ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Implementing Evidence-Based Practice in Critical Care Nursing: An Ethnographic Case Study of Knowledge Use.
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence Summary for Ultrasound-Guided Peripheral Arterial Catheter Placement in Adult Critical Care Patients.Health science reports · 2026Review
- Co-Producing Evidence-Based Care: Nurses' and Patients' Lived Experiences in Long-Term Condition Management.Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
- Promoting evidence-based nursing through collaboration, autonomy, and agency: A qualitative case study.International journal of nursing sciences · 2026Article
- Evidence-Based Practice Attributes Among Specialist Nurses in Acute Care: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Evidence-based nursing competence and its influencing factors among nurses in traditional Chinese medicine hospitals in Hunan province: a cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo explore how critical care nurses access, negotiate and apply knowledge in high-pressure clinical environments, focusing on organisational, cultural and leadership factors influencing evidence-based practice implementation in acute hospital settings.
designA focused ethnographic collective case study was conducted across two contrasting critical care units in England.
methodsMethods included non-participant observation (56 sessions), semi-structured interviews (36 participants) and document review. Spradley's Developmental Research Sequence guided data generation and analysis. Data were collected over an eight-month period (February to September 2022).
findingsFive major themes were identified: sources of knowledge and acquisition strategies; institutional and hierarchical influences on knowledge use; role of experiential knowledge and clinical intuition; challenges to evidence-based practice implementation; and strategies for integrating knowledge into practice. Organisational structures, leadership engagement, mentorship and access to updated digital resources were key enablers of evidence-based practice. Barriers included workload pressures, inconsistent guideline dissemination and hierarchical cultures. Adaptive blending of formal evidence, clinical experience and intuition characterised effective knowledge negotiation at the bedside.
conclusionKnowledge use in critical care nursing is a dynamic, relational process shaped by leadership, organisational culture and systemic pressures. The availability of evidence alone is insufficient; visible leadership, peer learning, protected educational time and valuing of experiential knowledge are critical to embedding evidence-based practice into routine practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR PATIENT CARE: Strengthening organisational systems, investing in nurse manager development, expanding simulation-based learning and legitimising experiential knowledge are vital strategies to enhance evidence-based critical care. IMPACT: This study provides actionable insights for healthcare leaders, educators and policymakers seeking to optimise evidence-based practice adoption in high-acuity clinical environments and improve patient outcomes. REPORTING
methodThe Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist guided reporting. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT: Patients and the public were not involved in the design, conduct, reporting or dissemination of this research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.