1. Cross pollination: multidisciplinary interaction to promote research utilisation Alison Hutchinson PhD Postdoctoral Research Fellow

2. Study methods  Setting  Pediatric  Sample  nurses, doctors and allied health professionals  Data collection  Observation – development of 2 clinical management tools  Interviews – 23, undertaken at 3 time points

3. Study Methods  Observation  Social interaction analysis (Bales, 1951)  Analysis of types of evidence used  Interviews  Thematic analysis

4. Findings  Doctors and allied health staff tended to bring the scientific evidence to the table  Nurses focused on the practical aspects of care and the ward routine  Nurses drew on experience and particularly problems that had arisen in their practice - anecdotal evidence  Nurses assumed and trusted that professionals from other disciplines would be acquainted with the best available evidence

5.  Strong commitment to the task of tool development  Worked cooperatively  Positive interpersonal interactions  Sharing of information and expression of opinions were the most frequently observed interactions  Primary forms of evidence used were clinical experience and professional opinions which were then blended with available research evidence

6.  Nurses felt collaborative involvement of all health disciplines in decision-making regarding patient care was mandatory, and believed they could not work in isolation from other disciplinary groups  Mutual respect - considered important to effective interdisciplinary communication and collaboration  Multi-status groups  Doctors, however, held the power when it came to decision-making (management of Crohn’s disease)

7.  Interdisciplinary interaction during the meetings:  served to encourage and assist nurses’ use of research in their practice  Role modelling research use behaviour  Educating nurses about the basis for decisions and treatment orders  Exposure to champions for the adoption of specific research evidence  served to promote information sharing, discussion and debate about the applicability of specific evidence & promote adaptation of research evidence for practice

8. Conclusion  Clinical management tools have the capacity to facilitate the integration of research evidence into practice But,  the dialogue between multidisciplinary group members in the process of developing such tools, in and of itself, also plays a role in influencing research use

9. Challenges  Measurement and promotion of a culture of inquiry  Measurement of research use (patient and behaviour outcomes) in response to a specific strategy to facilitate RU  Promotion and facilitation of multidisciplinary interaction

10. Acknowledgements  Professor Linda Johnston  Professor Judith Parker  Associate Professor Nick Santamaria