Purpose: The purpose of this integrative review was to determine whether a journal club (JC) is a successful medium to bridge the research-to-practice gap and more specifically to answer the question: Do JCs increase research knowledge, dissemination of the knowledge, and implementation of evidence into practice?
Background: Although substantial advancements have been made to increase awareness and utilization of evidence-based practice (EBP), the implementation of evidence into practice has its limitations.
Theoretical Framework: The Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Service framework was used as the theoretical base for this review.
Review Methods: An integrative review, as described by Ganong, was conducted. The search generated 28 articles, 10 of which met the inclusion criteria. Data were interpreted and evaluated using a data summary sheet influenced by the Ganong approach. The findings were summarized into 4 categories: understanding, circulation, implementation, and facilitation.
Data sources: CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane, Athens, Google Scholar, and Academia Premiere.
Outcome: Journal clubs improved research-critiquing skills and increased the dissemination of research findings, but lacked the ability to integrate the evidence into practice. Facilitators of a successful JC were leaders in reviewing, developing, and implementing EBP.
Conclusion: The 3 elements of the Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Service framework, context, evidence, and facilitation were supported by the findings.
Implications: A JC promotes change, stimulates professionalism, and provides the opportunity to improve practice through understanding, utilization, and implementation of EBP.