scholarly journals From Generalist Approach to Evidence-Based Practice

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald E. Hall
Keyword(s):  
Social Workers ◽  
Social Services ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Effective Intervention ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Technological Society ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Objective Research

The generalist approach subscribes to the eclectic methodology for what Social Workers do. The application of the generalist approach is by nature nebulous. In an advanced technological society, practice technology is less forthcoming in the absence of technologically based skill. Evidence-Based Practiced entails a series of scientific research procedures. It is intended for the application of rigorous expertise to arrive at the most effective intervention based upon objective research findings. Subsequently Evidence-Based Practice is then critical to accommodate social services in the 21st century.

What Does Evidence-Based Practice Mean to You? A Follow-Up Study Examining School-Based Speech-Language Pathologists' Perspectives on Evidence-Based Practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 688-704
Author(s):  
Katrina Fulcher-Rood ◽  
Anny Castilla-Earls ◽  
Jeff Higginbotham
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Expertise ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
School Based ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Ebp Implementation

Purpose The current investigation is a follow-up from a previous study examining child language diagnostic decision making in school-based speech-language pathologists (SLPs). The purpose of this study was to examine the SLPs' perspectives regarding the use of evidence-based practice (EBP) in their clinical work. Method Semistructured phone interviews were conducted with 25 school-based SLPs who previously participated in an earlier study by Fulcher-Rood et al. 2018). SLPs were asked questions regarding their definition of EBP, the value of research evidence, contexts in which they implement scientific literature in clinical practice, and the barriers to implementing EBP. Results SLPs' definitions of EBP differed from current definitions, in that SLPs only included the use of research findings. SLPs seem to discuss EBP as it relates to treatment and not assessment. Reported barriers to EBP implementation were insufficient time, limited funding, and restrictions from their employment setting. SLPs found it difficult to translate research findings to clinical practice. SLPs implemented external research evidence when they did not have enough clinical expertise regarding a specific client or when they needed scientific evidence to support a strategy they used. Conclusions SLPs appear to use EBP for specific reasons and not for every clinical decision they make. In addition, SLPs rely on EBP for treatment decisions and not for assessment decisions. Educational systems potentially present other challenges that need to be considered for EBP implementation. Considerations for implementation science and the research-to-practice gap are discussed.

scholarly journals A national cross-sectional survey of the attitudes, skills and use of evidence-based practice amongst Spanish osteopaths

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerard Alvarez ◽  
Cristian Justribo ◽  
Tobias Sundberg ◽  
Oliver P. Thomson ◽  
Matthew J. Leach
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Professional Literature ◽  
Media Campaigns ◽  
Participant Engagement ◽  
Online Databases ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Healthcare Professions

Abstract Background Although evidence-based practice (EBP) is largely supported across healthcare professions, its implementation in manual therapy professions such as osteopathy remains limited and debated. There is currently little knowledge of how Spanish osteopaths relate to EBP. Objectives The main aim of this study was to investigate the attitudes, skills and use of EBP among Spanish osteopaths. A secondary aim was to identify barriers and facilitators for the adoption of EBP in the Spanish osteopathic context. Methods National cross-sectional survey of Spanish osteopaths registered and non-registered to an osteopathic association in Spain. Eligible participants were invited by a range of recruitment strategies including email and social media campaigns to complete the Spanish-translated Evidence-Based practice Attitude and utilization Survey (EBASE) anonymously online. Results A total of 567 osteopaths completed the survey which represents an approximate response rate of 9%. Participant’s attitudes toward EBP were largely positive. Most respondents agreed or strongly agreed that EBP was necessary in the practice of osteopathy (89.6%) and that professional literature and research findings were useful to their day-to-day practice (88.9%). Levels of perceived skill in EBP were reported as low to moderate with lowest levels for items related to ‘research conduct’. Except reading/reviewing professional literature and using online search engines to find practice-related literature, participant engagement in all other EBP-related activities was generally infrequent. The perceived proportion of clinical practice that was based on clinical research evidence was reported to be very small. Main barriers to EBP uptake included a lack of clinical evidence in osteopathy and insufficient skills for applying research findings. Main facilitators of EBP uptake included access to full-text articles, internet at the workplace and online databases. Conclusions Spanish osteopaths were largely supportive of evidence-based practice, had low to moderate skills in EBP and engaged in EBP activities infrequently. Formal regulation of the profession in Spain and the inclusion of osteopathic programs into the university sector would potentially improve EBP skills and use.

The Promotion of Avoidable Ignorance in the British Journal of Social Work

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 455-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eileen Gambrill
Keyword(s):  
British Journal ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Professional Journals ◽  
The Status ◽  
Dangerous Knowledge

The manifest purpose of professional journals is to share important knowledge. Increasing revelations of flaws in the peer-reviewed literature shows that this purpose is often not honored and that inflated claims of knowledge as well as other concerns such as misrepresentations of disliked or misunderstood views are rife. In this article, avoidable misunderstandings of science and evidence-based practice (EBP) in publications in the British Journal of Social Work 2005–2016 are described as well as strategies used to forward misinformation. Such discourse misinforms rather than informs readers and decreases opportunities to accurately inform social workers about possibilities to help clients and to avoid harming them and to involve clients as informed participants. Those writing about avoidable ignorance highlight how it is used strategically, perhaps to neutralize what is viewed as dangerous knowledge—the process of EBP and science generally, which may threaten the status quo.

Evidence-based practice and management-by-knowledge of disability care: rigid constraint or fluid support?

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabella Pistone ◽  
Allan Lidström ◽  
Ingemar Bohlin ◽  
Thomas Schneider ◽  
Teun Zuiderent-Jerak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Workers ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Service Providers ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Epistemic Injustice ◽  
Dynamic Interactions ◽  
Local Practices ◽  
Rigid Constraint ◽  
Care Practices

Background: Although increasingly accepted in some corners of social work, critics have claimed that evidence-based practice (EBP) methodologies run contrary to local care practices and result in an EBP straitjacket and epistemic injustice. These are serious concerns, especially in relation to already marginalised clients.Aims and objectives: Against the backdrop of criticism against EBP, this study explores the ramifications of the Swedish state-governed knowledge infrastructure, ‘management-by-knowledge’, for social care practices at two care units for persons with intellectual disabilities.Methods: Data generated from ethnographic observations and interviews were analysed by applying a conceptual framework of epistemic injustice; also analysed were national, regional and local knowledge products within management-by-knowledge related to two daily activity (DA) units at a social care provider in Sweden.Findings: In this particular case of disability care, no obvious risks of epistemic injustice were discovered in key knowledge practices of management-by-knowledge. Central methodologies of national agencies did include perspectives from social workers and clients, as did regional infrastructures. Locally, there were structures in place that focused on creating a dynamic interplay between knowledge coming from various forms of evidence, including social workers’ and clients’ own knowledge and experience.Discussion and conclusions: Far from being a straitjacket, in the case studied management-by-knowledge may be understood as offering fluid support. Efforts which aim at improving care for people with disabilities might benefit from organisational support structures that enable dynamic interactions between external knowledge and local practices.<br />Key messages<br /><ul><li>Examining one case of disability care in Sweden, both social workers’ and clients’ experiences were included in EBP infrastructures.</li><br /><li>In this study, Swedish EBP infrastructures functioned more like fluid support than a straitjacket.</li><br /><li>Organisational structures that combine different knowledge sources at service providers can minimise the risk of epistemic injustice within social care.</li></ul>

Can complexity in welfare professionals’ work be handled with standardised professional knowledge?

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lars Evertsson ◽  
Björn Blom ◽  
Marek Perlinski ◽  
Devin Rexvid
Keyword(s):  
Social Workers ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Empirical Studies ◽  
Professional Knowledge ◽  
Welfare States ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Professional Body ◽  
Problematic Situations ◽  
Use Of Knowledge

Complexity in professional work is often discussed in relation to the professional body of knowledge. There is a tendency to relate professional success, problems and shortcomings to flaws and limitations in the professions’ expert knowledge or use of knowledge. To reduce complexity, overcome problematic situations and achieve best practice, welfare states invest considerable resources in raising professional groups’ level of knowledge and use of evidence-based knowledge. Non-medical professions such as social workers are expected to adopt and implement the principles that underpin evidence-based medicine. However, based on two empirical studies of social workers within Swedish social services, this chapter argues that problematic situations and complexity in social work can have sources other than lack of knowledge or insufficient use of knowledge. The chapter argues that these complex and problematic situations cannot be solved by standardised professional knowledge about interventions and results.

scholarly journals Evidence-based practice in social work: Who are the critics?

2020 ◽  
pp. 146801732095513
Author(s):  
Joakim Finne
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Child Welfare ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Social Sector ◽  
The Social

Summary The aim of this study is to analyse attitudes towards and the utilisation of evidence-based practice among social workers in Norway. The data were collected in 2014–2015 from social workers in four Norwegian counties. The sample consists of 2060 social workers registered as members of the Norwegian Union of Social Educators and Social Workers. Findings The main findings in this study indicate that social workers in child welfare are generally less critical of evidence-based practice than those within social welfare. Higher education and knowledge about evidence-based practice are seen as predictors for less critical attitudes towards the concept. The findings further suggest that social workers who use manuals and standardised procedures are less critical of evidence-based practice. Applications Understanding social workers’ attitudes towards evidence-based practice is important in order to facilitate the best possible practices. This study emphasises the importance of increasing knowledge of evidence-based practice in the social sector, and the need to further investigate how research methods and evidence-based practice concepts are translated into practice.

Confidence Levels Can Broaden the Application of Clinical Research Findings and Promote Evidence-Based Practice

2009 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 99-104
Author(s):  
James E. Graham ◽  
Timothy A. Reistetter ◽  
Trudy R. Mallinson ◽  
Kenneth J. Ottenbacher
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Research ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Confidence Levels ◽  
Research Findings

scholarly journals Research Use and Evidence-Based Practice Among Swedish Medical Social Workers: A Qualitative Study

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 258-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Camilla Udo ◽  
Henrietta Forsman ◽  
Marcus Jensfelt ◽  
Maria Flink
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Research Use ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Swedish Medical
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document