We aimed to identify possible solutions to enhance evidence-based practice (EBP) in rehabilitation professionals in Japan. [Participants and Methods] A three-round Delphi method was undertaken among a cohort of clinical therapists (328 physical therapists, 55 occupational therapists, and 6 speech therapists). In the first round, the participants listed possible solutions for promoting EBP, other than 12 solutions presented in a previous study; subsequently, a new list was created. In the second round, a newly-created list of solutions was presented, and the participants responded on a 5-point Likert scale on how much they agreed with the solutions promoting EBP in Japanese rehabilitation professionals. In the third round, the distribution of responses obtained in the second round was presented, and participant's agreement was again assessed on a 5-point Likert scale. [Results] Across the three rounds, data were collected from 33.7% to 47.0% of all eligible participants. After the first round, 17 possible solutions were developed, and a list of 29 solutions was used in the second round. After the third round, 10 solutions reached the predetermined criteria for consensus. [Conclusion] In this study, ten possible solutions to promote EBP were proposed by the Japanese rehabilitation professionals.

[Purpose] This study aimed to determine whether certain research activities improve the attitude of rehabilitation professionals towards evidence-based practice and its implementation in Japan. [Participants and Methods] We included physical, occupational, and speech therapists currently working in clinical settings. We employed hierarchical multiple regression analyses to assess the attitude of rehabilitation professionals towards evidence-based practice and research activities. Scores of the five dimensions of the Health Sciences-Evidence Based Practice questionnaire were considered the dependent variables. The five dimensions were as follows: Dimension 1, attitude towards evidence-based practice; Dimensions 2–4, evidence-based practice implementation; and Dimension 5, work environment related to evidence-based practice barriers–facilitators. The four sociodemographic variables (gender, academic degree, clinical experience, and the number of therapists at work) were initially included, following which self-reported research achievements were supplemented as independent variables (the number of case studies, literature reviews, cross-sectional studies, and longitudinal studies). [Results] We analyzed data from 167 participants. In addition to sociodemographic variables, the research achievements that statistically increased F-values of the modeling were case study achievements in Dimensions 2–3, cross-sectional study achievements in Dimensions 2 and 4, and longitudinal study achievements in Dimension 5. [Conclusion] Case studies and cross-sectional studies could improve evidence-based practice implementation among rehabilitation professionals in Japan.