Creating Synergy in Practice: Promoting Complementarity Between Evidence‐Based and Postmodern Approaches

Jacobs, Stephanie; Kissil, Karni; Scott, Dalesa; Davey, Maureen

doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2009.00171.x

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, with regard to training providers, training workshops alone are not sufficient to produce change (Herschell, Kolko, Baumann, & Davis, 2010; McHugh & Barlow, 2010; Smith-Hansen, Constantino, Piselli, & Remen, 2011), and adoption may occurs in stages that are similar to the stages of change model (i.e., readiness to change, Prochaska & DiClemente, 1982). Thus, to facilitate the adoption and adaptation of evidence-based interventions in community settings, alternative approaches (e.g., motivational interviewing, Hershenberg & Malik, 2008), active learning, including coaching and feedback (Beidas & Kendall, 2010), and attention to therapist style, epistemology, and other characteristics (Jacobs, Kissil, & Davey, 2010) may need to be built into training. Overall, research on effectiveness and dissemination dovetails with efficacy research to provide a more comprehensive picture of how to enhance change among clients and decrease the research-practice gap.…”

Section: A Translational Model Of Rpimentioning

confidence: 99%

A translational model of research-practice integration.

Vivian

Hershenberg²,

Teachman³

et al. 2012

Psychotherapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose a four-level, recursive Research-Practice Integration framework as a heuristic to (a) integrate and reflect on the articles in this Special Section as contributing to a bidirectional bridge between research and practice, and (b) consider additional opportunities to address the research–practice gap. Level 1 addresses Treatment Validation studies and includes an article by Lochman and colleagues concerning the programmatic adaptation, implementation, and dissemination of the empirically supported Coping Power treatment program for youth aggression. Level 2 translation, Training in Evidence-Based Practice, includes a paper by Hershenberg, Drabick, and Vivian, which focuses on the critical role that predoctoral training plays in bridging the research–practice gap. Level 3 addresses the Assessment of Clinical Utility and Feedback to Research aspects of translation. The articles by Lambert and Youn, Kraus, and Castonguay illustrate the use of commercial outcome packages that enable psychotherapists to integrate ongoing client assessment, thus enhancing the effectiveness of treatment implementation and providing data that can be fed back to researchers. Lastly, Level 4 translation, the Cross-Level Integrative Research and Communication, concerns research efforts that integrate data from clinical practice and all other levels of translation, as well as communication efforts among all stakeholders, such as researchers, psychotherapists, and clients. Using a two-chair technique as a framework for his discussion, Wolfe's article depicts the struggle inherent in research–practice integration efforts and proposes a rapprochement that highlights advancements in the field.

show abstract

Section: A Translational Model Of Rpimentioning

confidence: 99%

A translational model of research-practice integration.

Vivian

Hershenberg²,

Teachman³

et al. 2012

Psychotherapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although there is a body of research addressing communication within healthcare [15,24-27], limited research has focussed on the challenge of communicating evidence to patients in the context of the community setting, such as general practitioner (GP) surgeries and health centres. These settings can be particularly challenging when evidence emerges that conflicts with current practice, as these health practitioners are often the first point of contact for patients and people seeking information and reassurance about health issues.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The challenges of communicating research evidence in practice: perspectives from UK health visitors and practice nurses

Bekkum

Hilton

2013

BMC Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHealth practitioners play a pivotal role in providing patients with up-to-date evidence and health information. Evidence-based practice and patient-centred care are transforming the delivery of healthcare in the UK. Health practitioners are increasingly balancing the need to provide evidence-based information against that of facilitating patient choice, which may not always concur with the evidence base. There is limited research exploring how health practitioners working in the UK, and particularly those more autonomous practitioners such as health visitors and practice nurses working in community practice settings, negotiate this challenge. This research provides a descriptive account of how health visitors and practice nurses negotiate the challenges of communicating health information and research evidence in practice.MethodsA total of eighteen in-depth telephone interviews were conducted in the UK between September 2008 and May 2009. The participants comprised nine health visitors and nine practice nurses, recruited via adverts on a nursing website, posters at a practitioner conference and through recommendation. Thematic analysis, with a focus on constant comparative method, was used to analyse the data.ResultsThe data were grouped into three main themes: communicating evidence to the critically-minded patient; confidence in communicating evidence; and maintaining the integrity of the patient-practitioner relationship. These findings highlight some of the daily challenges that health visitors and practice nurses face with regard to the complex and dynamic nature of evidence and the changing attitudes and expectations of patients. The findings also highlight the tensions that exist between differing philosophies of evidence-based practice and patient-centred care, which can make communicating about evidence a daunting task.ConclusionsIf health practitioners are to be effective at communicating research evidence, we suggest that more research and resources need to be focused on contextual factors, such as how research evidence is negotiated, appraised and communicated within the dynamic patient-practitioner relationship.

show abstract

“…When the starting point for studying clinical judgment is therapists' experience, it becomes apparent that systemically oriented clinicians can engage in the integrated clinical practice sought theoretically and proposed in the literature (e.g., Chwalisz, 2003;Jacobs et al, 2010), and perhaps do so more than is often assumed. The clinician in the exemplar made use of seemingly dichotomous philosophical stances and disparate sources of information, and did so rather fluently.…”

Section: Implications For the Traditional Approach To Clinical Judgmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Increased attention to common change factors exists in the couple and family therapy literature (e.g., Sparks & Duncan, 2010;Sprenkle, David, & Lebow, 2009), and seems to represent a move toward meta-theoretical, trans-disciplinary thinking about systemic practice. Second, recent integrative efforts have attempted to translate evidence-based practices from the larger clinical literature grounded in "positivist explanation" (Chwalisz, 2003, p. 500) to couple and family therapy grounded in more contextual philosophical assumptions (e.g., Jacobs, Kissil, Scott, & Davey, 2010), again reflecting meta-theorizing and trans-disciplinary thinking about clinical practice.…”

Section: Openings For Studying Clinical Judgment In Systems Therapymentioning

confidence: 99%

Re-visioning a Model of Clinical Judgment for Systemic Practitioners

Jankowski

Ivey²,

Vaughn³

2012

Journal of Systemic Therapies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Building upon prior research on clinical judgment, the present study contains a description of a meta-theoretical model of problem definition in systems therapy. Qualitative analysis yielded an exemplar that illustrated the use of therapist-specific, interactional, and situational factors, the therapist's influence in the therapeutic conversation along three positioning dimensions, and a continuum of implicit to explicit construction of the presenting problem. The current description of clinical judgment addresses correctives proposed in the existing literature and advances the study of clinical judgment in couple and family therapy.

show abstract

Creating Synergy in Practice: Promoting Complementarity Between Evidence‐Based and Postmodern Approaches

Cited by 17 publications

References 62 publications

A translational model of research-practice integration.

A translational model of research-practice integration.

The challenges of communicating research evidence in practice: perspectives from UK health visitors and practice nurses

Re-visioning a Model of Clinical Judgment for Systemic Practitioners

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About