Evidence-based practice implementation: The impact of public versus private sector organization type on organizational support, provider attitudes, and adoption of evidence-based practice

Abstract

BackgroundThe goal of this study is to extend research on evidence-based practice (EBP) implementation by examining the impact of organizational type (public versus private) and organizational support for EBP on provider attitudes toward EBP and EBP use. Both organization theory and theory of innovation uptake and individual adoption of EBP guide the approach and analyses in this study. We anticipated that private sector organizations would provide greater levels of organizational support for EBPs leading to more positive provider attitudes towards EBPs and EBP use. We also expected attitudes toward EBPs to mediate the association of organizational support and EBP use.MethodsParticipants were mental health service providers from 17 communities in 16 states in the United States (n = 170). Path analyses were conducted to compare three theoretical models of the impact of organization type on organizational support for EBP and of organizational support on provider attitudes toward EBP and EBP use.ResultsConsistent with our predictions, private agencies provided greater support for EBP implementation, and staff working for private agencies reported more positive attitudes toward adopting EBPs. Organizational support for EBP partially mediated the association of organization type on provider attitudes toward EBP. Organizational support was significantly positively associated with attitudes toward EBP and EBP use in practice.ConclusionThis study offers further support for the importance of organizational context as an influence on organizational support for EBP and provider attitudes toward adopting EBP. The study demonstrates the role organizational support in provider use of EBP in practice. This study also suggests that organizational support for innovation is a malleable factor in supporting use of EBP. Greater attention should be paid to organizational influences that can facilitate the dissemination and implementation of EBPs in community settings.

Structural Model of Evidence-Based Practice Implementation among Clinical Nurses

“…, 학습조직 구축요인 [6]의 영향을 받는 것으로, EBP에 대한 태도는 EBP에 대한 지식/기술 [13], 신념 [14], EBP를 위한 조직문화와 준비도 [7,13]의 영향을 받는 것으로 경로를 설정하였다. 그리고 조직혁신성은 학습조직 구축요인 [15]의 영향을 받 는 것으로, EBP 실행은 EBP에 대한 지식/기술 [5], 신념 [5,6,12], 태 도 [7], EBP를 위한 조직문화와 준비도 [7,11], 학습조직 구축요인 [8], …”

“…그리고 조직혁신성은 학습조직 구축요인 [15]의 영향을 받 는 것으로, EBP 실행은 EBP에 대한 지식/기술 [5], 신념 [5,6,12], 태 도 [7], EBP를 위한 조직문화와 준비도 [7,11], 학습조직 구축요인 [8], …”

Sector Well-Being Differences Among UK Police Custody Staff

“…For health, examples saw greater levels of private sector support, attitudes, and use of evidence-based practice implemented by mental health service providers in the USA (Aarons et al 2009). Similarly, Heponiemi et al (2010) reported a comparison of Finnish physicians which saw not only greater levels of positive private sector job attitudes and well-being but also organizational justice and job control than in the public sector.…”

From Programs to Systems: Deploying Implementation Science and Practice for Sustained Real World Effectiveness in Services for Children and Families

“…Thus one of the first tasks for an implementation professional interested in optimizing the capacity for sustainable impact of a given intervention is to undertake, in collaboration with local stakeholders and experts, an analysis of the system into which the new innovation will be inserted. Stakeholder analyses and network mapping and systems mapping (Aarons, Sommerfield, & Walrath-Greene, 2009;Paina & Peters, 2012) are processes that allow a new innovation to be viewed from multiple perspectives and allow developers and providers to anticipate how the innovation will align constructively with the existing structures, how it may disturb the existing system in both beneficial and antagonistic ways, and to identify the key agencies and key individual stakeholders whose support and leadership will be critical to the innovation's success. This involves much more than developing a communications plan and requires would-be innovators to recognize themselves within a co-constructed process that reaches beyond the parameters of their own specific planned program or service.…”