The practice research network: Research into practice, practice into research

Abstract

The purpose of the broader project on which this report is based was to utilize a Practice Research Network, an alternative to traditional clinical studies to 1) identify demographically one practice group, namely professional counselors in the United States, 2) describe their practice patterns, and 3) identify their client population and the efficacy of their clinical work through client outcomes based on actual client reports. This article describes the development of one such nation-wide Practice Research Network (PRN) and provides some preliminary findings for each phase of the project. Use of the PRN model can help overcome the traditional ''research to practice'' gap and provide research results into community practice thus integrating outcomes measures into the daily practice of mental health professionals.During the early phases of this project, a software program was developed upon which the participating practitioners could identify the data elements within the parameters of the focus on their agreed-upon research interests, enter data following client visits over time, and by comparing their own composite profiles and effectiveness with those of other participating practitioners who had clients presenting with similar diagnoses, could alter their own service delivery patterns, therapeutic interventions, or approaches while working with the clients and thereby improve the efficacy of their service. By participating, the practitioners benefited by access to downloadable and printable reports on profiles of 1) their specific clients, 2) their service delivery patterns, and 3) the outcomes or efficacy by their clients' direct feedback. They were also able to compare these results with the composite data from other practitioners.

Revisiting Practice-Based Research Networks as a Platform for Mental Health Services Research

“…Each of these PBRNs began with funding from the Center for Substance Abuse Treatment to conduct surveys of their members to assess their involvement in substance abuse treatment. The ACA also used this money to learn more about its members’ practice patterns and behaviors and to develop a system for PBRN members to enter client data following sessions, track clients over time and compare their clients’ outcomes with those seen by other therapists (Smith et al 2005). Key findings from the ACA PBRN have been descriptions of current practicing counselors and their caseloads.…”

“…Key findings from the ACA PBRN have been descriptions of current practicing counselors and their caseloads. For example, counselors largely based their treatments on theory (39%), experience (28%) or other decision making tools (19%), 13% of their clients have substance abuse problems, 76% of their clients were self-paying, and a pre-post analysis of symptom change in counseling sessions revealed a statistically significant difference (Smith et al 2005). …”

The relationship between Clinical Trial Network protocol involvement and quality of substance use disorder treatment

“…Clinical trials in these academic settings were often seen as disconnected from the health problems encountered by community clinicians and their patients (Macaulay & Nutting, 2006; Smith, Sexton, & Bradley, 2005; Tierney et al, 2007; Westfall, VanVorst, Main, & Hebert, 2006). By contrast, PBRNs consist of collaborations between academic researchers and a group of community-based health care providers with the goal of improving health services delivery and closing the gap between research and practice (Gilbert et al, 2008; Pearce, Love, Barron, Matheny & Mahfoud, 2004; Riedy, Ly, Ybarra, & Milgrom, 2007).…”