Factors That Influence the Use of EBP Among Newly Trained Practitioners

Purpose:

Due to increased emphasis on evidence-based practice (EBP) and evidence-supported interventions (ESIs) in social work, 2008 CSWE accreditation standards changed to greater emphasize the use of evidence to inform practice and practice to inform research. As a result, social workers earning their MSWs after 2008 should have received more EBP-related content, which should translate into higher utilization of EBP and ESIs in their practice. However, it is unknown whether the change in standards has produced social workers who use these knowledge and skills with clients once in the field. The purpose of this mixed-methods study was to examine the extent to which newly trained practitioners use EBP and/or ESIs in practice and to determine the multilevel factors (individual, training program, organizational) that influence the use of EBP and ESIs among newly trained practitioners.

Methods:

Using convenience and snowball sampling from state licensing boards, clinical societies, and MSW alumni listservs, we recruited a national sample of 94 MSW practitioners from 12 states who graduated in 2009 or later to participate in a web-based survey. We also conducted in-depth, qualitative interviews with 13 survey participants who indicated interest in a follow-up interview. Bivariate and multiple regression methods were used to analyze quantitative survey data. Qualitative interview data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach to determine patterns and themes present in the data.

Results:

Results showed that 78.1% of respondents “occasionally” (40.2%) or “frequently” (37.9%) use EBP in their current practice. In addition, 75% of the sample indicated that they either agreed or strongly agreed that EBP is essential to their practice. Bivariate correlations showed significant positive associations between practitioner use of EBP and confidence with EBP [r(84)=.54, p<.001]; feeling that EBP is essential to practice [r(85)=.54, p<.001]; working in an organizational culture that emphasizes EBP [r(85)=.45, p<.001]; having a field placement/internship that emphasized EBP [r(85)=.25, p<.05]; and having faculty emphasize the importance of EBP in their teaching [r(85)=.28, p<.01]. Multiple regression analysis revealed that significant predictors of use of EBP were: confidence with EBP (β=.274, p<.005), feeling that EBP is essential to practice (β=.299, p<.005), and organizational culture emphasizes EBP (β=.228, p<.05). Results were similar for use of ESIs. Qualitative results indicated that MSW graduates articulate the importance and benefit of EBP, yet they encounter program training-level and agency-level barriers in their abilities to implement EBP in practice. For example, issues around the definition of EBP/ESIs emerged as a dominant theme.

Conclusions and Implications:

Social workers trained after 2008 highly endorse the use of EBP and/or ESIs in their decision-making with clients and feel that it is essential to their practice. However, individual and organizational factors may be more important in determining use of EBP than educational program factors. Practitioners continue to experience barriers that impact their abilities to use EBP-related knowledge gained in their academic training in practice. If schools of social work continue to promote the use of EBP/ESIs in the curricula, we also need to address the factors that impact the implementation of EBP into practice.