Advertisement

Managing and Adapting Practice: Provider Perceptions of an Evidence-Informed Framework for Delivering Mental Health Services

  • Sara L. BuckinghamEmail author
  • Kimberly D. Becker
  • Michael Reding
  • Eric L. Daleiden
  • Bruce F. Chorpita
Original Article

Abstract

This study examined providers’ reflections on delivering managing and adapting practice (MAP), an evidence-informed framework that guides decision-making from scientific and client data. Consensual qualitative research methods were used to analyze the reflections of 201 youth mental health providers. Results indicated that providers approached MAP according to their own preferences and particular cases. While most appeared to approach MAP from a practice management standpoint, when faced with challenging cases, providers used coordination and outcomes management resources. Regardless of approach, most providers came to appreciate the full framework through reflective practice. Their diverse approaches offer lessons for evidence-based practice implementation and sustainment.

Keywords

Evidence-based service delivery Reflective practice Implementation Community mental health 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflicts of interest

Bruce F. Chorpita is President and Eric L. Daleiden is Chief Operating Officer of PracticeWise, LLC, a private behavioral health consulting corporation. Kimberly D. Becker is a consultant to PracticeWise, LLC.

Ethical Approval

The University of South Carolina’s Institutional Review Board determined that this study was exempt from review.

Informed Consent

This study was conducted on already available data for which formal consent was not needed due to the nature of data collected.

References

  1. Becker, K. D., Lee, B., Daleiden, E., Lindsey, M., Brandt, N., & Chorpita, B. (2015). The common elements of engagement in children’s mental health: Which elements for which outcomes? Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 44, 30–43.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2013.814543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burchard, J. D., Bruns, E. J., & Burchard, S. N. (2002). The wraparound process. In B. J. Burns & K. Hoagwood (Eds.), Community-based treatment for youth (pp. 66–90). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Chorpita, B. F., Bernstein, A. D., Daleiden, E. L., & the Research Network on Youth Mental Health. (2008). Driving with roadmaps and dashboards: Using information resources to structure the decision models in service organizations. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 35, 114–123.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-007-0151-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chorpita, B. F., & Daleiden, E. L. (2014). Structuring the collaboration of science and service in pursuit of a shared vision. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 43, 323–338.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2013.828297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chorpita, B. F., Daleiden, E. L., & Collins, K. S. (2014). Managing and adapting practice: A system for applying evidence in clinical care with youth and families. Clinical Social Work Journal, 42, 134–142.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-013-0460-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319–340.  https://doi.org/10.2307/249008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Edmunds, M. (1997). Managing managed care: Quality improvements in behavioral health. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  8. Ferreira, J. F., Basseches, M., & Vasco, A. B. (2017). Guidelines for reflective practice in psychotherapy: A reflection on the benefits of combining moment-by-moment and phase-by-phase mapping in clinical decision making. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 27, 35–46.  https://doi.org/10.1037/int0000047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hill, C. E., Thompson, B. J., & Williams, E. N. (1997). A guide to conducting consensual qualitative research. The Counseling Psychologist, 25, 517–572.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000097254001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Malone, T. W., Lai, K., & Grant, K. R. (2001). Two design principles for collaboration technology: Examples of semiformal systems and radical tailorability. In G. M. Olson, T. W. Malone, & J. B. Smith (Eds.), Coordination theory and collaboration technology (pp. 125–160). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  11. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2016). Designing qualitative research (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. McHugh, R. K., & Barlow, D. H. (2010). The dissemination and implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments: A review of current efforts. American Psychologist, 65, 73–84.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mennen, F. E., Cederbaum, J., Chorpita, B. F., Becker, K., Lopez, O., & Sela-Amit, M. (2018). The large-scale implementation of evidence-informed practice into a specialized MSW curriculum. Journal of Social Work Education, 54, S56–S64.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2018.1434440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Nguyen, Q. D., Fernandez, N., Karsenti, T., & Charlin, B. (2014). What is reflection? A conceptual analysis of major definitions and a proposal of a five-component model. Medical Education, 48, 1176–1189.  https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Reding, M. E. J., Chorpita, B. F., Lau, A. S., & Innes-Gomberg, D. (2014). Providers’ attitudes toward evidence-based practices: Is it just about providers, or do practices matter, too? Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 41, 767–776.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0525-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rodriguez, A., Lau, A. S., Wright, B., Regan, J., & Brookman-Frazee, L. (2018). Mixed-method analysis of program leader perspectives on the sustainment of multiple child evidence-based practices in a system-driven implementation. Implementation Science, 13, 44–57.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-018-0737-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  18. Shimokawa, K., Lambert, M. J., & Smart, D. W. (2010). Enhancing treatment outcome of patients at risk of treatment failure: Meta-analytic and mega-analytic review of a psychotherapy quality assurance system. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78, 298–311.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Southam-Gerow, M. A., Daleiden, E. L., Chorpita, B. F., Bae, C., Mitchell, C., Faye, M., et al. (2014). MAPping Los Angeles County: Taking an evidence-informed model of mental health care to scale. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 43, 190–200.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2013.833098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Thomas, M. D., Blacksmith, J., & Reno, J. (2000). Utilizing insider-outsider research teams in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 10, 819–828.  https://doi.org/10.1177/104973200129118840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (1996). A model of the antecedents of perceived ease of use: Development and test. Decision Sciences, 27, 451–481.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1996.tb00860.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wandersman, A., Chien, V. H., & Katz, J. (2012). Toward an evidence-based system for innovation support for implementing innovations with quality: Tools, training, technical assistance, and quality assurance/quality improvement. American Journal of Community Psychology, 50, 445–459.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-012-9509-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Alaska AnchorageAnchorageUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of South CarolinaColumbiaUSA
  3. 3.Department of PsychiatryIcahn School of Medicine at Mount SinaiNew YorkUSA
  4. 4.PracticeWise, LLCSatellite BeachUSA
  5. 5.Department of PsychologyUniversity of California Los AngelesLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations