Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

What Therapy Practices Do Providers Value in Youth Behavioral Health? A Measure Development Study

  • Published:
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Existing measures of attitudes toward evidence-based practices (EBPs) assess attitudes toward manualized or research-based treatments. Providers of youth behavioral health (N = 282) completed the Valued Practices Inventory (VPI), a new measure of provider attitudes toward specific practices for youth that avoids mention of EBPs by listing specific therapies—some of which are drawn from EBPs (e.g., problem solving) and some of which are not included in EBPs (e.g., dream interpretation). Exploratory factor analysis revealed two factors: practices derived from the evidence base (PDEB) and alternative techniques (AT). The PDEB scale was significantly correlated with scales on the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale-50 (Aarons et al. in Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 39(5): 331–340, 2012), whereas the AT scale was not. Attitudes toward PDEB and AT were also related to provider characteristics such as years of experience and work setting. The VPI offers a complementary approach to existing measures of attitudes because it avoids mention of EBPs, which may help prevent biases in responses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Addis ME, Krasnow AD. A national survey of practicing psychologists’ attitudes toward psychotherapy treatment manuals. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 2000; 68: 331–339.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Nelson TD, Steele RG. Predictors of practitioner self-reported use of evidence-based practices: Practitioner training, clinical setting, and attitudes toward research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2007; 34(4): 319–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aarons GA, Cafri, G, Lugo L, et al. Expanding the domains of attitudes toward evidence-based practice: The Evidence Based Practice Attitude Scale-50. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2012; 39(5): 331–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Aarons GA. Mental health provider attitudes toward adoption of evidence-based practice: The evidence-based practice attitude scale (EBPAS). Mental Health Services Research. 2004; 6: 61–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Gyani A, Shafran R, Myles P, et al. The gap between science and practice: how therapists make their clinical decisions. Behavior Therapy. 2014; 45(2): 199–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nakamura B, Higa-McMillan C, Okamura K, et al. Knowledge of and attitudes toward evidence-based practices in community child mental health practitioners. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2011; 38(4): 287–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Borntrager C, Chorpita B, Higa-McMillan C, et al. Provider attitudes toward evidence-based practices: Are the concerns with the evidence or with the manuals? Psychiatric Services. 2009; 60(5): 677–681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Reding ME, Chorpita BF, Lau AS, et al. 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. 2014; 41(6): 767–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Aarons GA, Sommerfeld DH, Walrath-Greene CM. Evidence-based practice implementation: the impact of public versus private sector organization type on organizational support, provider attitudes, and adoption of evidence-based practice. Implementation Science. 2009; 4(1), 83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Brookman-Frazee L, Garland A, Taylor R, et al. Therapists’ attitudes toward psychotherapeutic strategies in community-based psychotherapy with children with disruptive behavior problems. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research. 2009; 36: 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Jensen-Doss A, Hawley KH, Lopez M, et al. Using evidence-based treatments: The experiences of youth providers working under a mandate. Professional Psychology: Science and Practice. 2009; 40(4): 417–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cook JM, Biyannova T, Elhai J, et al. What do psychotherapists really do in practice? An internet study of over 2,000 practitioners. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training. 2010; 47: 260–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Prochaska J, Norcross J. Contemporary psychotherapists: A national survey of characteristics, practices, orientations, and attitudes. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training. 1983; 20: 161–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Norcross J, Lambert M. Evidence-based therapy relationships. In Psychotherapy relationships that work: Evidence-based responsiveness (2nd Ed., pp. 3–21), by J. Norcross (Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press; 2011.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Olatunji B, Deacon B, Abramowitz J. The cruelest cure? Ethical issues in the implementation of exposure-based treatments. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice. 2009; 16: 172–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chorpita B, Daleiden E, Weisz J. Identifying and selecting the common elements of evidence based interventions: A distillation and matching model. Mental Health Services Research. 2005; 7: 5–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Stumpf RE, Higa-McMillan CK, Chorpita BF. Implementation of Evidence-Based Services for Youth Assessing Provider Knowledge. Behavior Modification. 2009; 33(1): 48–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Child and Adolescent Mental Health Division. Instructions and codebook for provider monthly summaries. Honolulu, HI: Hawaii Department of Health, Child and Adolescent Mental Health Division; 2008. Retrieved from: https://health.hawaii.gov/camhd/files/2017/11/MTPS-codebook.pdf, https://health.hawaii.gov/camhd/files/2017/11/MTPS-form.pdf. Accessed 14 Feb 2019.

  19. Kendall PC. Treating anxiety disorders in children: Results of a randomized clinical trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 1994; 62(1): 100.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Hupp SDA, Stary AK, Bradshaw KN, et al. Debunk, debunk, debunk: Some evidence for why dissemination is only half the battle. The Behavior Therapist. 2012; 35(4): 7678.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Weersing VR, Weisz JR, Donenberg GR. Development of the therapy procedures checklist: A therapist-report measure of technique use in child and adolescent treatment. Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology. 2002; 31(2): 168–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ackerman SJ, Benjamin LS, Beutler LE, et al. Empirically supported therapy relationships: Conclusions and recommendations of the Division 29 Task Force. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training. 2001; 38(4): 495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Karver MS, Handelsman JB, Fields S, et al. Meta-analysis of therapeutic relationship variables in youth and family therapy: The evidence for different relationship variables in the child and adolescent treatment outcome literature. Clinical Psychology Review. 2006; 26: 50–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Aarons GA, Hoagwood K, Landsverk, J, et al. Psychometric properties and US national norms of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS). Psychological Assessment. 2010; 22: 356–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Little RJA, Rubin DB. Statistical analysis with missing data. New York: Wiley; 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Muthén & Muthén). Mplus User’s Guide: Statistical Analysis with Latent Variables: User’s Guide; 2010.

  27. Olsson U. Maximum likelihood estimation of the polychoric correlation coefficient. Psychometrika. 1979; 44(4): 443–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Muthén B, du Toit SH, Spisic D. Robust inference using weighted least squares and quadratic estimating equations in latent variable modeling with categorical and continuous outcomes. Psychometrika. 1997; 75:1–45.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 1999; 6: 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Browne M, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.). 1993; Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-159). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Costello AB, Osborne JW. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 2005; 10. URL https://pareonline.net/pdf/v10n7.pdf. Accessed 14 Feb 2009.

  32. McDonald RP. Test theory: A unified approach. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Beck JS. Cognitive behavior therapy: Basics and beyond (2nd edn.). New York: Guilford Press; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Friedberg RD, McClure JM. Clinical practice of cognitive therapy with children and adolescents: The nuts and bolts (2nd edn.). New York: Guilford Press; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Bickman L, Kelley SD, Breda C et al. Effects of routine feedback to clinicians on mental health outcomes of youths: Results of a randomized trial. Psychiatric Services. 2011; 62(12), 1423–1429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Cohen JA, Deblinger E, Mannarino AP et al. A multisite, randomized controlled trial for children with sexual abuse–related PTSD symptoms. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 2004; 43(4), 393–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. Achieving the Promise: Transforming Mental Health Care in America (Pub. No. SMA-03-3832). Rockville: Department of Health and Human Services; 2003.

  39. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Surgeon general’s report: A national action agenda. Rockville: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Chorpita B, Becker K, Daleiden E. Understanding the common elements of evidence based practice: Misconceptions and clinical examples. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 2007; 47: 647–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Glasgow RE, Riley WT. Pragmatic measures: what they are and why we need them. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2013; 45(2), 237–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Powell BJ, Stanick CF, Halko HM et al. Toward criteria for pragmatic measurement in implementation research and practice: a stakeholder-driven approach using concept mapping. Implementation Science. 2017; 12(1), 118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Hawai’i at Hilo, 200 W. Kawili St., Hilo, HI, 96720, USA

    Charmaine K. Higa-McMillan PhD

  2. Duksung Women’s University, Seoul, South Korea

    Chad Ebesutani PhD

  3. Hathaway-Sycamores Child and Family Services, Pasadena, CA, USA

    Cameo F. Stanick PhD

Authors
  1. Charmaine K. Higa-McMillan PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chad Ebesutani PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cameo F. Stanick PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charmaine K. Higa-McMillan PhD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in this study were in accordance with the ethical standards of the University of Hawai’i Institutional Review Board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Higa-McMillan, C.K., Ebesutani, C. & Stanick, C.F. What Therapy Practices Do Providers Value in Youth Behavioral Health? A Measure Development Study. J Behav Health Serv Res 46, 607–624 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-019-09651-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-019-09651-x

Search

Navigation