| Literature DB >> 17615076 |
Patricia H Bridges1, Laura L Bierema, Thomas Valentine.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many authors, as well as the American Physical Therapy Association, advocate that physical therapists adopt practice patterns based on research evidence, known as evidence-based practice (EBP). At the same time, physical therapists should be capable of integrating EBP within the day-to-day practice of physical therapy. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which personal characteristics and the characteristics of the social system in the workplace influence the propensity of physical therapists to adopt EBP.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2007 PMID: 17615076 PMCID: PMC1929067 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-103
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
Items measuring the propensity to adopt EBP from the factors affecting the propensity to adopt evidence-based practice survey
| 1. | In making clinical decisions, I value clinical experience more than scientific studies. (Reversed)* |
| 3. | In making clinical decisions, seeking evidence from scientific studies makes a lot of sense to me.* |
| 4. | In making clinical decisions, assessing the quality of the research evidence makes a lot of sense to me.* |
| 7. | Clinical experience is the most reliable way to know what really works. (Reversed)* |
| 9. | Patient care should be based where possible on scientific studies rather than the opinions of respected practitioners.* |
| 10. | Critical appraisal of the literature and its relevance to the patient are not very practical in real patient care. (Reversed)* |
| 12. | Practice guidelines for physical therapy should be based on evidence from scientific studies rather than consensus opinion.* |
| 13. | Seeking relevant evidence from scientific studies is not very practical in real patient care. (Reversed)* |
*Response Strongly Disagree < 1,2,3,4,5,6 > Strongly Agree
Distribution and reliability of the scale variables
| Propensity to adopt EBP using the | 8 | 31.9 | 6.1 | 4.0 | .83 |
| Self-management | 10 | 44.7 | 6.9 | 4.5 | .87 |
| Desire for learning | 6 | 30.9 | 3.9 | 5.2 | .85 |
| Self-control | 6 | 31.9 | 3.2 | 5.3 | .80 |
| Nonconformity | 6 | 23.7 | 3.7 | 4.0 | .56 |
| Practicality | 4 | 14.1 | 3.8 | 3.7 | .66 |
| Continuous learning | 3 | 12.9 | 3.4 | 4.3 | .79 |
| Dialogue & inquiry | 3 | 13.6 | 3.2 | 4.5 | .87 |
| Team learning | 3 | 12.5 | 3.3 | 4.3 | .81 |
| Embedded systems | 3 | 10.7 | 3.5 | 3.6 | .79 |
| Empowerment | 3 | 11.5 | 3.4 | 3.8 | .81 |
| System connection | 3 | 12.3 | 3.3 | 4.1 | .80 |
| Provide leadership | 3 | 12.8 | 3.7 | 4.2 | .89 |
Personal characteristics of study respondents (n = 831)
| Age | |
| Years as a licensed physical therapist | |
| Gender | |
| Female | 72.7% |
| Male | 27.3% |
| Race/Ethnicity | |
| White/Caucasian | 86.1% |
| Asian | 6.1% |
| Black/African American | 4.6% |
| Hispanic | 1.1% |
| Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander | 0.4% |
| American Indian/Alaska Native | 0.1% |
| Other | 1.7% |
| Highest degree held | |
| Bachelor's | 53.2% |
| Master's | 42.4% |
| Doctorate in Physical Therapy | 1.4% |
| Other Doctorate | 1.8% |
| Other | 1.2% |
| Employment setting | |
| Outpatient | 41% |
| Hospital | 20.8% |
| Home Health Agency | 12% |
| Skilled Nursing Facility/Extended Care/Assisted Living Facility | 7.2% |
| Acute Rehab or Sub-acute Rehab Hospital | 4.3% |
| School System | 3.6% |
| Academic Institution | 1.8% |
| Other | 3.7% |
| Multiple listings | 5.4% |
| Percentage of time respondents spend performing selected activities | |
| Direct Patient Care | |
| Administration | |
| Education | |
| Research | |
| Other |
Pearson's correlation and spearman correlation of variables predicting the propensity to adopt EBP
| Desire for learning | .36 | .13 | .001 |
| Practicality | .27 | .07 | .001 |
| Nonconformity | .24 | .06 | .001 |
| Self-control | .18 | .03 | .001 |
| Years licensed as a physical therapist | -.10 | .01 | .002 |
| Self-management | .09 | .01 | .006 |
| Age | -.07 | .01 | .026 |
| Percentage of time spent in direct patient care | -.07 | .01 | .025 |
| Percentage of time spent in administration | -.04 | .00 | .114 |
| Highest degree held | .29* | ---- | .001* |
| Empowerment | .11 | .01 | .001 |
| Continuous learning | .08 | .01 | .015 |
| System connection | .08 | .01 | .012 |
| Team learning | .06 | .003 | .062 |
| Provide leadership | .04 | .002 | .109 |
| Embedded systems | .04 | .002 | .123 |
| Dialogue & inquiry | .03 | .001 | .233 |
*Spearman Correlation
Best one, two, and three variable models
| Model | Model | Predictor | Beta |
| One variable model | .14 | Desire for learning | .369 |
| Two variable model | .19 | Desire for learning | .333 |
| .19 | Highest degree held | .241 | |
| Three variable model | .23 | Desire for learning | .282 |
| .23 | Highest degree held | .236 | |
| .23 | Practicality | .187 |
Note: The F statistic for each of the 3 models was significant at the .05 level. The t statistic for each parameter was significant at the .05 level.