A Psychometric Evaluation of the Intention Scale for Providers-Direct Items

Predicting Therapists' Intentions to Use Innovations: Comparing the Role of Individual, Organizational, and Innovation Characteristics

Theories emphasize the role of individual and organizational characteristics in implementation outcomes, yet research indicates that these characteristics account for only a small amount of variance in those outcomes. Innovation characteristics might be important proximal determinants of implementation outcomes but are infrequently examined in mental health services research. This study examined the relative variance explained by individual, organizational, and innovation characteristics on behavioral intentions, a central implementation outcome in implementation theories. Data were collected from 95 therapists and 28 supervisors who participated in a cluster randomized trial that tested the effectiveness of two clinical decision-making innovations. Multilevel models compared individual, organizational, and innovation characteristics as predictors of therapists' intentions to use the innovations. Subsequent mediational path analyses tested whether innovation characteristics mediated the effect of innovation type on intentions. Individual and organizational characteristics explained 29% of the variability in therapists' intentions. Approximately 75% of the variability in therapists' intentions was accounted for by innovation characteristics. Individual and organizational characteristics were not statistically significant predictors of intentions after controlling for innovation characteristics. The indirect effect of innovation type on intentions through therapists' beliefs was statistically significant (B = 0.410, 95% Bootstrapped CI = [0.071, 0.780]), but the direct effect of innovation type was not (B = 0.174, p = .365). Innovation characteristics are related to therapist intentions and might explain why some innovations are received more favorably than others. Future studies should explore the complex interrelationships between these beliefs alongside other individual or organizational characteristics.

Instruments measuring evidence-based practice behavior, attitudes, and self-efficacy among healthcare professionals: a systematic review of measurement properties

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based practice (EBP) is well known to most healthcare professionals. Implementing EBP in clinical practice is a complex process that can be challenging and slow. Lack of EBP knowledge, skills, attitudes, self-efficacy, and behavior can be essential barriers that should be measured using valid and reliable instruments for the population in question. Results from previous systematic reviews show that information regarding high-quality instruments that measure EBP attitudes, behavior, and self-efficacy in various healthcare disciplines need to be improved. This systematic review aimed to summarize the measurement properties of existing instruments that measure healthcare professionals' EBP attitudes, behaviors, and self-efficacy.

METHODS

We included studies that reported measurement properties of instruments that measure healthcare professionals' EBP attitudes, behaviors, and self-efficacy. Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, HaPI, AMED via Ovid, and Cinahl via Ebscohost were searched in October 2020. The search was updated in December 2022. The measurement properties extracted included data on the item development process, content validity, structural validity, internal consistency, reliability, and measurement error. The quality assessment, rating of measurement properties, synthesis, and modified grading of the evidence were conducted in accordance with the COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Thirty-four instruments that measure healthcare professionals' EBP attitudes, behaviors or self-efficacy were identified. Seventeen of the 34 were validated in two or more healthcare disciplines. Nurses were most frequently represented (n = 53). Despite the varying quality of instrument development and content validity studies, most instruments received sufficient ( +) ratings on content validity, with the quality of evidence graded as "very low" in most cases. Structural validity and internal consistency were the measurement properties most often assessed, and reliability and measurement error were most rarely assessed. The quality assessment results and overall rating of these measurement properties varied, but the quality of evidence was generally graded higher for these properties than for content validity.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the summarized results, the constructs, and the population of interest, several instruments can be recommended for use in various healthcare disciplines. However, future studies should strive to use qualitative methods to further develop existing EBP instruments and involve the target population.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This review is registered in PROSPERO. CRD42020196009. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020196009.

Climate for evidence-based mental health care implementation in Germany: psychometric investigation of the Implementation Climate Scale (ICS)

Organizational implementation climate is an important construct in implementation research to describe to what extent implementation is expected, supported, and rewarded. Efforts in bridging the research-practice gap by implementing evidence-based practice (EBP) can benefit from consideration of implementation climate. The Implementation Climate Scale (ICS) is a psychometrically strong measure assessing employees' perceptions of the implementation climate. The present cross-sectional study aimed at providing a German translation and investigating its psychometric properties. The translation followed standard procedures for adapting psychometric instruments. German psychotherapists (N = 425) recruited online completed the ICS, the Evidence Based Practice Attitudes Scale (EBPAS-36D) and the Intention Scale for Providers (ISP). We conducted standard item and reliability analyses. Factorial validity was assessed by comparing an independent cluster model of Confirmatory Factorial Analysis (ICM-CFA), a Bifactor CFA, a Second-order CFA and an (Bifactor) Exploratory Structural Equation Model (ESEM). Measurement invariance was tested using multiple-group CFA and ESEM, convergent validity with correlation analysis between the ICS and the ISP subjective norms subscale (ISP-D-SN). The mean item difficulty was pi = .47, mean inter-item correlation r = .34, and mean item-total correlation ritc = .55. The total scale (ω = 0.91) and the subscales (ω = .79-.92) showed acceptable to high internal consistencies. The model fit indices were comparable and acceptable (Second-order CFA: RMSEA [90% CI] = .077 [.069; .085], SRMR = .078, CFI = .93). Multiple-group CFA and ESEM indicated scalar measurement invariance across gender and presence of a psychotherapy license. Psychotherapists in training reported higher educational support for EBP than licensed psychotherapists (T = 2.09, p = .037, d = 0.25). The expected high correlation between the ICS and the ISP-D-SN was found (r = .59, p < .001). Results for the German ICS confirm good psychometric properties including validity.

Confirmatory factor analysis of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS) in a large and representative Swedish sample: is the use of the total scale and subscale scores justified?

Background

There is a call for valid and reliable instruments to evaluate implementation of evidence-based practices (EBP). The 15-item Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS) measures attitude toward EBP, incorporating four lower-order factor subscales (Appeal, Requirements, Openness, and Divergence) and a Total scale (General Attitudes). It is one of a few measures of EBP attitudes evaluated for its psychometric properties. The reliability of the Total scale has been repeatedly supported, but also the multidimensionality of the inventory. However, whether all of the items contribute to the EBPAS Total beyond their subscales has yet to be demonstrated. In addition, the Divergence subscale has been questioned because of its low correlation with the other subscales and low inter-item correlations. The EBPAS is widely used to tailor and evaluate implementation efforts, but a Swedish version has not yet been validated. This study aimed to contribute to the development and cross-validation of the EBPAS by examining the factor structure of t a Swedish-language version in a large sample of mental health professionals.

Methods

The EBPAS was translated into Swedish and completed by 570 mental health professionals working in child and adolescent psychiatry settings spread across Sweden. The factor structure was examined using first-order, second-order and bifactor confirmatory factor analytic (CFA) models.

Results

Results suggested adequate fit for all CFA models. The EBPAS Total was strongly supported in the Swedish version. Support for the hierarchical second-order model was also strong, while the bifactor model gave mixed support for the subscales. The Openness and Requirements subscales came out best, while there were problems with both the Appeal (e.g. not different from the General Attitudes factor) and the Divergence subscales (e.g. low reliability).

Conclusions

Overall, the psychometric properties were on par with the English version and the total score appears to be a valid measure of general attitudes towards EBP. This is the first study supporting this General Attitudes factor based on a bifactor model. Although comparatively better supported in this Swedish sample, we conclude that the use of the EBPAS subscale scores may result in misleading conclusions. Practical implications and future directions are discussed.

Where Does It Begin? Community-Based Therapists' Intentions for Treating Non-comorbid Youth

This study examined patterns and predictors of 79 public sector therapists' practice element (PE) intentions for treating hypothetical single problem area youth with either anxiety or disruptive behavior problems. Analyses of intention profiles suggested that PE intentions varied by diagnosis and included both a majority of practices derived from the evidence base (PDEBs) and a large number of practices with minimal evidence support (PMESs) for each problem area. Hierarchical multiple regression results indicated the only significant predictor of higher PDEB intentions for both problem areas was reporting more PMES intentions. Implications for community-based research and implementation efforts are discussed.