Evaluations of youth mental health providers’ treatment and assessment practices have largely examined trends in evidence-based treatment (EBT) and standardized measures use separately. Evidence-based practice (EBP) integrates EBTs with accurate, valid assessment. Thus, there is a need to understand how individual providers integrate treatment and assessment practices in routine care. To address this gap, the current study used latent profile analysis to derive distinct profiles of assessment and treatment practices, identified provider and practice settings characteristics that predict profiles, and compared provider-reported top influences on their current practices between profiles. In a multidisciplinary national survey, 1,092 youth mental health providers self-reported their assessment (i.e., use of standardized, unstandardized assessment measures) and treatment (i.e., strategies common across EBTs for multiple problem areas, strategic specific to EBTs for a single problem area, and strategies not included in EBTs for any of the problem areas) practices. Four distinct profiles were identified. The largest profile, “EBT Eclectics” (73%), reported a mix of common and specific EBT and other treatment strategies and unstandardized measures, but minimal standardized measures use. The profile that most closely resembled EBP, “EBP Integrationists” (17%), reported frequent use of common and specific EBT strategies alongside some standardized measures use. The two smaller profiles were differentiated by their relative use of specific EBT (“Key Ingredients Specialists”, 6%) and other treatment strategies (“Generalists”, 5%). Profiles were differentiated by provider and practice characteristics, and provider-reported top influences. Findings highlight future directions to enhance EBP in routine care settings.
Cho et al. (Fri,) studied this question.