Logo image
Back
Evidence implementation in Australian manual therapy practice: A cross-sectional study
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Evidence implementation in Australian manual therapy practice: A cross-sectional study

Matthew J. Leach and Tamara Agnew
Journal of bodywork and movement therapies, Vol.36, pp.109-116
10/2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2023.05.007
PMID: 37949546

Metrics

25 Record Views
1 Times Cited - Web of Science

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being

Source: InCites

Abstract

Attitude Cross-sectional studies Evidence-based practice Implementation science Musculoskeletal manipulations Skills
Background Few studies have explored the determinants of evidence implementation in complementary manual therapy professions. Exploring the factors that impede or enable evidence implementation in complementary manual therapy professions is critical to determining the most appropriate strategies to optimise this practice, and enhance the quality of care. Methods The study used a cross-sectional study design to examine Australian complementary medicine manual therapists’ attitudes, skills, training, use, barriers and enablers to evidence implementation. Eligible therapists were invited to self-administer the 84-item Evidence-Based practice Attitude and utilization Survey online. Results The survey was completed by 294 manual therapists (77% female; 65% aged ≥50 years). Participants were mostly supportive of, and reported a moderate to moderate-high level of skill in evidence implementation. However, the level of engagement in evidence implementation was low. The leading barriers to evidence implementation were lack of time, and lack of clinical evidence. While few participants reported skill-level as a barrier, most indicated a desire to develop the skills necessary to improve their engagement in evidence implementation. Participants also supported a range of other enabling strategies to foster evidence implementation in their practice, with most of these strategies targeting access to evidence. Conclusions Although participants reported few barriers to evidence implementation, there was a low level of engagement in this activity. The barriers to evidence implementation therefore warrant further exploration. This ongoing work will help better understand how to optimise evidence implementation in complementary manual therapy practice, and help drive improvements in patient care.

Details

Logo image