Treatment Research Institute, 600 Public Ledger Building, 150 S. Independence Mall West, Philadelphia, PA 19106, USA.
Drug Alcohol Depend. 2010 Mar 1;107(2-3):202-8. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2009.10.013. Epub 2009 Dec 2.
This study assessed substance abuse treatment providers' beliefs about empirically supported treatments (ESTs) to determine if providing information about empirical support for interventions would change beliefs. Treatment providers (N=136) completed an interview regarding five interventions with varied empirical support: contingency management (CM), motivational interviewing (MI), relapse prevention (RP), 12-step approaches (TSA), and verbal confrontation (VC). Participants then read primers describing empirical support for each intervention prior to completing a repeat interview. Overall, providers reported positive beliefs about ESTs. Baseline beliefs about empirical support for each intervention were inflated relative to that of expert raters except for CM. After reading the primers, beliefs about efficacy changed in the direction of the experts for all interventions except MI, but continued to be inflated except for CM. Willingness to utilize interventions increased for RP, MI, and CM and decreased for TSA and VC, but remained higher than warranted by empirical support.
本研究评估了物质滥用治疗提供者对循证治疗（EST）的信念，以确定提供干预措施的实证支持信息是否会改变信念。治疗提供者（N=136）完成了关于五种干预措施的访谈，这些干预措施具有不同的实证支持：条件管理（CM）、动机访谈（MI）、复发预防（RP）、12 步方法（TSA）和口头对抗（VC）。参与者在重复访谈前阅读了描述每种干预措施的实证支持的入门材料。总体而言，提供者对 EST 表示出积极的信念。与专家评估者相比，除了 CM 之外，每种干预措施的实证支持的基线信念都被夸大了。在阅读入门材料后，除了 MI 之外，所有干预措施的疗效信念都朝着专家的方向发生了变化，但除了 CM 之外，这些信念仍然被夸大。除了 TSA 和 VC 之外，对 RP、MI 和 CM 的干预意愿增加，而对 TSA 和 VC 的干预意愿减少，但仍高于实证支持所要求的水平。
