↓ Skip to main content

US chiropractors’ attitudes, skills and use of evidence-based practice: A cross-sectional national survey

Overview of attention for article published in Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
15 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
US chiropractors’ attitudes, skills and use of evidence-based practice: A cross-sectional national survey
Published in
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, May 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12998-015-0060-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael J Schneider, Roni Evans, Mitchell Haas, Matthew Leach, Cheryl Hawk, Cynthia Long, Gregory D Cramer, Oakland Walters, Corrie Vihstadt, Lauren Terhorst

Abstract

Evidence based practice (EBP) is being increasingly utilized by health care professionals as a means of improving the quality of health care. The introduction of EBP principles into the chiropractic profession is a relatively recent phenomenon. There is currently a lack of information about the EBP literacy level of US chiropractors and the barriers/facilitators to the use of EBP in the chiropractic profession. A nationwide EBP survey of US chiropractors was administered online (Nov 2012-Mar 2013) utilizing a validated self-report instrument (EBASE) in which three sub-scores are reported: attitudes, skills and use. Means, medians, and frequency distributions for each of the sub-scores were generated. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the demographic characteristics of the sample. Means and proportions were calculated for all of the responses to each of the questions in the survey. A total of 1,314 US chiropractors completed the EBASE survey; the sample appeared to be representative of the US chiropractic profession. Respondents were predominantly white (94.3%), male (75%), 47 (+/- 11.6) years of age, and in practice for more than 10 years (60%). EBASE sub-score means (possible ranges) were: attitudes, 31.4 (8-40); skills, 44.3 (13-65); and use, 10.3 (0-24). Survey participants generally held favorable attitudes toward EBP, but reported less use of EBP. A minority of participants indicated that EBP coursework (17%) and critical thinking (29%) were a major part of their chiropractic education. The most commonly reported barrier to the use of EBP was "lack of time". Almost 90% of the sample indicated that they were interested in improving their EBP skills. American chiropractors appear similar to chiropractors in other countries, and other health professionals regarding their favorable attitudes towards EBP, while expressing barriers related to EBP skills such as research relevance and lack of time. This suggests that the design of future EBP educational interventions should capitalize on the growing body of EBP implementation research developing in other health disciplines. This will likely include broadening the approach beyond a sole focus on EBP education, and taking a multilevel approach that also targets professional, organizational and health policy domains.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 2%
Unknown 91 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 15%
Researcher 13 14%
Other 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Other 21 23%
Unknown 19 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 17%
Social Sciences 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Other 16 17%
Unknown 24 26%