The Decision to Adopt Evidence-Based and Other Innovative Mental Health Practices: Risky Business?

A risk-based decision-making framework was used to examine the decision to adopt innovative mental health practices, including both evidence-based and other research-guided practices. Seventy-eight projects involving decisions to adopt one of four innovative mental health practices were the focus of...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) D.C.), 2006-08, Vol.57 (8), p.1153-1161
Hauptverfasser: Panzano, Phyllis C, Roth, Dee
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1161
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1153
container_title Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)
container_volume 57
creator Panzano, Phyllis C
Roth, Dee
description A risk-based decision-making framework was used to examine the decision to adopt innovative mental health practices, including both evidence-based and other research-guided practices. Seventy-eight projects involving decisions to adopt one of four innovative mental health practices were the focus of this study. Key informants with direct knowledge about the adoption decision provided data for hypothesis testing. As predicted, the propensity to adopt an innovative practice-as measured by decision stage-was negatively related to the perceived risk of adopting the practice, positively related to expected capacity to manage risk, and positively related to an organization's past propensity to take risks. Further, perceived risk, anticipated resource availability, and exposure to field-based evidence explained a substantial part of what differentiated adopters from nonadopters. Finally, several features of innovations known to influence innovation adoption decisions were found to be related in expected ways to perceived risk, capacity to manage risk, and risk propensity. This research supports the view that the decision to adopt an innovative mental health practice is a decision made in consideration of risk. Contrary to popular views that early adopters of innovations are willing to take enormous risks, these data offer the novel idea that early adopters act because they see the risks associated with adopting as lower than their nonadopter counterparts, partly because the risks are seen as more manageable. Implications of results are discussed for organizations considering adoption of innovative health care practices and for state or local mental health authorities hoping for a higher level of adoption in their areas.
doi_str_mv 10.1176/ps.2006.57.8.1153
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68681452</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>68681452</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a310t-9222286674dec97e488d78ae999cd91d8737ba9b72a51ebfeef7b897171502d13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10N9rFDEQB_BFFFurf4AvEgR92zWze5tJfJH-0hYqFanPIbuZ5VL3stske9D_vil3cCCYl4TwmcnkWxTvgVcAKL7Msao5F1WLlcw3bfOiOIa2xVIh5y_zmWNb1tjwo-JNjPecc0AQr4sjEBK5EnhcdHdrYhfUu-gmz9LETu00J3a5dZZ8T-WZiWSZ8ZbdpjUFdu39tDXJbYn9JJ_MyK7IjGnNfgXTJ9dT_Mp-u_j3kZ0t0XmK8dvb4tVgxkjv9vtJ8ef75d35VXlz--P6_PSmNA3wVKo6LykEriz1CmklpUVpSCnVWwVWYoOdUR3WpgXqBqIBO6kwf6nltYXmpPi86zuH6WGhmPTGxZ7G0XialqiFFBJWbZ3hx3_g_bQEn2fTNTRQA4DMCHaoD1OMgQY9B7cx4VED18_p6znznL5uUUv9nH6u-bBvvHQbsoeKfdwZfNoDE3szDsH4nPzBSV4LIVV21c6ZeXaH6f7_8hNyE5pO</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>213121118</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Decision to Adopt Evidence-Based and Other Innovative Mental Health Practices: Risky Business?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>American Psychiatric Publishing Journals (1997-Present)</source><source>Psychiatry Legacy Collection Online Journals 1844-1996</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Panzano, Phyllis C ; Roth, Dee</creator><creatorcontrib>Panzano, Phyllis C ; Roth, Dee</creatorcontrib><description>A risk-based decision-making framework was used to examine the decision to adopt innovative mental health practices, including both evidence-based and other research-guided practices. Seventy-eight projects involving decisions to adopt one of four innovative mental health practices were the focus of this study. Key informants with direct knowledge about the adoption decision provided data for hypothesis testing. As predicted, the propensity to adopt an innovative practice-as measured by decision stage-was negatively related to the perceived risk of adopting the practice, positively related to expected capacity to manage risk, and positively related to an organization's past propensity to take risks. Further, perceived risk, anticipated resource availability, and exposure to field-based evidence explained a substantial part of what differentiated adopters from nonadopters. Finally, several features of innovations known to influence innovation adoption decisions were found to be related in expected ways to perceived risk, capacity to manage risk, and risk propensity. This research supports the view that the decision to adopt an innovative mental health practice is a decision made in consideration of risk. Contrary to popular views that early adopters of innovations are willing to take enormous risks, these data offer the novel idea that early adopters act because they see the risks associated with adopting as lower than their nonadopter counterparts, partly because the risks are seen as more manageable. Implications of results are discussed for organizations considering adoption of innovative health care practices and for state or local mental health authorities hoping for a higher level of adoption in their areas.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1075-2730</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1557-9700</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1176/ps.2006.57.8.1153</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16870967</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Decision Making ; Decision making models ; Diffusion of Innovation ; Evidence-Based Medicine ; Humans ; Innovations ; Interviews as Topic ; Longitudinal Studies ; Medical sciences ; Mental health care ; Mental Health Services ; Miscellaneous ; Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychopathology. Psychiatry ; Public health. Hygiene ; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine ; Social psychiatry. Ethnopsychiatry ; United States</subject><ispartof>Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.), 2006-08, Vol.57 (8), p.1153-1161</ispartof><rights>2006 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc. Aug 2006</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a310t-9222286674dec97e488d78ae999cd91d8737ba9b72a51ebfeef7b897171502d13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a310t-9222286674dec97e488d78ae999cd91d8737ba9b72a51ebfeef7b897171502d13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://psychiatryonline.org/doi/epdf/10.1176/ps.2006.57.8.1153$$EPDF$$P50$$Gappi$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/ps.2006.57.8.1153$$EHTML$$P50$$Gappi$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,2855,2859,21626,21627,21628,21629,27924,27925,77791,77792,77794,77799</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=18026689$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16870967$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Panzano, Phyllis C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roth, Dee</creatorcontrib><title>The Decision to Adopt Evidence-Based and Other Innovative Mental Health Practices: Risky Business?</title><title>Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)</title><addtitle>Psychiatr Serv</addtitle><description>A risk-based decision-making framework was used to examine the decision to adopt innovative mental health practices, including both evidence-based and other research-guided practices. Seventy-eight projects involving decisions to adopt one of four innovative mental health practices were the focus of this study. Key informants with direct knowledge about the adoption decision provided data for hypothesis testing. As predicted, the propensity to adopt an innovative practice-as measured by decision stage-was negatively related to the perceived risk of adopting the practice, positively related to expected capacity to manage risk, and positively related to an organization's past propensity to take risks. Further, perceived risk, anticipated resource availability, and exposure to field-based evidence explained a substantial part of what differentiated adopters from nonadopters. Finally, several features of innovations known to influence innovation adoption decisions were found to be related in expected ways to perceived risk, capacity to manage risk, and risk propensity. This research supports the view that the decision to adopt an innovative mental health practice is a decision made in consideration of risk. Contrary to popular views that early adopters of innovations are willing to take enormous risks, these data offer the novel idea that early adopters act because they see the risks associated with adopting as lower than their nonadopter counterparts, partly because the risks are seen as more manageable. Implications of results are discussed for organizations considering adoption of innovative health care practices and for state or local mental health authorities hoping for a higher level of adoption in their areas.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Decision making models</subject><subject>Diffusion of Innovation</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Medicine</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Innovations</subject><subject>Interviews as Topic</subject><subject>Longitudinal Studies</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Mental health care</subject><subject>Mental Health Services</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychopathology. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene</subject><subject>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</subject><subject>Social psychiatry. Ethnopsychiatry</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>1075-2730</issn><issn>1557-9700</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp10N9rFDEQB_BFFFurf4AvEgR92zWze5tJfJH-0hYqFanPIbuZ5VL3stske9D_vil3cCCYl4TwmcnkWxTvgVcAKL7Msao5F1WLlcw3bfOiOIa2xVIh5y_zmWNb1tjwo-JNjPecc0AQr4sjEBK5EnhcdHdrYhfUu-gmz9LETu00J3a5dZZ8T-WZiWSZ8ZbdpjUFdu39tDXJbYn9JJ_MyK7IjGnNfgXTJ9dT_Mp-u_j3kZ0t0XmK8dvb4tVgxkjv9vtJ8ef75d35VXlz--P6_PSmNA3wVKo6LykEriz1CmklpUVpSCnVWwVWYoOdUR3WpgXqBqIBO6kwf6nltYXmpPi86zuH6WGhmPTGxZ7G0XialqiFFBJWbZ3hx3_g_bQEn2fTNTRQA4DMCHaoD1OMgQY9B7cx4VED18_p6znznL5uUUv9nH6u-bBvvHQbsoeKfdwZfNoDE3szDsH4nPzBSV4LIVV21c6ZeXaH6f7_8hNyE5pO</recordid><startdate>200608</startdate><enddate>200608</enddate><creator>Panzano, Phyllis C</creator><creator>Roth, Dee</creator><general>American Psychiatric Association</general><general>American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200608</creationdate><title>The Decision to Adopt Evidence-Based and Other Innovative Mental Health Practices: Risky Business?</title><author>Panzano, Phyllis C ; Roth, Dee</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a310t-9222286674dec97e488d78ae999cd91d8737ba9b72a51ebfeef7b897171502d13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Decision making models</topic><topic>Diffusion of Innovation</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Medicine</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Innovations</topic><topic>Interviews as Topic</topic><topic>Longitudinal Studies</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Mental health care</topic><topic>Mental Health Services</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychopathology. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene</topic><topic>Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine</topic><topic>Social psychiatry. Ethnopsychiatry</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Panzano, Phyllis C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Roth, Dee</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Panzano, Phyllis C</au><au>Roth, Dee</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Decision to Adopt Evidence-Based and Other Innovative Mental Health Practices: Risky Business?</atitle><jtitle>Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.)</jtitle><addtitle>Psychiatr Serv</addtitle><date>2006-08</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>57</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>1153</spage><epage>1161</epage><pages>1153-1161</pages><issn>1075-2730</issn><eissn>1557-9700</eissn><abstract>A risk-based decision-making framework was used to examine the decision to adopt innovative mental health practices, including both evidence-based and other research-guided practices. Seventy-eight projects involving decisions to adopt one of four innovative mental health practices were the focus of this study. Key informants with direct knowledge about the adoption decision provided data for hypothesis testing. As predicted, the propensity to adopt an innovative practice-as measured by decision stage-was negatively related to the perceived risk of adopting the practice, positively related to expected capacity to manage risk, and positively related to an organization's past propensity to take risks. Further, perceived risk, anticipated resource availability, and exposure to field-based evidence explained a substantial part of what differentiated adopters from nonadopters. Finally, several features of innovations known to influence innovation adoption decisions were found to be related in expected ways to perceived risk, capacity to manage risk, and risk propensity. This research supports the view that the decision to adopt an innovative mental health practice is a decision made in consideration of risk. Contrary to popular views that early adopters of innovations are willing to take enormous risks, these data offer the novel idea that early adopters act because they see the risks associated with adopting as lower than their nonadopter counterparts, partly because the risks are seen as more manageable. Implications of results are discussed for organizations considering adoption of innovative health care practices and for state or local mental health authorities hoping for a higher level of adoption in their areas.</abstract><cop>Washington, DC</cop><pub>American Psychiatric Association</pub><pmid>16870967</pmid><doi>10.1176/ps.2006.57.8.1153</doi><tpages>9</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1075-2730
ispartof Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.), 2006-08, Vol.57 (8), p.1153-1161
issn 1075-2730
1557-9700
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68681452
source MEDLINE; American Psychiatric Publishing Journals (1997-Present); Psychiatry Legacy Collection Online Journals 1844-1996; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Biological and medical sciences
Decision Making
Decision making models
Diffusion of Innovation
Evidence-Based Medicine
Humans
Innovations
Interviews as Topic
Longitudinal Studies
Medical sciences
Mental health care
Mental Health Services
Miscellaneous
Psychiatry
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychopathology. Psychiatry
Public health. Hygiene
Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine
Social psychiatry. Ethnopsychiatry
United States
title The Decision to Adopt Evidence-Based and Other Innovative Mental Health Practices: Risky Business?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-05T20%3A14%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Decision%20to%20Adopt%20Evidence-Based%20and%20Other%20Innovative%20Mental%20Health%20Practices:%20Risky%20Business?&rft.jtitle=Psychiatric%20services%20(Washington,%20D.C.)&rft.au=Panzano,%20Phyllis%20C&rft.date=2006-08&rft.volume=57&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=1153&rft.epage=1161&rft.pages=1153-1161&rft.issn=1075-2730&rft.eissn=1557-9700&rft_id=info:doi/10.1176/ps.2006.57.8.1153&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E68681452%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=213121118&rft_id=info:pmid/16870967&rfr_iscdi=true