Reexamining the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale-36 (EBPAS-36) in a US sample of trauma-focused treatment providers

BackgroundMental health providers' attitudes toward evidence-based practice are likely to influence what interventions they learn, implement, and sustain over time. A 36-item version of the Evidence-Based Practice Attitude Scale (EBPAS) was recently developed to assess provider attitudes in 12 domains. Research suggests the EBPAS-36 is a promising tool, though inconsistencies across studies signal the need to reexamine its validity and reliability along with the correlates of provider attitudes.MethodsThis study assessed the factorial structure of the EBPAS-36, the intercorrelations and reliabilities of its subscales, and correlates of practice attitudes in a U.S. sample of 445 practitioners who received training in trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy.ResultsA confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) verified that the EBPAS-36 fits a 12-factor model representing each of its subscales. Reinforcing prior results, the subscales of the EBPAS-36 were weakly to moderately correlated, indicating that the 12 domains are related yet distinct. A hypothesized second-order CFA model with three overarching latent factors was not validated, but an alternative second-order model with two factors fit the data adequately. Most subscales demonstrated good-to-excellent internal consistency, though values for certain subscales ranged from marginally acceptable to poor. Provider attitudes varied by gender, professional experience, and discipline. Practitioners who more frequently assessed client trauma symptoms reported more positive EBP attitudes, and those who expressed greater concerns that trauma assessments may cause harm reported more negative attitudes.ConclusionsTaken together with previous findings, the results show the EBPAS-36 performs well overall, though some subscales may benefit from refinement. Further validation tests of the EBPAS-36 in diverse samples are warranted.