Evidence-based treatment (EBT) refers to treatment that is backed by scientific evidence. That is, studies have been conducted and extensive research has been documented on a particular treatment, and it has proven to be successful. The goal of EBT is to encourage the use of safe and effective treatments likely to achieve results and lessen the use of unproven, potentially unsafe treatments.
The Use of EBT in Evidence-Based Practice (EBP)
Evidence-based treatments play a significant role in evidence-based practices in psychotherapy and general health care. EBP evolved from evidence-based medicine (EBM), which was established in 1992 for the same reasons: to encourage the use of safe, effective medicine as opposed to poorly studied, potentially harmful options. The National Registry for Evidence-Based Programs and Practices (NREPP), which is maintained by the United States’ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), lists all evidence-based programs and practices. To be listed in NREPP, a practice must be determined, after extensive research, to have significant impact on individual mental health outcomes.
To date, EBP has received a great deal of attention from organizations like the American Psychological Association (APA), which advocates for more evidence-based practices and treatments in dealing with mental health issues. In a statement from the APA Council of Representatives (2005), EBP was defined as “the integration of the best available research with clinical expertise in the context of patient characteristics, culture, and preferences.”
Increased emphasis on the importance of EBP has led to an increase in demand from insurance companies for clinicians to choose EBP and EBT to qualify for coverage, as well. Considering that the criteria for determining whether a treatment is evidence-based are quite specific and detailed, some have taken issue with this widespread emphasis on EBT as essential. While research is important, especially with regard to medications, some argue that there are treatments available that may not meet EBT criteria and yet, have proven successful in other ways.
Of course, the incorporation of EBT is just one facet of evidence-based practice; EBP also stresses the importance of informed decision-making when determining how to approach a person’s health situation. This requires a physician or mental health professional to be aware of current discoveries and dialogue in the research field, thereby enabling him or her to examine all possible approaches to treatment.
EBT in Child and Adolescent Therapy
Since they are presumably based on scientific evidence, evidence-based treatments are encouraged in coping with issues faced by children and adolescents. However, it is important to note that when choosing a treatment for a minor, parents, guardians, and practitioners should always examine the quality and quantity of the evidence. A strong EBT will be proven effective in several studies—not one or two. It is also important to look at who is funding the research, as well as how and where the studies are conducted; ideally, multiple independent and unbiased studies will be conducted that verify the safety and effectiveness of a treatment.
To aide in determining the efficacy of a particular treatment, EffectiveChildTherapy.com breaks EBTs into five levels:
- “Level #1: Works Well; Well-Established Treatments”—very strong research support; “at least two large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs)” conducted by “independent investigatory teams working at different research settings” and not affiliated with the treatment developers
- “Level #2: Works; Probably Efficacious Treatments”—supported by research but lacking independent research support
- “Level #3: Might Work; Possibly Efficacious Treatments”—otherwise known as “promising treatments” with minimal research support
- “Level #4: Unknown/Untested; Experimental Treatments”—being used but not tested properly
- “Level #5: Does Not Work/Tested But Did Not Work”—tested and no positive findings to date; may be harmful
Concerns and Controversy Surrounding EBT
The subject of EBT has sparked a substantial amount of controversy in the mental health field over the years, mainly regarding the process of evaluating whether something is an EBT (Nathan, 2004; Tanenbaum, 2005).
In addition to a general debate over the definition of “evidence” as it pertains to EBT and EBP (Tanenbaum, 2005), there has been considerable dispute over the research methods and models used in evaluating treatments, specifically, the efficacy model versus the effectiveness model (Nathan, 2004). Efficacy models typically describe carefully controlled experiments conducted with time constraints and random assignment of treatments, often in laboratory settings. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) measure efficacy.
Effectiveness models are associated with real-world research, in which treatments are observed in clinical settings with mental health professionals and the people who regularly come to see them. Practical clinical trials (PCTs) measure effectiveness. Many believe the ideal research situation would somehow combine the two (Nathan, 2004).
Another issue that arises with evidence-based medicine and treatments is the way in which the drug industry has used the popularity of EBT to push prescription drugs and psychotropic medications on clinicians and mental health practitioners, and consequently, the people they treat. A recent article published in BMJ (Spence, 2014) discusses how drug companies quickly figured out how to capitalize on the “evidence” aspect of medicine by producing studies and reports to prove a treatment’s efficacy, often without allowing for proper time to determine side effects and potential long-term dangers. “Today EBM is a loaded gun at clinicians’ heads,” says Des Spence, a general practitioner based in Glasgow. “‘You better do as the evidence says,’ it hisses, leaving no room for discretion or judgment. EBM is now the problem, fueling overdiagnosis and overtreatment.”
Along these lines, there is also the argument that all forms of treatment in psychotherapy offer some benefit, regardless of the quantity or quality of supporting evidence. Consequently, it is difficult to accurately assess what makes one treatment effective over another (Tenenbaum, 2005). Others simply take issue with the heavy emphasis on scientific research over the more intuitive aspects of psychotherapy, such as making sound judgments based on clinical knowledge and experience (Nathan, 2004).
References:
- American Psychological Association (2005, August). Policy statement on evidence-based practice in psychology. Meeting of the APA Council of Representatives. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/practice/guidelines/evidence-based-statement.aspx
- Effective Child Therapy. What is evidence-based practice? Retrieved from http://effectivechildtherapy.com/content/what-evidence-based-practice
- IFS, an Evidence-Based Practice. (2015, November 23). Retrieved from http://foundationifs.org/news-articles/79-ifs-an-evidence-based-practice
- Nathan, P. (2004). The evidence base for evidence-based mental health treatments: four continuing controversies. Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, Vol. 4, No. 3. doi: 10.1093/brief-treatment/mhh021. Retrieved from http://btci.stanford.clockss.org/cgi/reprint/4/3/243.pdf
- Spence, D. (2014, January 3). Evidence-based medicine is broken. BMJ. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g22. Retrieved from http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g22
- Tanenbaum, S. J. (2005, January). Evidence-based practice as mental health policy: three controversies and a caveat. Health Affairs, Vol. 24, No. 1, 163-173. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.24.1.163. Retrieved from http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/24/1/163.full
Last Updated:04-1-2016
Evidence-Based Practice can be best described as the application of research based treatments, that are tailored by an experienced therapist to meet the individual needs, preferences, and cultural expectations of those receiving them. To see a far more nuanced explanation, please keep reading.
If you are like many people, you may have heard the phrase “evidence-based practice” at some point when searching for or receiving healthcare services, including mental healthcare services, but not be sure what this means. Evidence-based practice (EBP) is commonly likened to a three legged stool (Sackett, 2000). You can think of the first leg of the stool as representing the best available clinical scientific evidence. This leg is commonly described as the most important leg of the three legged stool, thus this page includes more information about this leg than the other two legs.
The second leg consists of your values and preferences as a patient. The final leg consists of your provider’s (such as a psychiatrist, psychologist, psychiatric nurse, mental health counselor) own clinical experience. The rationale behind EBP is that your healthcare outcomes will be optimized if all three legs of the stool are taken into account in making decisions about your care. On the surface, EBP makes a lot of sense and is pretty straightforward. However, there are some things you will want to consider in deciding whether or not a given therapist is, in fact, engaging in EBP.
The First Leg: Best Available Clinical Research Evidence
When people look for mental health treatment for themselves or a loved one, they often search for a psychotherapy provider who may have availability in their schedule, be located nearby, have desired fees, or be covered by a specific insurance plan. However, when you search for treatment it is essential to also get specific information about the type of treatment or treatments that a mental health care provider will offer. It is important to understand that not all mental health treatments are equally effective, and it helps to be educated when searching for a therapist. Simply put, some therapies may work better for some psychological problems than others.
Mental health care providers (i.e., psychotherapists, such as psychologists, social workers, psychiatrists) may subscribe to different ‘schools of thought,’ or approaches on how to effectively reduce psychological symptoms. Some therapists rely on approaches that are based directly on scientific evidence that indicates the best routes to symptom relief. However, other mental health care providers offer treatment that is not based on strong scientific evidence, or for which no evidence is available .
Keep in mind that “scientific evidence” means much more than psychotherapists’ subjective experiences or informal clinical impressions (such as “I’ve repeatedly found that this treatment works for my patients”). Decades of psychological and medical research have shown that these kinds of experiences and impressions are imperfect and, at times, deeply flawed. Thus, you cannot rely on them to determine whether a treatment works. Instead, by “scientific evidence,” we mean rigorous, controlled research conducted by multiple teams of investigators (see next paragraph). Therapists are human and have their biases, and careful research is the best means of reducing these biases.
For therapists to truly engage in evidence-based practice, they must anchor your treatment in the best scientific evidence available and use the techniques and psychological approaches that have scientific support. Unfortunately, many members of the public assume that all psychological treatments have been adequately tested in scientific research- this is not the case. Many other people are unaware that psychological treatments with significant scientific support exist. These treatments are often called “empirically supported” or “evidence based” treatments . Empirically supported treatments are treatments that are based directly on scientific evidence suggesting the most likely contributors and risk factors for psychological symptoms. Empirically supported treatments and their associated techniques typically have been studied in several large-scale clinical trials, involving thousands of patients and careful comparison of the effects of these versus other types of psychological treatments. Dozens of multi-year studies have shown that empirically supported treatments can reduce symptoms significantly for many years following the end of psychological treatment – similar evidence for other types of therapies is not available to date.
Although there are a number of empirically supported treatments, the most commonly used empirically supported approaches for the treatment of psychological symptoms involve cognitive and behavior therapies (CBT). The efficacy of CBT has been demonstrated for a wide-range of symptoms in adults, adolescents, and children. Click here 
to learn more about CBT.
The Second Leg: Patient Values and Preferences
You have a right to have a voice in the treatment you receive. Psychological treatment should be a collaborative process that respects your own experiences, needs, and values. Thus, you should expect your therapist to take your values and preferences into consideration when making treatment recommendations.
You may find that you have preferences regarding the type of person who you would optimally want to be your therapist. For instance, you may prefer a therapist of a particular gender or ethnicity or a therapist who has a specific background (e.g., substantial experience with the military). In an optimal world, you would be able to receive empirically supported treatment (the first leg of the evidence-based practice stool) delivered by a therapist who fits your preferences. Unfortunately, because many therapists do not follow evidence-based practice and are not experienced in providing empirically supported treatments, it may come down to luck or availability as to whether you can find a therapist who both meets your preferences and can provide you treatment according to evidence-based practice. In this situation, consider first identifying the therapists who will deliver empirically supported treatment and then see which therapist seems to be the best fit. Also, feel free to share any concerns you have with that therapist so that you can work together to address them to the degree possible
It is important to bear in mind that that research consistently demonstrates that even when therapists are of a different gender, ethnicity, cultural background, and so on, from you, they can still be extremely helpful. Also, differences between therapists and patients might even be helpful in some cases. For example, when dealing with a male patient who is anxious around assertive women, a female therapist may be especially effective in giving him practice with confronting his anxieties.
Although your preferences and values are a critical component in evidence based practice, it also is important to realize that many of the most effective treatments for mental health problems require people to do things that they do not want to do. For instance, many treatments with solid scientific support ask patients to attempt activities that they find to be anxiety-producing or to engage in social activities when they feel depressed. Thus, there is a good chance that your therapist will to encourage you to step outside your comfort zone even if your initial preference is to not do this. For this reason, it is important to feel comfortable with your therapist so you can honestly discuss concerns and ensure that you truly understand why it makes sense to proceed with the proposed treatment. As part of this process, you should expect your therapist to provide a clear rationale for the treatment being proposed, to review the research evidence for the treatment, and to explain any proposed deviations from standard delivery of the treatment so you can make an informed decision to proceed or not. If your therapist does not supply this information, be sure to ask.
The Third Leg: Clinical Expertise
Ultimately, it is your therapist’s job to interpret the best evidence from systematic clinical research (the first leg) in light of your preferences, values, culture, and daily life realities. Therapists rely on their own clinical expertise in figuring out how to integrate these different pieces of information to formulate your individual treatment plan. They also rely on clinical expertise whenever the existing research base does not provide sufficient information to address your situation. A therapist who is serious about engaging evidence-based practice should give the scientific evidence extra weight in designing your care so that you have the best chance to improve. However, sometimes the scientific evidence is lacking or incomplete. For instance, if you present with two mental health problems for which there are two different treatments, the existing scientific literature may not clearly spell out whether you would be better off starting with Treatment A or Treatment B. In this situation, your therapist will use his or her clinical experience to create an individualized treatment plan for you. In this case, you should expect your therapist to clearly explain to you how the scientific evidence applies to your situation/problem, where the gap in information lies, and what your options are. Then you can collaboratively pick the best path forward.
Clinical expertise also includes the degree of experience that a therapist may have with a particular problem or particular group of people. For instance, many therapists who engage in evidence based practice have particular areas of specialty (e.g., anxiety, eating disorders, depression etc.). In many cases you may find that there is added benefit in findings a therapist who has substantial clinical expertise in addressing the problems you are facing. This expertise, however, does not outweigh the first leg of the evidence-based practice stool. A therapist may have substantial clinical expertise in treating a particular problem but may ignore the existing scientific evidence. In this case you will want to find a different therapist because clinical expertise does not outweigh the scientific evidence.
Finally, research indicates that even relatively inexperienced therapists, such as those who recently received their doctoral degrees, can be extremely helpful in alleviating psychological distress. If new therapists (a) are well trained, (b) caring and empathic, and (c) rely on scientific evidence to guide their interventions, they can often be just as effective as more experienced therapists.
