执业临床社会工作者对补充和替代干预的看法

IF 1.7 4区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL WORK
Tina Vitolo, Morgan E. Cooley, D. Weissman
{"title":"执业临床社会工作者对补充和替代干预的看法","authors":"Tina Vitolo, Morgan E. Cooley, D. Weissman","doi":"10.1177/10497315231195829","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: This article explored Licensed Clinical Social Workers (LCSWs) beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge of Complementary and Alternative Interventions (CAI). Method: We utilized a cross-sectional online survey among a sample of 193 LCSWs. Results: Approximately 60% of LCSWs assessed for and utilized CAI professionally, and 90% personally utilized CAI. LCSWs had moderately positive beliefs, neutral attitudes, and high baseline knowledge of CAI. Age and years of practice were the only significant correlates, and the only significant predictor for assessment and utilization of CAI was positive attitudes. Discussion: As the largest group of mental health providers, we found that it is vital for LCSWs to have a solid understanding of CAI to provide effective and safe services to the clients they serve. It is hoped that the results of this study will serve as a starting point for future research on CAI among social workers, with the goal of enhancing client-centered practice.","PeriodicalId":47993,"journal":{"name":"Research on Social Work Practice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Licensed Clinical Social Workers’ Perceptions of Complementary and Alternative Interventions\",\"authors\":\"Tina Vitolo, Morgan E. Cooley, D. Weissman\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10497315231195829\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: This article explored Licensed Clinical Social Workers (LCSWs) beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge of Complementary and Alternative Interventions (CAI). Method: We utilized a cross-sectional online survey among a sample of 193 LCSWs. Results: Approximately 60% of LCSWs assessed for and utilized CAI professionally, and 90% personally utilized CAI. LCSWs had moderately positive beliefs, neutral attitudes, and high baseline knowledge of CAI. Age and years of practice were the only significant correlates, and the only significant predictor for assessment and utilization of CAI was positive attitudes. Discussion: As the largest group of mental health providers, we found that it is vital for LCSWs to have a solid understanding of CAI to provide effective and safe services to the clients they serve. It is hoped that the results of this study will serve as a starting point for future research on CAI among social workers, with the goal of enhancing client-centered practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47993,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research on Social Work Practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research on Social Work Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315231195829\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL WORK\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research on Social Work Practice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497315231195829","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本文探讨了持证临床社会工作者(LCSW)对补充和替代干预(CAI)的信念、态度和知识。方法:我们对193名LCSW进行了横断面在线调查。结果:约60%的LCSW专业评估并使用CAI,90%的LCSW个人使用CAI。LCSW具有适度的积极信念、中立态度和较高的CAI基线知识。年龄和实践年限是唯一显著的相关因素,评估和利用CAI的唯一显著预测因素是积极的态度。讨论:作为最大的心理健康提供者群体,我们发现LCSW对CAI有着扎实的了解,为他们服务的客户提供有效和安全的服务是至关重要的。希望本研究的结果将作为未来社会工作者CAI研究的起点,以加强以客户为中心的实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Licensed Clinical Social Workers’ Perceptions of Complementary and Alternative Interventions
Purpose: This article explored Licensed Clinical Social Workers (LCSWs) beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge of Complementary and Alternative Interventions (CAI). Method: We utilized a cross-sectional online survey among a sample of 193 LCSWs. Results: Approximately 60% of LCSWs assessed for and utilized CAI professionally, and 90% personally utilized CAI. LCSWs had moderately positive beliefs, neutral attitudes, and high baseline knowledge of CAI. Age and years of practice were the only significant correlates, and the only significant predictor for assessment and utilization of CAI was positive attitudes. Discussion: As the largest group of mental health providers, we found that it is vital for LCSWs to have a solid understanding of CAI to provide effective and safe services to the clients they serve. It is hoped that the results of this study will serve as a starting point for future research on CAI among social workers, with the goal of enhancing client-centered practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
105
期刊介绍: Research on Social Work Practice, sponsored by the Society for Social Work and Research, is a disciplinary journal devoted to the publication of empirical research concerning the methods and outcomes of social work practice. Social work practice is broadly interpreted to refer to the application of intentionally designed social work intervention programs to problems of societal and/or interpersonal importance, including behavior analysis or psychotherapy involving individuals; case management; practice involving couples, families, and small groups; community practice education; and the development, implementation, and evaluation of social policies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信