Evidence-based practice and management-by-knowledge of disability care: rigid constraint or fluid support?
Search for other papers by Isabella Pistone in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Allan Lidström in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Ingemar Bohlin in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Thomas Schneider in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Teun Zuiderent-Jerak in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Morten Sager in
Current site
Google Scholar
Background:
Although increasingly accepted in some corners of social work, critics have claimed that evidence-based practice (EBP) methodologies run contrary to local care practices and result in an EBP straitjacket and epistemic injustice. These are serious concerns, especially in relation to already marginalised clients.
Aims and objectives:
Against the backdrop of criticism against EBP, this study explores the ramifications of the Swedish state-governed knowledge infrastructure, ‘management-by-knowledge’, for social care practices at two care units for persons with intellectual disabilities.
Methods:
Data generated from ethnographic observations and interviews were analysed by applying a conceptual framework of epistemic injustice; also analysed were national, regional and local knowledge products within management-by-knowledge related to two daily activity (DA) units at a social care provider in Sweden.
Findings:
In this particular case of disability care, no obvious risks of epistemic injustice were discovered in key knowledge practices of management-by-knowledge. Central methodologies of national agencies did include perspectives from social workers and clients, as did regional infrastructures. Locally, there were structures in place that focused on creating a dynamic interplay between knowledge coming from various forms of evidence, including social workers’ and clients’ own knowledge and experience.
Discussion and conclusions:
Far from being a straitjacket, in the case studied management-by-knowledge may be understood as offering fluid support. Efforts which aim at improving care for people with disabilities might benefit from organisational support structures that enable dynamic interactions between external knowledge and local practices.
-
Addis, M.E., Wade, W. and Hatgis, C. (1999) Barriers to dissemination of Evidence‐based practices: addressing practitioners’ concerns about manual‐based psychotherapies, Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 6(4): 430–41.
-
Andrews, N., Gabbay, J., Le-May, A., Miller, E., Petch, A. and O’Neill, M. (2020) Story, dialogue and caring about what matters to people: progress towards evidence-enriched policy and practice, Evidence & Policy, 16(4): 597–618.
-
Bate, P. and Robert, G. (2006) Experience-based design: from redesigning the system around the patient to co-designing services with the patient, Quality & Safety in Health Care, 15(5): 307–10.
-
Bergmark, A. and Lundström, T. (2006) Mot en evidensbaserad praktik? Om färdriktningen i socialt arbete’ [Towards an evidence-based practice? About the direction in social work], Socialvetenskaplig Tidskrift, 13(2): 99–113.
-
Bergmark, A. and Lundström, T. (2011) EBP i svenskt socialt arbete: om ett programs mottagande, förändring och möjligheter i en ny omgivning’ [EBP in Swedish social work: about a programme’s reception, change and opportunities in a new environment], in I. Bohlin and M. Sager (eds) Evidensens Många Ansikten [The Many Faces of Evidence], Linköping: Arkiv Förlag, pp 163–84.
-
Björk, A. (2016) Evidence, fidelity, and organisational rationales: multiple uses of motivational interviewing in a social services agency, Evidence & Policy, 12(1): 53–71.
-
Björk, A. (2019) Reconsidering critical appraisal in social work: choice, care and organization in real-time treatment decisions, Nordic Social Work Research, 9(1): 42–54.
-
Braye, S. and Preston-Shoot, M. (2005) Emerging from out of the shadows? Service user and carer involvement in systematic reviews, Evidence & Policy, 1(2): 173–94.
-
Carel, H. and Kidd, I. (2014) Epistemic injustice in healthcare: a philosophical analysis, Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 17(4): 529–40.
-
Crichton, P., Carel, H. and Kidd, I. (2017) Epistemic injustice in psychiatry, British Journal of Psychiatry Bulletin, 41(2): 65–70.
-
Eriksson, B.G. and Karlsson, P.A. (2016) Utvärdering av Nationell Satsning på att Utveckla EBP Inom Verksamhetsområdet Stöd Till Personer Med Funktionsnedsättning’ [Evaluation of National Investment in Developing EBP Within the Business Area Support for People with Disabilities], Stockholm: Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions, FoU Sjuhärad and Hedmark University College.
-
Flyvbjerg, B. (2001) Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Franzén, C. (2018) State governance versus dentists’ autonomy: the case of Swedish dental care, Acta Odontologica Scandinavica, 76(2): 125–29.
-
Fricker, M. (2007) Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
Gray, M. (2009) Evidence-based Social Work: A Critical Stance, London, New York: Routledge.
-
Greenhalgh, T., Snow, R., Ryan, S., Rees, S. and Salisbury, H. (2015) Six ‘biases’ against patients and carers in evidence-based medicine, BMC Medicine, 13(1): 200.
-
Grim, K., Tistad, M., Schön, U.K. and Rosenberg, D. (2019) The legitimacy of user knowledge in decision-making processes in mental health care: an analysis of epistemic injustice, Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation and Mental Health, 6(2): 157–73.
-
Jacobsson, K. and Meeuwisse, A. (2020) ‘State governing of knowledge’: constraining social work research and practice, European Journal of Social Work, 23(2): 277–89.
-
Johansson, K. (2019) Evidence-based social service in Sweden: a long and winding road from policy to local practice, Evidence & Policy, 15(1): 85–102.
-
Johansson, K., Denvall, V. and Vedung, E. (2015) After the NPM Wave: evidence-based practice and the vanishing client, Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration, 19(2): 69–88.
-
Kalkan, A., Sandberg, J. and Garpenby, P. (2015) Management by knowledge in practice: implementation of National Healthcare Guidelines in Sweden, Social Policy & Administration, 49(7): 911–27.
-
Kalman, H., Lövgren, V. and Sauer, L. (2016) Epistemic injustice and conditioned experience: the case of intellectual disability, Wagadu: A Journal of Transnational Women’s and Gender Studies, 15: 63–81.
-
Lipsky, M. (1980) Street-level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
-
Martinell Barfoed, E. (2018) From stories to standardised interaction: changing conversational formats in social work, Nordic Social Work Research, 8(1): 36–49.
-
Metz, A., Boaz, A. and Robert, G. (2019) Co-creative approaches to knowledge production: what next for bridging the research to practice gap? Evidence & Policy, 15(3): 331–37.
-
Michaels, J.A. (2020) Potential for epistemic injustice in evidence-based healthcare policy and guidance, Journal of Medical Ethics, 47(6): 417–22.
-
Moes, F., Houwaart, E., Delnoij, D. and Horstman, K. (2020) Questions regarding ‘epistemic injustice’ in knowledge-intensive policymaking: two examples from Dutch health insurance policy, Social Science & Medicine, 245: 112674, doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112674.
-
Myers, L.L. and Thyer, B.A. (1997) Should social work clients have the right to effective treatment? Social Work, 42(3): 288–98.
-
NBHW (National Board of Health and Welfare) (2017) Vägar Till ökad Delaktighet. Kunskapsstöd för Socialtjänsten om Arbete Med Stöd Och Service Enligt LSS [Roads to Increased Participation. Knowledge Support for the Social Services About Work with Support and Service According to LSS], Stockholm: NBHW.
-
NHBW (National Board of Health and Welfare) (2020) Öppna Jämförelser [Open Comparisons], https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/oppnajamforelser.
-
Nicholas, G., Foote, J., Kainz, K., Midgley, G., Prager, K. and Zurbriggen, C. (2019) Towards a heart and soul for co-creative research practice: a systemic approach, Evidence & Policy, 15(3): 353–70.
-
Norcross, J.C., Beutler, L.E. and Levant, R.F. (2006) Evidence-based Practices in Mental Health: Debate and Dialogue on the Fundamental Questions, Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
-
Otto, H.U. and Ziegler, H. (2008) The notion of causal impact in evidence-based social work: an introduction to the special issue on what works? Research on Social Work Practice, 18(4): 273–77.
-
Persad, G. (2017) What is the relevance of procedural fairness to making determinations about medical evidence? American Medical Association Journal of Ethics, 19(2): 183.
-
Sackett, D.L., Straus, S.E., Richardson, W.S., Rosenberg, W. and Haynes, R.B. (2000) Evidence-based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM, 2nd edn, Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.
-
Sandberg, J., Persson, B. and Garpenby, P. (2019) The dilemma of knowledge use in political decision making: National Guidelines in a Swedish priority-setting context, Health Economics, Policy and Law, 14(4): 425–42, doi: 10.1017/S1744133118000233.
-
Scully, J.L. (2020) Epistemic exclusion, injustice, and disability, in A. Cureton and D.T. Wasserman (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy and Disability, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
Stewart, E., Smith-Merry, J., Geddes, M. and Bandola-Gill, J. (2020) Opening up evidence-based policy: exploring citizen and service user expertise, Evidence & Policy, 16(2): 199–208.
-
SOU (2008) Evidensbaserad Praktik Inom Socialtjänsten – Till Nytta för Brukaren: Betänkande av Utredningen för Kunskapsbaserad Socialtjänst [Evidence-based Practice Within Social Services – for the Benefit of the User], Stockholm: Fritzes.
-
Synnot, A.J., Lowe, D., Merner, B. and Hill, J. (2018) The evolution of Cochrane evidence summaries in health communication and participation: seeking and responding to stakeholder feedback, Evidence & Policy, 14(2): 335–47.
-
Tate, A. (2018) Contributory injustice in psychiatry, Med Ethics, 45: 97-100.
-
Tavory, I. and Timmermans, S. (2014) Abductive Analysis: Theorizing Qualitative Research, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
-
Trinder, L. and Reynolds, S. (2000) Evidence-Based Practice: A Critical Appraisal, Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd.
-
Wampold, B.E. (2015) The Great Psychotherapy Debate: The Evidence for What Makes Psychotherapy Work, 2nd edn, New York: Routledge.
-
Witkin, S.L. and Harrison, W.D. (2001) Whose evidence and for what purpose? Social Work, 46(4): 293–96.
-
Zuiderent-Jerak, T. (2016) If intervention is method, what are we learning? Engaging Science Technology and Society, 2: 73–82.
Search for other papers by Isabella Pistone in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Allan Lidström in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Ingemar Bohlin in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Thomas Schneider in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Teun Zuiderent-Jerak in
Current site
Google Scholar
Search for other papers by Morten Sager in
Current site
Google Scholar
| May 2022 onwards | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 774 | 389 | 38 |
| Full Text Views | 400 | 14 | 2 |
| PDF Downloads | 304 | 19 | 3 |
Institutional librarians can find more information about free trials here
We are a leading social science publisher
committed to making a difference.
Bristol University Press and
Policy Press
bristoluniversitypress.co.uk