Practitioner perceptions of evidence-based practice in elite sport in the United States of America

Hugh Fullagar, Liam Harper, Andrew Govus, Robert McCunn, Joey Eisenmann, Alan McCall

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Practitioners’ perceptions regarding the use and effectiveness of research evidence in sport is not well understood. The purpose of the present study was to examine practitioners’ perceptions around the use, implementation, and barriers to evidence-based practice (EBP) in sport science in the United States of America (USA). A survey (28 items) was completed by 67 full-time staff who were a physical performance team member employed by universities and/or professional sporting organisations in the USA. Questions included the use of research, contribution of research areas, barriers to accessing and implementing EBP, and methods of feedback to coach and players. All respondents (100%) stated they used research evidence in their performance/training program, ranking research as contributing most (largest contribution = 1 to smallest contribution = 4) to individualised preparation or recovery recommendations (1.98 ± 1.02). The top three preferred sources of information were ‘peer-reviewed research’ (100% of respondents), ‘conferences/seminars’ (76%) and ‘practitioners within your sport’ (63%). Commonly reported perceived barriers between accessing and implementing research were ‘lack of staff’ (accessing = 33%, implementing = 46%) ‘time’ (accessing = 38%, implementing = 48%) and non-applicable research’ (accessing = 33%, implementing = 37%), whilst “poor player compliance” was a clear barrier to implementing EBP (56%). Practitioners 45 most preferred, and actual, method of feedback for coaching staff (87% for both) and players (94% and 95%, respectively) was ‘informal conversations/speaking’. Improved access to educational and financial resources, increased integration of staff in coach settings and understanding of player/coach contexts may help to alleviate barriers to EBP
LanguageEnglish
JournalJournal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 10 Jul 2019

Fingerprint

Evidence-Based Practice
Sports
Research
Compliance
Education
Mentoring

Cite this

@article{ba3d81a0f44f45a3880ef32a67746964,
title = "Practitioner perceptions of evidence-based practice in elite sport in the United States of America",
abstract = "Practitioners’ perceptions regarding the use and effectiveness of research evidence in sport is not well understood. The purpose of the present study was to examine practitioners’ perceptions around the use, implementation, and barriers to evidence-based practice (EBP) in sport science in the United States of America (USA). A survey (28 items) was completed by 67 full-time staff who were a physical performance team member employed by universities and/or professional sporting organisations in the USA. Questions included the use of research, contribution of research areas, barriers to accessing and implementing EBP, and methods of feedback to coach and players. All respondents (100{\%}) stated they used research evidence in their performance/training program, ranking research as contributing most (largest contribution = 1 to smallest contribution = 4) to individualised preparation or recovery recommendations (1.98 ± 1.02). The top three preferred sources of information were ‘peer-reviewed research’ (100{\%} of respondents), ‘conferences/seminars’ (76{\%}) and ‘practitioners within your sport’ (63{\%}). Commonly reported perceived barriers between accessing and implementing research were ‘lack of staff’ (accessing = 33{\%}, implementing = 46{\%}) ‘time’ (accessing = 38{\%}, implementing = 48{\%}) and non-applicable research’ (accessing = 33{\%}, implementing = 37{\%}), whilst “poor player compliance” was a clear barrier to implementing EBP (56{\%}). Practitioners 45 most preferred, and actual, method of feedback for coaching staff (87{\%} for both) and players (94{\%} and 95{\%}, respectively) was ‘informal conversations/speaking’. Improved access to educational and financial resources, increased integration of staff in coach settings and understanding of player/coach contexts may help to alleviate barriers to EBP",
author = "Hugh Fullagar and Liam Harper and Andrew Govus and Robert McCunn and Joey Eisenmann and Alan McCall",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "10",
language = "English",
journal = "Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research",
issn = "1064-8011",
publisher = "NSCA National Strength and Conditioning Association",

}

Practitioner perceptions of evidence-based practice in elite sport in the United States of America. / Fullagar, Hugh ; Harper, Liam; Govus, Andrew; McCunn, Robert; Eisenmann, Joey; McCall, Alan.

In: Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 10.07.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Practitioner perceptions of evidence-based practice in elite sport in the United States of America

AU - Fullagar, Hugh

AU - Harper, Liam

AU - Govus, Andrew

AU - McCunn, Robert

AU - Eisenmann, Joey

AU - McCall, Alan

PY - 2019/7/10

Y1 - 2019/7/10

N2 - Practitioners’ perceptions regarding the use and effectiveness of research evidence in sport is not well understood. The purpose of the present study was to examine practitioners’ perceptions around the use, implementation, and barriers to evidence-based practice (EBP) in sport science in the United States of America (USA). A survey (28 items) was completed by 67 full-time staff who were a physical performance team member employed by universities and/or professional sporting organisations in the USA. Questions included the use of research, contribution of research areas, barriers to accessing and implementing EBP, and methods of feedback to coach and players. All respondents (100%) stated they used research evidence in their performance/training program, ranking research as contributing most (largest contribution = 1 to smallest contribution = 4) to individualised preparation or recovery recommendations (1.98 ± 1.02). The top three preferred sources of information were ‘peer-reviewed research’ (100% of respondents), ‘conferences/seminars’ (76%) and ‘practitioners within your sport’ (63%). Commonly reported perceived barriers between accessing and implementing research were ‘lack of staff’ (accessing = 33%, implementing = 46%) ‘time’ (accessing = 38%, implementing = 48%) and non-applicable research’ (accessing = 33%, implementing = 37%), whilst “poor player compliance” was a clear barrier to implementing EBP (56%). Practitioners 45 most preferred, and actual, method of feedback for coaching staff (87% for both) and players (94% and 95%, respectively) was ‘informal conversations/speaking’. Improved access to educational and financial resources, increased integration of staff in coach settings and understanding of player/coach contexts may help to alleviate barriers to EBP

AB - Practitioners’ perceptions regarding the use and effectiveness of research evidence in sport is not well understood. The purpose of the present study was to examine practitioners’ perceptions around the use, implementation, and barriers to evidence-based practice (EBP) in sport science in the United States of America (USA). A survey (28 items) was completed by 67 full-time staff who were a physical performance team member employed by universities and/or professional sporting organisations in the USA. Questions included the use of research, contribution of research areas, barriers to accessing and implementing EBP, and methods of feedback to coach and players. All respondents (100%) stated they used research evidence in their performance/training program, ranking research as contributing most (largest contribution = 1 to smallest contribution = 4) to individualised preparation or recovery recommendations (1.98 ± 1.02). The top three preferred sources of information were ‘peer-reviewed research’ (100% of respondents), ‘conferences/seminars’ (76%) and ‘practitioners within your sport’ (63%). Commonly reported perceived barriers between accessing and implementing research were ‘lack of staff’ (accessing = 33%, implementing = 46%) ‘time’ (accessing = 38%, implementing = 48%) and non-applicable research’ (accessing = 33%, implementing = 37%), whilst “poor player compliance” was a clear barrier to implementing EBP (56%). Practitioners 45 most preferred, and actual, method of feedback for coaching staff (87% for both) and players (94% and 95%, respectively) was ‘informal conversations/speaking’. Improved access to educational and financial resources, increased integration of staff in coach settings and understanding of player/coach contexts may help to alleviate barriers to EBP

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

T2 - Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

JF - Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

SN - 1064-8011

ER -