Introduction

Mullen (2008) identifies the divide between what research shows and what is actually used in practice, echoing others over the last decade. Zlotnick and Galambos (2004) note the need for workers in health care to translate evidence from other health care professions in order to delineate the interventions that best fit our clients such and indicates the relevance of systematic reviews in that endeavor. McNeill (2006) suggested that the development of evidence is one challenge, and the implementation of that which already has evidence is another. In terms of the former, limited research skills might deter development. Using interventions that have demonstrated effectiveness can be blocked when the practitioners do not have access to those interventions and/or the search skills needed to locate them. It could be assumed that practitioners have easy access to computerized databases, or reports of such interventions. However, as McNeill (2006), for one, indicates agencies may not have the resources for access and/or be reluctant to have practitioners use time to search for the evidence. The present text seeks to provide a readily available source on health care interventions with promise of efficacy. For clarity, interventions that have some support of being effective might be referred to as promising, efficacious, effective, evidence-based, or best practice. These terms are used interchangeably in the text to connote its underlying principle-that what we are after is the best currently available practices for clients in health care practice (Gambrill, 2006).