Assessing the Suitability of Clinical Programs for Implementation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/yatdkn31Abstract
Mental health organizations looking to implement new clinical programs are faced with an ever-increasing number of options to choose from. Determining which program(s) to implement is often based on a fondness for “pet programs” and factors such as the availability of vender packages that may have little bearing on the appropriateness of a given program. A nine-dimension rubric is proposed as a way of measuring a program’s suitability for implementation. This rubric involves an assessment of a program’s: objective(s), efficacy, gen- eralizability, cost benefit profile, opportunity cost(s), fidelity measurement, outcome assessment, feasibility, and three factors related to implementation. These dimensions of suitability are presented as score-able criter- ia to offer organizations a means to compare and contrast various clinical programs. Programs are scored, ideally first by venders or program advocates, then individually by those charged with making a decision about implementation. Lastly, consensus is sought on scores across the nine-dimension rubric using the measurable anchors. Limitations of this approach are discussed. Future work in this area is recommended.
The authors have no financial disclosures or conflicts to report.
Downloads
References
Blase, K., Fixsen, D. (2013). Stages of Implementation Analysis: Where are we Now? National Implementa - tion Research Network.
Bond, G. R., Evans, L., Salyers, M. P., Williams, J., Kim, H. W., & Bond. (2000). Measurement of fidelity in psychiatric rehabilitation. Mental Health Services Research, 2(2), 75–87. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.n - lm.nih.gov/pubmed/11256719
Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Dixon, L. B., Dickerson, F., Bellack, A. S., Bennett, M., Dickinson, D., Goldberg, W., Goldberg, R. W. (2010). The 2009 schizophrenia PORT psychosocial treatment recommendations and summary statements. Schizo- phrenia Bulletin, 36(1), 48–70. doi:10.1093/schbul/sbp115
Drake, R. E., Goldman, H. H., Leff, H. S., Lehman, a F., Dixon, L., Mueser, K. T., & Torrey, W. C. (2001). Implementing evidence-based practices in routine mental health service settings. Psychiatric Services (Wash- ington, D.C.), 52(2), 179–82. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11157115
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M. & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231).
Fox, D. (2005). Evidence of evidence-based health policy: the politics of systematic reviews in coverage de - cisions. Health Affairs, 24(1), 114-122.
Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G. E., Kunz, R., Falck-Ytter, Y., Alonso-Coello, P., & Schünemann, H. J. (2008). GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.), 336(7650), 924–6. doi:10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD
Lehman, A. F., Kreyenbuhl, J., Buchanan, R. W., Dickerson, F. B., Dixon, L. B., Goldberg, R., … Steinwachs,
D. M. (2004). The Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT): updated treatment recommenda - tions 2003. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 30(2), 193–217. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15279040
Mowbray, C. (2003). Fidelity Criteria: Development, Measurement, and Validation. The American Journal of Evaluation, 24(3), 315–340. doi:10.1016/S1098-2140(03)00057-2
SAMHSA (2014). NREEP, SAMHSA, National Registry of Evidence-based Practices Programs and Practices. Retrieved from :http://www.nrepp.samhsa.gov/pdfs/Questions_To_Ask_Developers.pdf
Smallwood, J., Brown, R., Coulter, F., Irvine, E., & Copland, C. (2001). Aromatherapy and behaviour disturb- ances in dementia: a randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 16(10), 1010- 1013.
Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science : IS, 4, 67. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-4-67
Weiner, B. J., Amick, H., & Lee, S.-Y. D. (2008). Conceptualization and measurement of organizational readi- ness for change: a review of the literature in health services research and other fields. Medical care research and review : MCRR (Vol. 65, pp. 379–436). doi:10.1177/1077558708317802
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
