OBJECTIVE: To review the steps required to develop an outcome evaluation package and to report on the 12-month outcome of an integrated day program. METHOD: Based on the identification of salient outcome predictors, standardized instruments were selected. A cohort of 78 patients was assessed at the time of admission to the program, at discharge, and 3, 6, and 12 months afterward. RESULTS: Improvements were sustained over 1 year in all areas including treatment needs, quality of life, and readiness to change. CONCLUSIONS: The gap between the "cultures" of treatment and research must be narrowed. Following evidence of a program's general effectiveness through outcome monitoring, a randomized control design is optimal for specific interventions. The optimal length of follow-up depends on the perceived confounds.
OBJECTIVE: To review the steps required to develop an outcome evaluation package and to report on the 12-month outcome of an integrated day program. METHOD: Based on the identification of salient outcome predictors, standardized instruments were selected. A cohort of 78 patients was assessed at the time of admission to the program, at discharge, and 3, 6, and 12 months afterward. RESULTS: Improvements were sustained over 1 year in all areas including treatment needs, quality of life, and readiness to change. CONCLUSIONS: The gap between the "cultures" of treatment and research must be narrowed. Following evidence of a program's general effectiveness through outcome monitoring, a randomized control design is optimal for specific interventions. The optimal length of follow-up depends on the perceived confounds.