| Literature DB >> 28054197 |
Angela L Rollins1,2, Marina Kukla3, Michelle P Salyers4, John H McGrew4, Mindy E Flanagan3, Doug L Leslie5, Marcia G Hunt6, Alan B McGuire3,4.
Abstract
Successful implementation of evidence-based practices requires valid, yet practical fidelity monitoring. This study compared the costs and acceptability of three fidelity assessment methods: on-site, phone, and expert-scored self-report. Thirty-two randomly selected VA mental health intensive case management teams completed all fidelity assessments using a standardized scale and provided feedback on each. Personnel and travel costs across the three methods were compared for statistical differences. Both phone and expert-scored self-report methods demonstrated significantly lower costs than on-site assessments, even when excluding travel costs. However, participants preferred on-site assessments. Remote fidelity assessments hold promise in monitoring large scale program fidelity with limited resources.Entities:
Keywords: Cost; Evidence-based practice; Fidelity; Implementation; Quality
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28054197 DOI: 10.1007/s10488-016-0785-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adm Policy Ment Health ISSN: 0894-587X