INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8) is one of a limited number of standardised satisfaction measures that have been used widely across mental health services. This study examined the CSQ-8 as a measure of general satisfaction within residential substance abuse treatment. It compared the CSQ-8 with another established measure of client satisfaction that was developed for substance abuse treatment settings (Treatment Perceptions Questionnaire, TPQ). It also sought to examine the relationship between the CSQ-8 and commonly used process measures. DESIGN AND METHODS: Cross-sectional data was collected from across 14 Australian residential medium-to-long term alcohol and other drug treatment facilities (N = 1378). Demographic, substance abuse and mental health characteristics were collected, as well as process measures of craving, general functioning, self-perceptions, recovery and symptom distress. RESULTS: A confirmatory factory analysis established that the CSQ-8 retains a single factor. The scale was strongly correlated with the TPQ, suggesting high concurrent validity. However, while the TPQ was normally distributed, the CSQ-8 was highly negatively skewed. Significant associations were found between the CSQ-8 and cross-sectional process measures. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that that CSQ-8 is an appropriate measure to be used in residential substance abuse treatment settings. However, because of the high levels of negative skew, it is likely that the TPQ is more accurate in capturing clients' dissatisfaction than the CSQ-8. Future research should include longitudinal studies of satisfaction in order to examine how changes in satisfaction may be related to client characteristics, outcome measures, dropout or re-engagement in treatment. [Kelly PJ, Kyngdon F, Ingram I, Deane FP, Baker AL, Osborne BA. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8: Psychometric properties in a cross-sectional survey of people attending residential substance abuse treatment. Drug Alcohol Rev 2018;37:79-86].
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8) is one of a limited number of standardised satisfaction measures that have been used widely across mental health services. This study examined the CSQ-8 as a measure of general satisfaction within residential substance abuse treatment. It compared the CSQ-8 with another established measure of client satisfaction that was developed for substance abuse treatment settings (Treatment Perceptions Questionnaire, TPQ). It also sought to examine the relationship between the CSQ-8 and commonly used process measures. DESIGN AND METHODS: Cross-sectional data was collected from across 14 Australian residential medium-to-long term alcohol and other drug treatment facilities (N = 1378). Demographic, substance abuse and mental health characteristics were collected, as well as process measures of craving, general functioning, self-perceptions, recovery and symptom distress. RESULTS: A confirmatory factory analysis established that the CSQ-8 retains a single factor. The scale was strongly correlated with the TPQ, suggesting high concurrent validity. However, while the TPQ was normally distributed, the CSQ-8 was highly negatively skewed. Significant associations were found between the CSQ-8 and cross-sectional process measures. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that that CSQ-8 is an appropriate measure to be used in residential substance abuse treatment settings. However, because of the high levels of negative skew, it is likely that the TPQ is more accurate in capturing clients' dissatisfaction than the CSQ-8. Future research should include longitudinal studies of satisfaction in order to examine how changes in satisfaction may be related to client characteristics, outcome measures, dropout or re-engagement in treatment. [Kelly PJ, Kyngdon F, Ingram I, Deane FP, Baker AL, Osborne BA. The Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8: Psychometric properties in a cross-sectional survey of people attending residential substance abuse treatment. Drug Alcohol Rev 2018;37:79-86].
Authors: Mary Beth Miller; Chelsea B Deroche; Lindsey K Freeman; Chan Jeong Park; Nicole A Hall; Pradeep K Sahota; Christina S McCrae Journal: Sleep Date: 2021-02-12 Impact factor: 6.313
Authors: Kristen A Woodberry; Cole Chokran; Kelsey A Johnson; Keith H Nuechterlein; David J Miklowitz; Stephen V Faraone; Larry J Seidman Journal: Early Interv Psychiatry Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 2.721
Authors: Brian C Hsia; Anjani K Singh; Obumneme Njeze; Emine Cosar; Wenzhu B Mowrey; Jonathan Feldman; Marina Reznik; Sunit P Jariwala Journal: Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol Date: 2020-07-22 Impact factor: 6.347
Authors: Brett D Thombs; Laura Dyas; Mia Pépin; Kylene Aguila; Marie-Eve Carrier; Lydia Tao; Sami Harb; Vanessa L Malcarne; Ghassan El-Baalbaki; Sandra Peláez; Maureen Sauve; Marie Hudson; Robert W Platt Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-11-11 Impact factor: 2.692