Sarah B Hunter1, Carolyn M Rutter2, Allison J Ober3, Marika S Booth4. 1. Drug Policy Research Center, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA. Electronic address: shunter@rand.org. 2. Drug Policy Research Center, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA. Electronic address: crutter@rand.org. 3. Drug Policy Research Center, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA. Electronic address: ober@rand.org. 4. Drug Policy Research Center, RAND Corporation, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90407, USA. Electronic address: suttorp@rand.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the feasibility, effectiveness, and sustainability of CQI approaches in substance use disorder treatment settings. METHODS: In the initial phase of this study, eight programs were randomly assigned to receive a CQI intervention or to a waitlist control condition to obtain preliminary information about potential effectiveness. In the second phase, the initially assigned control programs received the CQI intervention to gain additional information about intervention feasibility while sustainability was explored among the initially assigned intervention programs. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Although CQI was feasible and sustainable, demonstrating its effectiveness using administrative data was challenging suggesting the need to better align performance measurement systems with CQI efforts. Further, although the majority of staff were enthusiastic about utilizing this approach and reported provider and patient benefits, many noted that dedicated time was needed in order to implement and sustain it.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the feasibility, effectiveness, and sustainability of CQI approaches in substance use disorder treatment settings. METHODS: In the initial phase of this study, eight programs were randomly assigned to receive a CQI intervention or to a waitlist control condition to obtain preliminary information about potential effectiveness. In the second phase, the initially assigned control programs received the CQI intervention to gain additional information about intervention feasibility while sustainability was explored among the initially assigned intervention programs. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Although CQI was feasible and sustainable, demonstrating its effectiveness using administrative data was challenging suggesting the need to better align performance measurement systems with CQI efforts. Further, although the majority of staff were enthusiastic about utilizing this approach and reported provider and patient benefits, many noted that dedicated time was needed in order to implement and sustain it.
Authors: Kim A Hoffman; Carla A Green; James H Ford; Jennifer P Wisdom; David H Gustafson; Dennis McCarty Journal: J Behav Health Serv Res Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 1.505
Authors: Jennifer P Wisdom; James H Ford Ii; Randy A Hayes; Eldon Edmundson; Kim Hoffman; Dennis McCarty Journal: J Behav Health Serv Res Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 1.505
Authors: David H Gustafson; Andrew R Quanbeck; James M Robinson; James H Ford; Alice Pulvermacher; Michael T French; K John McConnell; Paul B Batalden; Kim A Hoffman; Dennis McCarty Journal: Addiction Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Michael J Taylor; Chris McNicholas; Chris Nicolay; Ara Darzi; Derek Bell; Julie E Reed Journal: BMJ Qual Saf Date: 2013-09-11 Impact factor: 7.035
Authors: Lisa Rubenstein; Dmitry Khodyakov; Susanne Hempel; Margie Danz; Susanne Salem-Schatz; Robbie Foy; Sean O'Neill; Siddhartha Dalal; Paul Shekelle Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2013-12-04 Impact factor: 2.038