Eleanor G Wu1, Kimberly D Becker2, Rachel E Kim3, Jonathan I Martinez4, Jennifer M Gamarra5, Bruce F Chorpita5. 1. Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina, 1512 Pendleton Street, Barnwell College, Suite #220, 29208, Columbia, SC, USA. ew17@email.sc.edu. 2. Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina, 1512 Pendleton Street, Barnwell College, Suite #220, 29208, Columbia, SC, USA. 3. Judge Baker Children's Center, 53 Parker Hill Avenue, 02120, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Department of Psychology, California State University, 18111 Nordhoff Street, 91330, Northridge, CA, USA. 5. Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, Box 951563, 90095, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Treatment engagement poses challenges for youth mental health providers. With the expansion of evidence-based treatments (EBTs), providers face complex decisions regarding how to engage youth and families using available information sources. This study investigated how EBT protocols are associated with the selection and delivery of engagement practices. METHOD: Twenty engagement practices were coded in a sample of digital recordings of early treatment sessions (N = 193) from the Child STEPs in California study, a randomized trial testing modular treatment and community-implemented treatment for youth mental health problems. Data were collected on which protocols mental health providers reportedly used to guide their sessions and the protocols in which they had received training. We examined which information sources (i.e., the guiding protocol, other protocols in training history, unspecified source) were associated with observed engagement practices. RESULTS: In sessions guided by a protocol, most observed engagement practices were accounted for by the guiding protocol (p < .001), rather than protocols in training history or unspecified sources (p < .001). In sessions not guided by a protocol, most observed practices were accounted for by training history (p < .001). Practice frequency and extensiveness was generally greater when a protocol guided the session. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion in protocols is associated with the selection and delivery of engagement practices, but this strategy might be insufficient for supporting the use of the full range of engagement practices supported by evidence. Supports are needed that leverage the engagement evidence base to ensure that selected practices empirically fit the engagement needs of youth and families.
PURPOSE: Treatment engagement poses challenges for youth mental health providers. With the expansion of evidence-based treatments (EBTs), providers face complex decisions regarding how to engage youth and families using available information sources. This study investigated how EBT protocols are associated with the selection and delivery of engagement practices. METHOD: Twenty engagement practices were coded in a sample of digital recordings of early treatment sessions (N = 193) from the Child STEPs in California study, a randomized trial testing modular treatment and community-implemented treatment for youth mental health problems. Data were collected on which protocols mental health providers reportedly used to guide their sessions and the protocols in which they had received training. We examined which information sources (i.e., the guiding protocol, other protocols in training history, unspecified source) were associated with observed engagement practices. RESULTS: In sessions guided by a protocol, most observed engagement practices were accounted for by the guiding protocol (p < .001), rather than protocols in training history or unspecified sources (p < .001). In sessions not guided by a protocol, most observed practices were accounted for by training history (p < .001). Practice frequency and extensiveness was generally greater when a protocol guided the session. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion in protocols is associated with the selection and delivery of engagement practices, but this strategy might be insufficient for supporting the use of the full range of engagement practices supported by evidence. Supports are needed that leverage the engagement evidence base to ensure that selected practices empirically fit the engagement needs of youth and families.
Authors: Anil Chacko; Scott A Jensen; Lynda S Lowry; Melinda Cornwell; Alyssa Chimklis; Elizabeth Chan; Daniel Lee; Brenda Pulgarin Journal: Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev Date: 2016-09
Authors: Joan Rosenbaum Asarnow; Lisa H Jaycox; Naihua Duan; Anne P LaBorde; Margaret M Rea; Pamela Murray; Martin Anderson; Christopher Landon; Lingqi Tang; Kenneth B Wells Journal: JAMA Date: 2005-01-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Bruce F Chorpita; Alayna Park; Katherine Tsai; Priya Korathu-Larson; Charmaine K Higa-McMillan; Brad J Nakamura; John R Weisz; Jennifer Krull Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2015-05-18
Authors: Sarah Kate Bearman; John R Weisz; Bruce F Chorpita; Kimberly Hoagwood; Alyssa Ward; Ana M Ugueto; Adam Bernstein Journal: Adm Policy Ment Health Date: 2013-11
Authors: Bruce F Chorpita; Eric L Daleiden; Alayna L Park; Alyssa M Ward; Michelle C Levy; Taya Cromley; Angela W Chiu; Andrea M Letamendi; Katherine H Tsai; Jennifer L Krull Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2016-08-22