Jennifer Regan

A Psychometric Analysis of the Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale—Parent Version in a Clinical Sample

The Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale—Parent Version (RCADS-P) is a 47-item parent-report questionnaire of youth anxiety and depression, with scales corresponding to the DSM-IV categories of Separation Anxiety Disorder, Social Phobia, Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD), Panic Disorder, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, and Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). The RCADS-P is currently the only parent-report questionnaire that concurrently assesses youth symptomatology of individual anxiety disorders as well as depression in accordance with DSM-IV nosology. The present study examined the psychometric properties of the RCADS-P in a large (N = 490), clinic-referred sample of youths. The RCADS-P demonstrated favorable psychometric properties, including high internal consistency, convergent/divergent validity, as well as strong discriminant validity—evidencing an ability to discriminate between anxiety and depressive disorders, as well as between the targeted anxiety disorders. Support for the DSM-related six-factor RCADS-P structure was also evidenced. This structure demonstrated superior fit to a recently suggested alternative to the DSM-IV classification of anxiety and affective disorders—namely, the MDD/GAD “distress” factor.

Tracking Evidence Based Practice with Youth: Validity of the MATCH and Standard Manual Consultation Records

This study sought to evaluate the agreement between therapist report and coder observation of therapy practices. The study sampled session data from a community-based, randomized trial of treatment for youth ages 7 to 13. We used therapist report of session content and coverage gathered using formal Consultation Records and developed complimentary records for coders to use when watching or listening to therapy tape. We established initial reliability between coders and then conducted a random, stratified, and comprehensive sample of sessions across youth (N = 121), therapists (N = 57), conditions (MATCH and Standard Manuals), and study sites (Honolulu and Boston) to code and compare with therapist record reports. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) representing coder versus therapist agreement on manual content delivered ranged from .42 to 1.0 across conditions and problem areas. Analyses revealed marked variability in agreement regarding whether behavioral rehearsals took place (ICCs from −.01 to 1.0) but strong agreement on client comprehension of therapy content and homework assignments. Overall, the findings indicate that therapists can be accurate reporters of the therapeutic practices they deliver, although they may need more support in reporting subtle but valuable aspects of implementation such as types of behavioral rehearsals. Developing means to support accurate reporting is important to developing future clinical feedback methodology applicable to the implementation of evidence-based treatments in the real world.

The Old Solutions Are the New Problem: How Do We Better Use What We Already Know About Reducing the Burden of Mental Illness?

Kazdin and Blase (2011) propose that traditional models of delivering therapy require more resources than are available to address the scope of mental illness. We argue that finding new platforms and avenues for our existing treatments is a good start but that it is not enough. We contend that the field also needs to develop formal strategies to reorganize its increasing abundance of knowledge to address the scarcity of resources for its application. If we can better utilize our existing knowledge, treatment delivery and service resource allocation can become more efficient and effective. If the field continues with its almost singular emphasis on knowledge proliferation (e.g., developing new treatments), as opposed to knowledge management (e.g., developing new ways to design, apply, and organize existing treatments), the problem outlined by Kazdin and Blase cannot be solved.

Measuring Sustainment of Multiple Practices Fiscally Mandated in Children’s Mental Health Services

Examining sustainment of multiple evidence-based practices is crucial to understanding the processes and outcomes of system-driven implementation efforts that are increasingly common. This study used administrative claims data to characterize volume and penetration of six practices over 19 fiscal quarters following initial implementation within the context of a system-driven, fiscally mandated implementation effort in Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health’s Prevention and Early Intervention services. Patterns of volume changes over time revealed an overall ramp up of practice claims over time, but variability in patterns of volume and penetration for each practice. Findings varied by the methods used to index and analyze volume and penetration. Furthermore, a number of client case-mix and therapist characteristics were associated with the volume of therapists’ claims for each practice relative to their claims for the other practices.

Integrity of Evidence-Based Practice: Are Providers Modifying Practice Content or Practice Sequencing?

This study examined patterns of evidence-based treatment (EBT) implementation within community settings by evaluating integrity along separate dimensions of practice content (PC; a session included the prescribed procedure) and practice sequencing (a session occurred in the prescribed sequence) within a recent randomized effectiveness trial. We measured whether sessions showed integrity to PC and to flexible or linear practice sequences. Findings revealed that providers tended to incorporate content from the EBT protocol in most treatment sessions, but that the sequencing of the sessions was often modified, suggesting that providers are amenable to evidence-based procedures, but not necessarily their prescribed arrangement.

Therapist report of adaptations to delivery of evidence-based practices within a system-driven reform of publicly funded children’s mental health services.

Objective: This study examined clinical adaptations reported by community therapists to multiple evidence-based practices (EBPs) currently implemented in children’s mental health services. Based on an item set informed by Stirman and colleagues’ model (2015), 2 factors emerged describing Augmenting adaptations and Reducing/Reordering adaptations. We used multilevel modeling to examine therapist- and practice-level predictors of therapist reports of each type of adaptation. Method: Data were drawn from an online survey, including a novel therapist report measure of EBP adaptations, completed by 572 therapists (89.2% female, Mage = 37.08 years, 33.4% non-Hispanic White) delivering EBPs in the context of a system-driven, fiscally mandated implementation effort. Results: Analyses revealed that the 2 types of therapist adaptations (Augmenting and Reducing/Reordering) could be readily discriminated, with therapists reporting significantly more Augmenting than Reducing/Reordering adaptations. Therapists of Hispanic/Latino ethnicity and with fewer years of experience reported more extensive Augmenting adaptations, but no therapist background characteristics were associated with Reducing/Reordering adaptations. Therapists’ general attitudes that EBPs diverged from their personal approach to therapy were associated with reporting more Augmenting and Reducing/Reordering adaptations. In contrast, negative perceptions toward the specific EBP predicted Reducing/Reordering adaptations, but not Augmenting adaptations. Conclusions: Community therapist reports suggest that most adaptations undertaken involve engaging with the practice to augment the fit of the EBPs for local contexts; however, when practices were perceived negatively, therapists were more likely to make adaptations reducing or rearranging components.

How Intervention and Implementation Characteristics Relate to Community Therapists’ Attitudes Toward Evidence-Based Practices: A Mixed Methods Study

Therapists’ perceptions toward evidence-based practices (EBPs) are important in implementation efforts, however little is known about characteristics of EBPs associated with more positive attitudes. This mixed-methods study examined how intervention and implementation characteristics of six EBPs related to therapist attitudes. Quantitative analysis of 793 cross-sectional surveys revealed that therapists endorsed more positive attitudes toward EBPs with (1) prescribed session content and order and (2) required consultation. Associations between these intervention and implementation characteristics and attitudes were not moderated by therapist experience or emotional exhaustion. Qualitative analyses complemented quantitative findings, indicating that “structure” was appealing for interventions and that therapists felt supported by consultation.

Comparing Agency Leader and Therapist Perspectives on Evidence-Based Practices: Associations with Individual and Organizational Factors in a Mental Health System-Driven Implementation Effort

Agency leaders and therapists are essential stakeholders in implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) within publicly-funded mental health services. Little is known about how these stakeholders differ in their perceptions of specific EBPs and which individual and organizational factors differentially influence these perceptions. Within the context of a system-driven implementation of multiple EBPs, survey data from 160 leaders and 720 therapists were examined to assess differences in perceptions of six EBPs. Findings indicated that leaders and therapists have unique perspectives and preferences regarding EBPs that are shaped by distinct sociodemographic and professional characteristics and aspects of organizational functioning.

Choices in Treatment Integrity:Considering the Protocol and Consultant Recommendations in Child and Adolescent Therapy

Codifying a complex treatment intervention into a manual necessarily involves simplifying procedures, possibly resulting in developer and expert adaptations that align with but are not fully consistent with the manualized content. This study evaluated the integrity of an evidence-based treatment to two information sources (i.e., an expert consultant and the treatment manual) within youth community mental health settings. Consultant recommendations were compared with manual-prescribed therapy procedures, which identified instances of agreement between the sources as well as consultant adaptations. To determine clinicians’ integrity to each source, clinician-reported therapy procedures were compared with consultant recommendations and manual prescriptions. Participants consisted of 30 clinicians, five consultants, and 78 youths (53% male; M age = 9.73 years, SD = 2.84; 81% Latino). Findings indicated that consultants generally recommended content from the manual but also made frequent adaptations that involved changing the sequence or problem focus of practices and adding additional content. Clinicians followed both information sources in a majority of their sessions when these sources agreed but were more likely to follow only one or neither source when they disagreed. Findings suggest that consultants often make adaptations to the manual and that clinicians are more likely to employ recommendations from the manual and/or consultant when the information sources are in agreement. Although it is as yet unclear whether consultant recommendations are effective when they differ from the prescriptions of the manual, results from this study indicate that information sources that supplement treatment manuals may benefit clinical decision making.