Evaluating Measures of Fidelity for Substance Abuse Group Treatment With Incarcerated Adolescents
Evaluating Measures of Fidelity for Substance Abuse Group Treatment With Incarcerated Adolescents
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jsat.2016.02.011
复制
发表时间：
2016-07-01
影响因子：
3.9
通讯作者：
Martin, Rosemarie A.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bassett, Shayna S.;Stein, L. A. R.;Martin, Rosemarie A.
随着循证医学实践需求的增长，治疗保真度的评价变得越来越重要。本研究的目的是描述治疗保真度的两个措施，可用于治疗师和主管的心理测量特性-一个基于群体的认知行为治疗（CBT）和一个相结合的物质教育和跨步骤介绍（SET）的青少年物质使用。在小组会议结束时（CBT n = 307; SET n = 279），治疗师和主管完成了一项评估措施，评估对干预措施的某些核心组成部分的依从性。忠诚度测量的主管版本还包括评定治疗师在提供干预的每个组成部分时所表现出的能力水平的项目。分半交叉验证分析的结果为11项，三因素CBT保真度测量提供了强有力的支持。有点不太一致，但足够的支持九项，两个因素SET fidelity measurement. Internal的范围从可接受的CBT和SET坚持量表和从可接受的CBT和SET能力量表，良好的CBT和SET能力量表，除了CBT的做法能力量表。初步验证的措施表明，这两种措施有足够的强大的因素结构，可靠性，并发和判别效度。这项研究的结果对研究和临床环境，包括监督过程有影响。(C)2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
The evaluation of treatment fidelity has become increasingly important as the demand for evidence-based practice grows. The purpose of the present study is to describe the psychometric properties of two measures of treatment fidelity that can be used by therapists and supervisors - one for group-based cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and one for combined Substance Education and Twelve-Step Introduction (SET) for adolescent substance use. At the end of group sessions (CBT n = 307; SET n = 279), therapists and supervisors completed an evaluation measure assessing adherence to certain core components of the intervention. The supervisor version of the fidelity measure also included items for rating the level of competency the therapist demonstrated when providing each component of the intervention. Results from split-half cross-validation analyses provide strong support for an 11-item, three-factor CBT fidelity measure. Somewhat less consistent but adequate support for a nine-item, two-factor SET fidelity measure was found. Internal consistencies ranged from acceptable to good for both the CBT and SET adherence scales and from acceptable to good for the CBT and SET competency scales, with the exception of the CBT practices competency scale. Preliminary validation of the measures suggests that both measures have adequate to strong factor structure, reliability, and concurrent and discriminant validity. The results of this study have implications for research and clinical settings, including the supervision process. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.