Developing therapist-report fidelity tools to support quality delivery of evidence-based practices in usual care is a top priority for implementation science. This study tested the reliability and accuracy of two groups of community therapists who reported on their use of family therapy (FT) and motivational interviewing/cognitive-behavioral therapy (MI/CBT) interventions during routine treatment of inner-city adolescents with conduct and substance use problems. Study cases (n = 45) were randomized into two conditions: (a) Routine Family Therapy (RFT), consisting of a single site that featured family therapy as its standard of care for behavioral treatment; or (b) Treatment As Usual (TAU), consisting of five sites that featured non-family approaches. Therapists and trained observational raters provided FT and MI/CBT adherence ratings on 157 sessions (104 RFT, 53 TAU). Overall therapist reliability was adequate for averaged FT ratings (ICC = .66) but almost non-existent for MI/CBT (ICC = .06); moreover, both RFT and TAU therapists were more reliable in reporting on FT than on MI/CBT. Both groups of therapists overestimated the extent to which they implemented FT and MI/CBT interventions. Results offer support for the feasibility of using existing therapist-report methods to anchor quality assurance procedures for FT interventions in real-world settings, though not for MI/CBT.

Objective A major focus of implementation science is discovering whether evidence-based approaches can be delivered with fidelity and potency in routine practice. This randomized trial compared usual care family therapy (UC-FT), implemented without a treatment manual or extramural support as the standard-of-care approach in a community clinic, to non-family treatment (UC-Other) for adolescent conduct and substance use disorders. Method The study recruited 205 adolescents (mean age 15.7 years; 52% male; 59% Hispanic American, 21% African American) from a community referral network, enrolling 63% for primary mental health problems and 37% for primary substance use problems. Clients were randomly assigned to either the UC-FT site or one of five UC-Other sites. Implementation data confirmed that UC-FT showed adherence to the family therapy approach and differentiation from UC-Other. Follow-ups were completed at 3, 6, and 12 months post-baseline. Results There was no between-group difference in treatment attendance. Both conditions demonstrated improvements in externalizing, internalizing, and delinquency symptoms. However, UC-FT produced greater reductions in youth-reported externalizing and internalizing among the whole sample, in delinquency among substance-using youth, and in alcohol and drug use among substance-using youth. The degree to which UC-FT outperformed UC-Other was consistent with effect sizes from controlled trials of manualized family therapy models. Conclusions Non-manualized family therapy can be effective for adolescent behavior problems within diverse populations in usual care, and it may be superior to non-family alternatives.

This article describes several barriers to widespread dissemination of manualized family-based treatments for adolescent substance use (ASU). We then offer a highly promising solution for adopting and sustaining family therapy in usual care: distilling the core practice elements of empirically validated family therapy models for ASU. We present a conceptual distillation of family therapy for ASU grounded in existing observational fidelity measures for three manualized models, a process that yielded four core elements: Family Engagement, Relational Reframing, Family Behavior Change, and Family Restructuring. We then introduce an innovative empirical method for distilling core elements that can serve as a template for rigorous distillation of other treatment approaches. Finally, we discuss how core elements can enhance family therapy services within the diverse workforce of usual care for ASU.

No abstract

Although attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is prevalent among adolescents in outpatient behavioral care, one of the few evidence-based treatment options, stimulant medication, is significantly underutilized. The Medication Integration Protocol (MIP) is a family-based intervention designed to help behavior therapists assume a lead role in educating clients about ADHD in adolescents, promoting family-centered decisions about medication initiation, and integrating medication management activities within behavioral treatment planning. This pilot study evaluated treatment fidelity and medication utilization for inner-city teens receiving MIP ( n = 14) compared with a matched Historical Control (HC) group ( n = 21) in a community clinic. Observational analyses revealed that in comparison with HC, MIP demonstrated basic protocol fidelity with regard to adherence to the MIP protocol, therapeutic alliance with the adolescent, and clinical focus on ADHD in session. MIP showed greater psychiatric evaluation completion and ADHD medication initiation than HC. Next steps in the ongoing development of MIP are outlined.