The Relationship Between Provider Competence, Content Exposure, and Consumer Outcomes in Illness Management and Recovery Programs

McGuire, Alan B.; White, Dominique A.; Bartholomew, Tom; Flanagan, Mindy E.; McGrew, John H.; Rollins, Angela L.; Mueser, Kim T.; Salyers, Michelle P.

doi:10.1007/s10488-015-0701-6

Cited by 13 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…54). Other notable predictors of therapeutic alliance that may help explain the remaining variation in patient and dietitian ratings of alliance include attachment style [55, 56], clinician skill/ competence [57], and patient adherence to treatment [7]. Evidently, further information is needed to clarify the relative contribution of intervention elements, clinician variables, and patient characteristics to the therapeutic alliance—especially within healthcare settings outside of addiction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Therapeutic Alliance Between Dietitians and Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: The Effect of Training in a Health Behavior Change Intervention

Murray

Baker

Halpin

et al. 2018

Annals of Behavioral Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The relationship between a clinician and their client—the “therapeutic alliance” is a robust predictor of outcome in healthcare settings; yet, few interventions to improve alliance have been tested. Motivational interviewing is a client-centered approach that embodies many principles and strategies consistent with a strong therapeutic alliance. Purpose To examine whether alliance is enhanced by training dietitians to deliver a motivational interviewing informed health behavior change intervention (“Eating as Treatment”; EAT) as part of routine consultations with patients with head and neck cancer. The predictive ability of motivational interviewing techniques was also assessed. Methods A secondary analysis of the EAT stepped-wedge cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted. Patients with head and neck cancer undergoing radiotherapy (n = 307) were treated by radiotherapy dietitians (n = 29) during the control (Treatment as Usual) or intervention (EAT) phase. Alliance was rated during the first and final weeks of radiotherapy, and again 4 and 12 weeks post-radiotherapy. Dietetic sessions were audiotaped. Week one sessions were objectively rated for dietitians’ use of motivational interviewing techniques. Results Generalized linear-mixed effects regressions found no effect of EAT on dietitian-rated alliance (p = .237). After excluding outliers, patient-rated alliance was 0.29 points lower after EAT training (p = .016). Post hoc analyses revealed lower patient ratings on perceived support and dietitian confidence. Hierarchical multiple regressions found that no specific motivational interviewing techniques predicted patient-rated alliance. Dietitian acknowledgment of patient challenges was related to dietitian-rated alliance (β =.15, p =.035). Conclusions Patient and dietitian ratings of alliance were high after EAT training, but not significantly improved. Further research is needed to better understand the differential impact of intervention training and delivery on patient and clinician ratings of therapeutic alliance. Clinical Trial information Trial registration number ACTRN12613000320752

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Therapeutic Alliance Between Dietitians and Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: The Effect of Training in a Health Behavior Change Intervention

Murray

Baker

Halpin

et al. 2018

Annals of Behavioral Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are indications that higher fidelity to empirically supported mental health program models, notably evidence-based practices (EBPs), is predictive of better client outcomes for people with SMIs (32). With respect to this predictive validity, there is some evidence regarding several interventions for this target group: Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) (33)(34)(35)(36)(37), Individual Placement and Support (IPS) (38), and IMR (39).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Illness Management and Recovery: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There have been inconsistent findings in the literature with respect to the efficacy of Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) in the psychosocial treatment of people with schizophrenia or other severe mental illnesses. This study aimed to comprehensively investigate the effectiveness of IMR, including the impact of completion and fidelity. In this randomized controlled trial (RCT), 187 outpatients received either IMR plus care as usual (CAU) or only CAU. Multilevel modeling was implemented to investigate group differences over an 18-month period, comprising 12 months of treatment and six months of follow-up. The primary outcome was overall illness management, which was assessed using the client version of the IMR scale. Secondary outcomes included measures regarding illness management, clinical, personal, and functional recovery, and hospitalizations. The interviewers were blinded to group allocation. This clinical trial was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register (NL4931, NTR5033). Patients who received IMR showed statistically significant improvement in self-reported overall illness management (the primary outcome). Moreover, they showed an improvement in self-esteem, which is a component of personal recovery. There were no effects within the other questionnaires. There were also no statistically significant between-group differences in terms of hospitalizations. Patients in both groups showed statistically significant improvement in clinician-rated overall illness management, social support, clinical and functional recovery, and self-stigma over time. IMR completion was associated with stronger effects. High IMR fidelity was associated with self-esteem. This study confirms the efficacy of IMR in overall illness self-management. To our knowledge, this is the first RCT on IMR to explore the impact of fidelity on treatment efficacy. Future studies should further establish efficacy in personal recovery. To improve efficacy, it appears important to promote IMR completion and fidelity.

show abstract

“…Although it is important to evaluate these programs after implementation to determine the effectiveness of the program, many of these programs do not have an evaluation scale 8,9 . One program that has an evaluation scale is the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program, which focuses on managing the illness and recovery of individuals with mental disorders, preventing relapses, and achieving long‐term remission.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1,4 Although it is important to evaluate these programs after implementation to determine the effectiveness of the program, many of these programs do not have an evaluation scale. 8,9 One program that has an evaluation scale is the Illness Management and Recovery (IMR) program, which focuses on managing the illness and recovery of individuals with mental disorders, preventing relapses, and achieving long-term remission. The program, which requires the cooperation of healthcare professionals, the patient, and the patient's relatives, is an evidence-based rehabilitation program that is carried out individually or in groups using structured, curriculum-based psychosocial interventions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of Illness Management and Recovery Scale‐Patient form

Polat

Kutlu

Gültekin

2020

Perspect Psychiatr Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The aim of this study was to provide the Turkish version of the Illness Management and Recovery Scale-Patient (IMRS-P) form and to determine its psychometric properties. Design and Methods: This is a descriptive and correlation study. The sample of this study consisted of 75 people with schizophrenia. Translation and content validity, confirmatory factor analyses were used to test the validity and reliability of the scales. Results: The content validity index was found to be 0.93. The scale had a threefactor structure, which subscales were 0.69 for recovery, 0.69 for management, and 0.35 for substance. The Cronbach's alpha was determined as 0.76. Practice Implications: The Turkish version of the IMRS-P form is a valid and reliable scale for Turkish patients.

show abstract

The Relationship Between Provider Competence, Content Exposure, and Consumer Outcomes in Illness Management and Recovery Programs

Cited by 13 publications

References 49 publications

Therapeutic Alliance Between Dietitians and Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: The Effect of Training in a Health Behavior Change Intervention

Therapeutic Alliance Between Dietitians and Patients With Head and Neck Cancer: The Effect of Training in a Health Behavior Change Intervention

Effects of Illness Management and Recovery: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of Illness Management and Recovery Scale‐Patient form

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About