Training and fidelity monitoring of behavioral interventions in multi-site addictions research

Abstract

AIMS-Methods for the training and fidelity monitoring of behavioral interventions in multi-site addictions research are reviewed, including five published studies and seven ongoing studies sponsored by the National Institute on Drug Abuse-funded Clinical Trials Network.METHODS-Methods are categorized and reviewed consistent with a technology model of treatment delivery. Topics include: therapist selection, training, certification, and supervision; selection, training, and certification of supervisors; scales and processes used for monitoring of the quality of treatment; and processes followed to provide new training for replacement staff once trials have begun. RESULTS-The review reveals both a wide array of procedures and emerging standards for multisite trials. Methodological weakness was observed with respect to limited empirical support for many adherence scales, little or no evaluation of supervisory processes, and no evaluation of retraining practices.CONCLUSIONS-Methods used in multi-site trials are important not only to ensure validity of those trials, but also to inform the wider dissemination of empirically based treatment into community agencies. Studies examining noted weaknesses are needed. Training and fidelity models that delegate responsibility to participating sites appear most relevant for establishing best practices for dissemination of behavioral interventions. The effectiveness of these distributed training and

Measures of fidelity of delivery of, and engagement with, complex, face‐to‐face health behaviour change interventions: A systematic review of measure quality

“…This finding demonstrates that the reporting of psychometric qualities in the complex, face‐to‐face health behaviour change interventions included in this review, may not be as infrequent as previously suggested in different populations (Baer et al ., 2007; Breitenstein et al ., 2010; Maynard et al ., 2013; Rixon et al ., 2016). However, not all studies reported psychometric qualities, and fewer reported implementation qualities, despite the importance of psychometric and implementation qualities (Gearing et al ., 2011; Glasgow et al ., 2005; Holmbeck & Devine, 2009; Lohr, 2002; Stufflebeam, 2000).…”

Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices for Treatment of Alcohol and Drug Disorders: The Role of the State Authority

“…This advocacy for EBPs in substance abuse treatment is key to successful adoption and fidelity. 48,49 Indeed, a particularly important barrier to the implementation of EBPs are unsupportive state, local, and federal mental health authority administrative practices and policies. 15 The most prevalent examples are lack of a long-term vision, lack of agreement on desired outcomes, lack of penalties for non-evidenced-based practices, short-term horizons for policy planning, political mandates on competing public-sector priorities, resource limitations, and uncertainty associated with change and untoward events.…”

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

“…829), is an important focus of implementation research for several reasons. Providers must understand the program model elements and have the skills to implement the elements faithfully (Baer et al, 2007;Drake, Bond, & Rapp, 2006;Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005). Although provider competence is considered important, the relationship between competence and clinical outcome is not always direct.…”