以混合方法研究公共心理健康治疗师的疗程规划。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Briana S Last, Madeline Kiefer, Yuanyuan Yang, Ahnaf Annur, Natalie Dallard, Emily Schaffer, Courtney Benjamin Wolk
{"title":"以混合方法研究公共心理健康治疗师的疗程规划。","authors":"Briana S Last, Madeline Kiefer, Yuanyuan Yang, Ahnaf Annur, Natalie Dallard, Emily Schaffer, Courtney Benjamin Wolk","doi":"10.1007/s11414-024-09900-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Session planning is a core activity for implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs), yet it is unknown whether public mental health settings provide the support for therapists to session plan. This two-part study conducted in collaboration with EBP leaders in Philadelphia's public mental health system deployed mixed methods to examine therapists' session planning practices and preferences. In Study 1, 61 public mental health therapists completed an online survey to identify session planning barriers and facilitators, current practices, and desired planning supports. In Study 2, nine therapists who ranked a session planning tool as a top choice support in Study 1 participated in two focus groups to elaborate on their survey responses and provide feedback on three session planning tool prototypes. Study 1 survey respondents cited multi-level barriers and facilitators to session planning. In both closed- and open-ended responses, analyzed descriptively and via content analysis respectively, therapists described wanting more time, lower caseloads, financial incentives for session planning, and additional clinical resources and guidance from trainings, peers, and supervisors to support session planning. Study 2 focus group participants, whose responses were analyzed using content analysis, reiterated the need for these multi-level supports and expressed the need for a \"one-stop\" database of session planning tools that would be free, easily searchable, and modifiable for varied clinical needs. All three session planning tool prototypes reviewed were acceptable; two were also considered feasible and appropriate. This investigation of an under-studied aspect of the EBP implementation process reveals the need for multi-level session planning supports.</p>","PeriodicalId":49040,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Mixed Methods Examination of Session Planning Among Public Mental Health Therapists.\",\"authors\":\"Briana S Last, Madeline Kiefer, Yuanyuan Yang, Ahnaf Annur, Natalie Dallard, Emily Schaffer, Courtney Benjamin Wolk\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11414-024-09900-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Session planning is a core activity for implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs), yet it is unknown whether public mental health settings provide the support for therapists to session plan. This two-part study conducted in collaboration with EBP leaders in Philadelphia's public mental health system deployed mixed methods to examine therapists' session planning practices and preferences. In Study 1, 61 public mental health therapists completed an online survey to identify session planning barriers and facilitators, current practices, and desired planning supports. In Study 2, nine therapists who ranked a session planning tool as a top choice support in Study 1 participated in two focus groups to elaborate on their survey responses and provide feedback on three session planning tool prototypes. Study 1 survey respondents cited multi-level barriers and facilitators to session planning. In both closed- and open-ended responses, analyzed descriptively and via content analysis respectively, therapists described wanting more time, lower caseloads, financial incentives for session planning, and additional clinical resources and guidance from trainings, peers, and supervisors to support session planning. Study 2 focus group participants, whose responses were analyzed using content analysis, reiterated the need for these multi-level supports and expressed the need for a \\\"one-stop\\\" database of session planning tools that would be free, easily searchable, and modifiable for varied clinical needs. All three session planning tool prototypes reviewed were acceptable; two were also considered feasible and appropriate. This investigation of an under-studied aspect of the EBP implementation process reveals the need for multi-level session planning supports.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49040,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-024-09900-8\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11414-024-09900-8","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

会话计划是实施循证实践(EBPs)的一项核心活动,但公共心理健康机构是否为治疗师进行会话计划提供支持却不得而知。这项由两部分组成的研究是与费城公共心理健康系统的 EBP 领导者合作开展的,采用了混合方法来考察治疗师的会话计划实践和偏好。在研究 1 中,61 名公共心理健康治疗师完成了一项在线调查,以确定会话规划的障碍和促进因素、当前实践以及所需的规划支持。在研究 2 中,在研究 1 中将疗程规划工具列为首选支持的 9 名治疗师参加了两个焦点小组,详细阐述了他们的调查回答,并就三个疗程规划工具原型提供了反馈意见。研究 1 的调查对象提出了会话规划的多层次障碍和促进因素。在封闭式和开放式回答中(分别通过描述性分析和内容分析进行分析),治疗师表示希望有更多的时间、更少的工作量、对疗程规划的经济激励,以及更多的临床资源和来自培训、同行和督导的指导,以支持疗程规划。第二项研究的焦点小组参与者(他们的回答通过内容分析法进行了分析)重申了对这些多层次支持的需求,并表示需要一个 "一站式 "的疗程规划工具数据库,该数据库应免费、易于搜索,并可根据不同的临床需求进行修改。所有三个会话规划工具原型都可以接受,其中两个还被认为是可行和合适的。这项对 EBP 实施过程中一个未充分研究的方面的调查显示,需要多层次的会议规划支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A Mixed Methods Examination of Session Planning Among Public Mental Health Therapists.

A Mixed Methods Examination of Session Planning Among Public Mental Health Therapists.

Session planning is a core activity for implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs), yet it is unknown whether public mental health settings provide the support for therapists to session plan. This two-part study conducted in collaboration with EBP leaders in Philadelphia's public mental health system deployed mixed methods to examine therapists' session planning practices and preferences. In Study 1, 61 public mental health therapists completed an online survey to identify session planning barriers and facilitators, current practices, and desired planning supports. In Study 2, nine therapists who ranked a session planning tool as a top choice support in Study 1 participated in two focus groups to elaborate on their survey responses and provide feedback on three session planning tool prototypes. Study 1 survey respondents cited multi-level barriers and facilitators to session planning. In both closed- and open-ended responses, analyzed descriptively and via content analysis respectively, therapists described wanting more time, lower caseloads, financial incentives for session planning, and additional clinical resources and guidance from trainings, peers, and supervisors to support session planning. Study 2 focus group participants, whose responses were analyzed using content analysis, reiterated the need for these multi-level supports and expressed the need for a "one-stop" database of session planning tools that would be free, easily searchable, and modifiable for varied clinical needs. All three session planning tool prototypes reviewed were acceptable; two were also considered feasible and appropriate. This investigation of an under-studied aspect of the EBP implementation process reveals the need for multi-level session planning supports.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research
Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
5.30%
发文量
51
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: This journal examines the organization, financing, delivery and outcomes of behavioral health services (i.e., alcohol, drug abuse, and mental disorders), providing practical and empirical contributions to and explaining the implications for the broader behavioral health field. Each issue includes an overview of contemporary concerns and recent developments in behavioral health policy and management through research articles, policy perspectives, commentaries, brief reports, and book reviews. This journal is the official publication of the National Council for Behavioral Health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信