{"title":"一项随机临床试验中以解决方案为中心的短暂干预的保真度监测策略。","authors":"Zach W Cooper, Leslie Johnson","doi":"10.1007/s10880-025-10063-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Integrated Care (IC) models have increased, but the current mechanisms to analyze the efficacy and fidelity of behavioral interventions within IC models are limited. A mixed methods concurrent process evaluation was used within the context of a randomized clinical trial to assess intervention fidelity for a Solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) intervention implemented within an IC model. A qualitative content analysis was conducted to develop a participant survey and charting template for the SFBT intervention. Quantitative data were collected through (1) participant surveys, (2) interventionist self-report surveys, and (3) data from participant charts. Descriptive statistics and repeated measures ANOVA were used to analyze quantitative data. Data triangulation was used to present findings. The average SFBT intervention was 24.6 min and 33/34 (97%) of participants in the intervention group completed all 3 SFBT sessions. Most visits were weekly follow-ups (53.9%), followed by biweekly (28.2%) and then 3-week follow-ups (5.1%). The interventionist used session templates and a self-report checklist to monitor intervention integrity. Those in the intervention group had increased growth regarding Solution-focused core constructs (a scale created by the authors) when compared to the treatment-as-usual group (F [1, 64] = 22.7, p < 0.001): mean difference, 15.1 [95% CI 11.2 to 18.9]. Our study examined fidelity comprehensively and provides a foundation for studies interested in fidelity monitoring of SFBT interventions as well as behavioral interventions within IC models. Trial Registration: The study was pre-registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05838222 on 01/05/2023.</p>","PeriodicalId":15494,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Strategies for Fidelity Monitoring a Solution-Focused Brief Intervention in a Randomized Clinical Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Zach W Cooper, Leslie Johnson\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10880-025-10063-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Integrated Care (IC) models have increased, but the current mechanisms to analyze the efficacy and fidelity of behavioral interventions within IC models are limited. A mixed methods concurrent process evaluation was used within the context of a randomized clinical trial to assess intervention fidelity for a Solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) intervention implemented within an IC model. A qualitative content analysis was conducted to develop a participant survey and charting template for the SFBT intervention. Quantitative data were collected through (1) participant surveys, (2) interventionist self-report surveys, and (3) data from participant charts. Descriptive statistics and repeated measures ANOVA were used to analyze quantitative data. Data triangulation was used to present findings. The average SFBT intervention was 24.6 min and 33/34 (97%) of participants in the intervention group completed all 3 SFBT sessions. Most visits were weekly follow-ups (53.9%), followed by biweekly (28.2%) and then 3-week follow-ups (5.1%). The interventionist used session templates and a self-report checklist to monitor intervention integrity. Those in the intervention group had increased growth regarding Solution-focused core constructs (a scale created by the authors) when compared to the treatment-as-usual group (F [1, 64] = 22.7, p < 0.001): mean difference, 15.1 [95% CI 11.2 to 18.9]. Our study examined fidelity comprehensively and provides a foundation for studies interested in fidelity monitoring of SFBT interventions as well as behavioral interventions within IC models. Trial Registration: The study was pre-registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05838222 on 01/05/2023.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10880-025-10063-7\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10880-025-10063-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
综合护理(IC)模型越来越多,但目前分析IC模型中行为干预的有效性和保真度的机制是有限的。在一项随机临床试验的背景下,使用混合方法并发过程评估来评估在IC模型中实施的以解决方案为重点的短期治疗(SFBT)干预的干预保真度。进行定性内容分析,为SFBT干预制定参与者调查和图表模板。定量数据通过(1)参与者调查、(2)干预者自述调查和(3)参与者图表数据收集。定量资料采用描述性统计和重复测量方差分析。使用数据三角测量来呈现结果。SFBT干预的平均时间为24.6分钟,干预组中33/34(97%)的参与者完成了所有3个SFBT会话。以每周随访为主(53.9%),其次为每两周随访(28.2%),最后为每3周随访(5.1%)。干预者使用会话模板和自我报告检查表来监测干预的完整性。与常规治疗组相比,干预组在以解决方案为中心的核心结构(作者创建的量表)方面的增长有所增加(F [1,64] = 22.7, p
Strategies for Fidelity Monitoring a Solution-Focused Brief Intervention in a Randomized Clinical Trial.
Integrated Care (IC) models have increased, but the current mechanisms to analyze the efficacy and fidelity of behavioral interventions within IC models are limited. A mixed methods concurrent process evaluation was used within the context of a randomized clinical trial to assess intervention fidelity for a Solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) intervention implemented within an IC model. A qualitative content analysis was conducted to develop a participant survey and charting template for the SFBT intervention. Quantitative data were collected through (1) participant surveys, (2) interventionist self-report surveys, and (3) data from participant charts. Descriptive statistics and repeated measures ANOVA were used to analyze quantitative data. Data triangulation was used to present findings. The average SFBT intervention was 24.6 min and 33/34 (97%) of participants in the intervention group completed all 3 SFBT sessions. Most visits were weekly follow-ups (53.9%), followed by biweekly (28.2%) and then 3-week follow-ups (5.1%). The interventionist used session templates and a self-report checklist to monitor intervention integrity. Those in the intervention group had increased growth regarding Solution-focused core constructs (a scale created by the authors) when compared to the treatment-as-usual group (F [1, 64] = 22.7, p < 0.001): mean difference, 15.1 [95% CI 11.2 to 18.9]. Our study examined fidelity comprehensively and provides a foundation for studies interested in fidelity monitoring of SFBT interventions as well as behavioral interventions within IC models. Trial Registration: The study was pre-registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05838222 on 01/05/2023.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers related to all areas of the science and practice of psychologists in medical settings. Manuscripts are chosen that have a broad appeal across psychology as well as other health care disciplines, reflecting varying backgrounds, interests, and specializations. The journal publishes original research, treatment outcome trials, meta-analyses, literature reviews, conceptual papers, brief scientific reports, and scholarly case studies. Papers accepted address clinical matters in medical settings; integrated care; health disparities; education and training of the future psychology workforce; interdisciplinary collaboration, training, and professionalism; licensing, credentialing, and privileging in hospital practice; research and practice ethics; professional development of psychologists in academic health centers; professional practice matters in medical settings; and cultural, economic, political, regulatory, and systems factors in health care. In summary, the journal provides a forum for papers predicted to have significant theoretical or practical importance for the application of psychology in medical settings.