Lucy A Tully, Janice Kan, Adrienne Turnell, Rebecca McLean, Trisha Nowland, Olivia Liew, Lindsay McFarlane, David J Hawes, Mark R Dadds
{"title":"在儿童和青少年心理健康方面使用措施和基于措施的护理：对澳大利亚从业人员的调查。","authors":"Lucy A Tully, Janice Kan, Adrienne Turnell, Rebecca McLean, Trisha Nowland, Olivia Liew, Lindsay McFarlane, David J Hawes, Mark R Dadds","doi":"10.1080/00049530.2024.2426662","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Use of measures by practitioners in mental health (MH) is a cornerstone of evidence-based practice and essential to high-quality service provision. Session-by-session measure use, known as Measurement-Based Care (MBC), has been shown to improve treatment engagement and outcomes, yet little is known about the use of measures or MBC in Australian child and youth MH practitioners. This study surveyed Australian child and youth MH practitioners to examine the frequency of measure use, what outcomes are measured, and what facilitates measure use.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This survey included Australian practitioners (<i>N</i> = 205) working in child and youth MH.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most practitioners reported using measures at some stage during treatment, but around 1 in 7 did not use measures at all. Only 10% used measures for every session or most sessions, which is characteristic of MBC. Symptom severity was measured by 84.3% of practitioners but only 35.6% measured goal attainment and 16.7% therapeutic alliance. The top facilitators of measure use endorsed by practitioners included free measures, better platforms to administer measures, and briefer measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is room for improvement in the use of outcome measures by Australian child and youth MH practitioners, and specifically in the use of MBC, which may improve client engagement and outcomes. Implications for the implementation of MBC are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":8871,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Psychology","volume":"76 1","pages":"2426662"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12218452/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of measures and measurement-based care in child and youth mental health: a survey of Australian practitioners.\",\"authors\":\"Lucy A Tully, Janice Kan, Adrienne Turnell, Rebecca McLean, Trisha Nowland, Olivia Liew, Lindsay McFarlane, David J Hawes, Mark R Dadds\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00049530.2024.2426662\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Use of measures by practitioners in mental health (MH) is a cornerstone of evidence-based practice and essential to high-quality service provision. Session-by-session measure use, known as Measurement-Based Care (MBC), has been shown to improve treatment engagement and outcomes, yet little is known about the use of measures or MBC in Australian child and youth MH practitioners. This study surveyed Australian child and youth MH practitioners to examine the frequency of measure use, what outcomes are measured, and what facilitates measure use.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This survey included Australian practitioners (<i>N</i> = 205) working in child and youth MH.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Most practitioners reported using measures at some stage during treatment, but around 1 in 7 did not use measures at all. Only 10% used measures for every session or most sessions, which is characteristic of MBC. Symptom severity was measured by 84.3% of practitioners but only 35.6% measured goal attainment and 16.7% therapeutic alliance. The top facilitators of measure use endorsed by practitioners included free measures, better platforms to administer measures, and briefer measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is room for improvement in the use of outcome measures by Australian child and youth MH practitioners, and specifically in the use of MBC, which may improve client engagement and outcomes. Implications for the implementation of MBC are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8871,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Psychology\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"2426662\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12218452/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2024.2426662\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2024.2426662","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Use of measures and measurement-based care in child and youth mental health: a survey of Australian practitioners.
Objective: Use of measures by practitioners in mental health (MH) is a cornerstone of evidence-based practice and essential to high-quality service provision. Session-by-session measure use, known as Measurement-Based Care (MBC), has been shown to improve treatment engagement and outcomes, yet little is known about the use of measures or MBC in Australian child and youth MH practitioners. This study surveyed Australian child and youth MH practitioners to examine the frequency of measure use, what outcomes are measured, and what facilitates measure use.
Method: This survey included Australian practitioners (N = 205) working in child and youth MH.
Results: Most practitioners reported using measures at some stage during treatment, but around 1 in 7 did not use measures at all. Only 10% used measures for every session or most sessions, which is characteristic of MBC. Symptom severity was measured by 84.3% of practitioners but only 35.6% measured goal attainment and 16.7% therapeutic alliance. The top facilitators of measure use endorsed by practitioners included free measures, better platforms to administer measures, and briefer measures.
Conclusions: There is room for improvement in the use of outcome measures by Australian child and youth MH practitioners, and specifically in the use of MBC, which may improve client engagement and outcomes. Implications for the implementation of MBC are discussed.
期刊介绍：
Australian Journal of Psychology is the premier scientific journal of the Australian Psychological Society. It covers the entire spectrum of psychological research and receives articles on all topics within the broad scope of the discipline. The journal publishes high quality peer-reviewed articles with reviewers and associate editors providing detailed assistance to authors to reach publication. The journal publishes reports of experimental and survey studies, including reports of qualitative investigations, on pure and applied topics in the field of psychology. Articles on clinical psychology or on the professional concerns of applied psychology should be submitted to our sister journals, Australian Psychologist or Clinical Psychologist. The journal publishes occasional reviews of specific topics, theoretical pieces and commentaries on methodological issues. There are also solicited book reviews and comments Annual special issues devoted to a single topic, and guest edited by a specialist editor, are published. The journal regards itself as international in vision and will accept submissions from psychologists in all countries.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
