Department of Mental Health Law and Policy, University of South Florida, 13301 Bruce B Downs Blvd, MHC2734, Tampa, FL 33612, USA.
Psychiatr Serv. 2012 Aug;63(8):765-71. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201100430.
Mental health intervention research requires clear and accurate specification of treatment conditions in intervention studies. Measures are increasingly available for community-based interventions for persons with serious mental illnesses. Measures must go beyond structural features to assess critical processes in interventions. They must also balance effectiveness, or adequate coverage of active treatment elements, with efficiency, or the degree to which measures may be used cost-effectively. The context of their use is changing with the emergence of new frameworks for implementation research and quality improvement. To illustrate a range of approaches, this article describes four recently developed fidelity measures: Cognitive Therapy for Psychosis Adherence Scale, Strengths Model Fidelity Scale, Illness Management and Recovery Program Fidelity Scale, and Tool for Measurement of ACT. The fidelity measures assess interventions in a range of treatment contexts from dyads to teams. Each measure focuses assessment resources on critical elements. Each has demonstrated coverage of its target intervention and satisfactory psychometric properties and is related to outcomes. Measures have been used for training, quality improvement, or certification. They assess domains and have uses beyond their nominal position in implementation and quality frameworks. This review of recent fidelity measures indicates that process components in community-based interventions can be effectively assessed. Omission of elements assessing potentially critical active treatment components poses risk to both research and practice until there is evidence to demonstrate that they are nonessential. Further development of fidelity measurement theory and approaches should proceed in conjunction with development of theory and methods in implementation science.
心理健康干预研究需要在干预研究中明确和准确地规范治疗条件。越来越多的措施可用于针对严重精神疾病患者的基于社区的干预。措施必须超越结构特征,评估干预措施中的关键过程。它们还必须平衡有效性(充分涵盖积极治疗要素)和效率(以具有成本效益的方式使用措施的程度)。随着实施研究和质量改进新框架的出现,其使用背景正在发生变化。为了说明一系列方法,本文描述了最近开发的四种保真度措施:精神病认知治疗依从性量表、优势模型保真度量表、疾病管理和康复计划保真度量表以及 ACT 测量工具。这些保真度措施在从二人组到团队的各种治疗环境中评估干预措施。每个措施都将评估资源集中在关键要素上。每个措施都已证明涵盖了其目标干预措施,并且具有令人满意的心理测量特性,并与结果相关。这些措施已用于培训、质量改进或认证。它们评估领域,并且除了在实施和质量框架中的名义位置之外,还有其他用途。对最近保真度措施的审查表明,可以有效地评估基于社区的干预措施中的过程组成部分。在没有证据表明它们不重要之前,遗漏评估潜在关键积极治疗要素的元素会给研究和实践带来风险。保真度测量理论和方法的进一步发展应与实施科学的理论和方法的发展同时进行。