Dr. German, Dr. Adler, Ms. Pinedo, Dr. Beck, and Dr. Creed are with the Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Dr. Frankel is with the Columbia University Clinic for Anxiety and Related Disorders, Columbia University Medical Center, New York. Dr. Stirman is with the National Center for PTSD Dissemination and Training Division, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Menlo Park, California, and with Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University, Stanford, California. Dr. Evans is with the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.
Psychiatr Serv. 2018 Mar 1;69(3):286-292. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.201700029. Epub 2017 Nov 15.
Use of expert-led workshops plus consultation has been established as an effective strategy for training community mental health (CMH) clinicians in evidence-based practices (EBPs). Because of high rates of staff turnover, this strategy inadequately addresses the need to maintain capacity to deliver EBPs. This study examined knowledge, competency, and retention outcomes of a two-phase model developed to build capacity for an EBP in CMH programs.
In the first phase, an initial training cohort in each CMH program participated in in-person workshops followed by expert-led consultation (in-person, expert-led [IPEL] phase) (N=214 clinicians). After this cohort completed training, new staff members participated in Web-based training (in place of in-person workshops), followed by peer-led consultation with the initial cohort (Web-based, trained-peer [WBTP] phase) (N=148). Tests of noninferiority assessed whether WBTP was not inferior to IPEL at increasing clinician cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) competency, as measured by the Cognitive Therapy Rating Scale.
WBTP was not inferior to IPEL at developing clinician competency. Hierarchical linear models showed no significant differences in CBT knowledge acquisition between the two phases. Survival analyses indicated that WBTP trainees were less likely than IPEL trainees to complete training. In terms of time required from experts, WBTP required 8% of the resources of IPEL.
After an initial investment to build in-house CBT expertise, CMH programs were able to use a WBTP model to broaden their own capacity for high-fidelity CBT. IPEL followed by WBTP offers an effective alternative to build EBP capacity in CMH programs, rather than reliance on external experts.
专家主导的研讨会加咨询已被确立为培训社区心理健康(CMH)临床医生实施循证实践(EBP)的有效策略。由于员工流失率高,这种策略不能充分满足维持实施 EBP 能力的需求。本研究考察了为 CMH 项目中 EBP 能力建设而开发的两阶段模型的知识、能力和保留结果。
在第一阶段,每个 CMH 项目中的初始培训队列参加现场研讨会,然后是专家主导的咨询(现场、专家主导 [IPEL] 阶段)(N=214 名临床医生)。在该队列完成培训后,新员工参加基于网络的培训(代替现场研讨会),然后与初始队列进行同行主导的咨询(基于网络、培训同行 [WBTP] 阶段)(N=148)。非劣效性检验评估了 WBTP 是否不能降低 IPEL 提高临床医生认知行为疗法(CBT)能力的效果,以认知治疗评定量表衡量。
WBTP 在培养临床医生能力方面并不逊于 IPEL。层次线性模型显示,两个阶段的 CBT 知识获取没有显著差异。生存分析表明,WBTP 受训者比 IPEL 受训者更不可能完成培训。就专家所需的时间而言,WBTP 仅需要 IPEL 的 8%。
在建立内部 CBT 专业知识方面进行初始投资后,CMH 项目能够使用 WBTP 模型来扩大自己实施高保真 CBT 的能力。IPEL 之后是 WBTP,为 CMH 项目建立 EBP 能力提供了一种有效的替代方案,而不是依赖外部专家。