Comparing the Costs and Acceptability of Three Fidelity Assessment Methods for Assertive Community Treatment

  • Angela L. Rollins
  • , Marina Kukla
  • , Michelle P. Salyers
  • , John H. McGrew
  • , Mindy E. Flanagan
  • , Doug L. Leslie
  • , Marcia G. Hunt
  • , Alan B. McGuire

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Successful implementation of evidence-based practices requires valid, yet practical fidelity monitoring. This study compared the costs and acceptability of three fidelity assessment methods: on-site, phone, and expert-scored self-report. Thirty-two randomly selected VA mental health intensive case management teams completed all fidelity assessments using a standardized scale and provided feedback on each. Personnel and travel costs across the three methods were compared for statistical differences. Both phone and expert-scored self-report methods demonstrated significantly lower costs than on-site assessments, even when excluding travel costs. However, participants preferred on-site assessments. Remote fidelity assessments hold promise in monitoring large scale program fidelity with limited resources.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)810-816
Number of pages7
JournalAdministration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
Volume44
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2017

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Phychiatric Mental Health
  • Health Policy
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing the Costs and Acceptability of Three Fidelity Assessment Methods for Assertive Community Treatment'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this