A Clinical Leadership Lens on Implementing Progress Feedback in Three Countries: Development of a Multidimensional Qualitative Coding Scheme.

BACKGROUND: Progress feedback, also known as measurement-based care (MBC), is the routine collection of patient-reported measures to monitor treatment progress and inform clinical decision-making. Although a key ingredient to improving mental health care, sustained use of progress feedback is poor. Integration into everyday workflow is challenging, impacted by a complex interrelated set of factors across patient, clinician, organizational, and health system levels. This study describes the development of a qualitative coding scheme for progress feedback implementation that accounts for the dynamic nature of barriers and facilitators across multiple levels of use in mental health settings. Such a coding scheme may help promote a common language for researchers and implementers to better identify barriers that need to be addressed, as well as facilitators that could be supported in different settings and contexts. METHODS: Clinical staff, managers, and leaders from two Dutch, three Norwegian, and four mental health organizations in the USA participated in semi-structured interviews on how intra- and extra-organizational characteristics interact to influence the use of progress feedback in clinical practice, supervision, and program improvement. Interviews were conducted in the local language, then translated to English prior to qualitative coding. RESULTS: A team-based consensus coding approach was used to refine an a priori expert-informed and literature-based qualitative scheme to incorporate new understandings and constructs as they emerged. First, this hermeneutic approach resulted in a multi-level coding scheme with nine superordinate categories and 30 subcategories. Second-order axial coding established contextually sensitive categories for barriers and facilitators. CONCLUSIONS: The primary outcome is an empirically derived multi-level qualitative coding scheme that can be used in progress feedback implementation research and development. It can be applied across contexts and settings, with expectations for ongoing refinement. Suggestions for future research and application in practice settings are provided. Supplementary materials include the coding scheme and a detailed playbook.

How and when feedback works in psychotherapy: Is it the signal?

OBJECTIVE: Monitoring of ongoing psychotherapy is of crucial importance in improving the quality of mental health care, and feedback (FB) about patients' progress has been established as a viable means. The essential feature of FB models is that patient progress is measured continuously through therapy. AIM: This study investigated the effect of receiving a warning signal when a patient is not achieving expected improvement (not-on-track), monitored with the Norwegian version of the patient FB system OQ®-Analyst. METHOD: Patients from six psychiatric clinics in Southern Norway (N = 259) were randomized to FB or no feedback (NFB). RESULTS: For the total sample, the FB effects appeared early (session three). Receiving a warning signal did not change the slope of patients' progress after the signal was given (FB versus NFB). FB seemed to be more effective with more severely distressed patients, although insignificant. Therapists indicated that the graphs imaging patient progress, and the accompanying discussion with the patient, were the most important aspects of FB. CONCLUSIONS: The use of OQ®-Analyst should be recommended in psychotherapeutic settings in Norway. Given the inconsistent results regarding the effect of warning signals, definitive conclusions about their effect may depend upon how and for whom it is used.

The effect of implementing the Outcome Questionnaire-45.2 feedback system in Norway: A multisite randomized clinical trial in a naturalistic setting.

It has been claimed that the monitoring of ongoing psychotherapy is of crucial importance for improving the quality of mental health care. This study investigated the effect of using the Norwegian version of the patient feedback system OQ-Analyst using the Outcome Questionnaire-45.2. Patients from six psychiatric clinics in Southern Norway (N = 259) were randomized to feedback (FB) or no feedback (NFB). The main effect of feedback was statistical significant (p = .027), corroborating the hypothesis that feedback would improve the quality of services, although the size of the effect was small to moderate (d = 0.32). The benefits of feedback have to be considered against the costs of implementation.

Psychometric properties of the outcome questionnaire-45.2: the Norwegian version in an international context.

OBJECTIVE: Monitoring of ongoing psychotherapy is of crucial importance in improving the quality of mental health care by detecting therapies being off track, which requires that the instrument used is psychometrically sound. This study investigates the psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the Outcome Questionnaire 45.2 (OQ-45) and situates the results in an international context. METHOD: Data from one non-clinical sample (N = 338) and one clinical sample (N = 560) were compared to international samples investigating reliability, cut-offs, and factor structure. RESULTS: The results show adequate reliability and concurrent validity. CONCLUSIONS: The means, clinical cut-offs, and the reliable change index vary across countries. However, the means of the OQ-45 for nonclinical samples correlate highly with external values of national well-being, indicating that the OQ-45 is a valid instrument internationally. The factor analyses in the present study do not confirm the hypothesized factor structure of the OQ-45, but are similar to the results internationally.