RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize the perceived priorities of state and county policy makers for youth mental health services and the factors that influence those priorities. METHODS: Mental health agency officials (N=338; N=221 state officials, N=117 county officials) representing 49 states completed a Web-based survey in 2019-2020. On 5-point scales, respondents rated the extent to which 15 issues were priorities for their agency in providing youth mental health services and the extent to which nine factors influenced those priorities. RESULTS: Suicide was identified as the highest priority (mean±SD rating=4.38±0.94), followed by adverse childhood experiences and childhood trauma and then increasing access to evidence-based treatments. Budget issues (mean=4.27±0.92) and state legislative priorities (mean=4.01±0.99) were perceived as having the greatest influence on setting priorities. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide insights into youth mental health policy priorities and can be used to guide implementation and dissemination strategies for research and program development within state and county systems.
RESUMEN
Caregivers play an essential role in the recovery of their adult loved ones with serious mental illness (SMI). Promoting caregiver empowerment and well-being is critical but has often been overlooked. Family peer interventions are well-suited to fill this need; however, research is limited supporting their use with caregivers of adults with SMI. Our team is currently engaged in a study evaluating an adapted version of the evidenced-based Parent Connectors program1,2, renamed Family Connectors (FC), for caregivers of young adults recently discharged from the First Episode Psychosis program in New York (OnTrackNY). This paper, written collaboratively with family peer professionals, describes the adaptation process we followed to systematically document the family peer professional experience one year into delivering the FC program to this novel population. Modifications made to improve intervention fit included tailoring the content of the intervention, incorporating an outside approach into the program, lengthening the service in some cases, and adding a weekly peer supervision meeting. We hope that these insights are used to inform future efforts to advance support for families of loved ones with SMI, and more broadly, that our approach serves as a model for effective collaboration to improve the application of peer support services for unique groups.
RESUMEN
OBJETIVE: The present study examined implementation issues in adopting cognitive-behavioral therapies in routine clinical settings in four countries reflecting diverse cultures, languages, settings, and traditions. METHOD: A Director's Systems Survey was administered prior to program implementation and one year later. Therapist ratings on attitudes about evidence-based practices and satisfaction were also gathered. RESULTS: All sites reported successful adoption of the program, although significant variations existed in fiscal support, family involvement, prior experience with cognitive-behavioral therapies, and plans for sustainability. Therapists' ratings indicated overall satisfaction with the implementation of the project. Findings from the Director's Systems Survey pointed to five factors facilitating implementation: 1) early adoption and guidance by innovative leaders (i.e., the Directors); 2) attention to the "fit" between the intervention model and local practices; 3) attention to front-end implementation processes (e.g., cultural adaptation, translation, training, fiscal issues); 4) attention to back-end processes early in the project (e.g., sustainability); and 5) establishing strong relationships with multiple stakeholders within the program setting. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation issues here mirror those identified in other studies of evidence-based practices uptake. Some of the obstacles to implementation of evidence-based practices may be generic, whereas issues such as the impact of political/economic instability, availability of translated materials, constitute unique stressors that differentially affect implementation efforts within specific countries.
OBJETIVO: Este estudo visa a examinar problemas na implementação de técnicas psicoterápicas cognitivo-comportamentais em ambientes clínicos de atendimento primário em quatro países que refletem diversas culturas, línguas, ambientes e tradições. MÉTODO: Uma pesquisa foi aplicada aos diretores de Sistemas Clínicos antes da implementação do programa e um ano após. Também foram coletados dados sobre como os terapeutas avaliavam as ações relativas à prática baseada em evidências e qual seu grau de satisfação com essa prática. RESULTADOS: Todos os locais de implementação relataram a adoção bem sucedida do programa, ainda que com significativas variações no apoio fiscal, envolvimento familiar, experiência prévia com terapias cognitivo-comportamentais e planos de sustentação em longo prazo. As avaliações dos terapeutas indicaram uma satisfação generalizada com a implementação do projeto. Achados da pesquisa com os diretores dos Sistemas Clínicos apontaram cinco fatores que facilitaram a implementação: 1) rápida adoção e orientação por líderes inovadores (i.e., os diretores); 2) atenção à adequação entre o modelo de intervenção e as práticas locais; 3) atenção desde o início à relação entre os processos de implementação e os usuários finais (e.g., adaptação cultural, tradução, treinamento, problemas fiscais); 4) atenção precoce aos processos de retaguarda do projeto (e.g., sustentação); e 5) estabelecimento de relações estreitas com múltiplos financiadores da instalação do programa. CONCLUSÕES: Os problemas de implementação encontrados neste estudo se assemelham aos identificados em outros estudos sobre a aquisição de práticas baseadas em evidência. Alguns dos obstáculos para a implementação de práticas baseadas em evidência podem ser generalizados, ao passo que problemas como o impacto da instabilidade político-econômica e disponibilidade de materiais traduzidos constituem estressores peculiares que afetam de forma diferenciada os esforços de implementação em cada país.