Evaluating the national multisite implementation of dialectical behaviour therapy in a community setting: a mixed methods approach.
Borderline personality disorder
Community settings
DBT therapists
Dialectical behaviour therapy
Evaluation
Implementation
Public health service
Team leaders
Journal
BMC psychiatry
ISSN: 1471-244X
Titre abrégé: BMC Psychiatry
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968559
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 05 2020
14 05 2020
Historique:
received:
30
08
2019
accepted:
19
04
2020
entrez:
16
5
2020
pubmed:
16
5
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The implementation of evidence-based interventions for borderline personality disorder in community settings is important given that individuals with this diagnosis are often extensive users of both inpatient and outpatient mental health services. Although work in this area is limited, previous studies have identified facilitators and barriers to successful DBT implementation. This study seeks to expand on previous work by evaluating a coordinated implementation of DBT in community settings at a national level. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) (Damschroder et al., Implementation Sci. 4:50, 2009) provided structural guidance for this national level coordinated implementation. A mixed methods approach was utilised to explore the national multisite implementation of DBT from the perspective of team leaders and therapists who participated in the coordinated training and subsequent implementation of DBT. Qualitative interviews with DBT team leaders (n = 8) explored their experiences of implementing DBT in their local service and was analysed using content analysis. Quantitative surveys from DBT therapists (n = 74) examined their experience of multiple aspects of the implementation process including orienting the system, and preparations and support for implementation. Frequencies of responses were calculated. Written qualitative feedback was analysed using content analysis. Five themes were identified from the interview data: team formation, implementation preparation, client selection, service level challenges and team leader role. Participants identified team size and support for the team leader as key points for consideration in DBT implementation. Key challenges encountered were the lack of system support to facilitate phone coaching and a lack of allocated time to focus on DBT. Implementation facilitators included having dedicated team members and support from management. The barriers and facilitators identified in this study are broadly similar to those reported in previous research. Barriers and facilitators were identified across several domains of the CFIR and are consistent with a recently published DBT implementation Framework (Toms et al., Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 6: 2, 2019). Future research should pay particular attention to the domain of characteristics of individuals involved in DBT implementation. The results highlight the importance of a mandated service plan for the coordinated implementation of an evidence-based treatment in a public health service. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03180541; Registered June 7th 2017 'retrospectively registered'.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The implementation of evidence-based interventions for borderline personality disorder in community settings is important given that individuals with this diagnosis are often extensive users of both inpatient and outpatient mental health services. Although work in this area is limited, previous studies have identified facilitators and barriers to successful DBT implementation. This study seeks to expand on previous work by evaluating a coordinated implementation of DBT in community settings at a national level. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) (Damschroder et al., Implementation Sci. 4:50, 2009) provided structural guidance for this national level coordinated implementation.
METHODS
A mixed methods approach was utilised to explore the national multisite implementation of DBT from the perspective of team leaders and therapists who participated in the coordinated training and subsequent implementation of DBT. Qualitative interviews with DBT team leaders (n = 8) explored their experiences of implementing DBT in their local service and was analysed using content analysis. Quantitative surveys from DBT therapists (n = 74) examined their experience of multiple aspects of the implementation process including orienting the system, and preparations and support for implementation. Frequencies of responses were calculated. Written qualitative feedback was analysed using content analysis.
RESULTS
Five themes were identified from the interview data: team formation, implementation preparation, client selection, service level challenges and team leader role. Participants identified team size and support for the team leader as key points for consideration in DBT implementation. Key challenges encountered were the lack of system support to facilitate phone coaching and a lack of allocated time to focus on DBT. Implementation facilitators included having dedicated team members and support from management.
CONCLUSIONS
The barriers and facilitators identified in this study are broadly similar to those reported in previous research. Barriers and facilitators were identified across several domains of the CFIR and are consistent with a recently published DBT implementation Framework (Toms et al., Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 6: 2, 2019). Future research should pay particular attention to the domain of characteristics of individuals involved in DBT implementation. The results highlight the importance of a mandated service plan for the coordinated implementation of an evidence-based treatment in a public health service.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03180541; Registered June 7th 2017 'retrospectively registered'.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32410670
doi: 10.1186/s12888-020-02610-3
pii: 10.1186/s12888-020-02610-3
pmc: PMC7227064
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03180541']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
235Références
Behav Res Ther. 2004 May;42(5):487-99
pubmed: 15033496
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2014 Sep;41(5):608-14
pubmed: 23754686
Nord J Psychiatry. 2014 Nov;68(8):543-8
pubmed: 24520919
Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277-88
pubmed: 16204405
Psychiatr Serv. 2009 Jul;60(7):989-92
pubmed: 19564234
Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2014 Dec 18;1:20
pubmed: 26401303
BMC Psychiatry. 2018 Sep 19;18(1):302
pubmed: 30231865
Implement Sci. 2009 Aug 07;4:50
pubmed: 19664226
Am J Psychiatry. 2009 Dec;166(12):1365-74
pubmed: 19755574
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1991 Dec;48(12):1060-4
pubmed: 1845222
Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2019 Feb 12;6:2
pubmed: 30805193
Acad Psychiatry. 2006 Jan-Feb;30(1):63-8
pubmed: 16473997
Am J Public Health. 2009 Nov;99(11):2087-95
pubmed: 19762654
BMC Psychiatry. 2015 Jan 22;15:2
pubmed: 25609479
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006 Jul;63(7):757-66
pubmed: 16818865
Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2017 Sep 23;4:19
pubmed: 28989706
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2016 Nov;43(6):893-908
pubmed: 26658692
Am Psychol. 2006 May-Jun;61(4):271-85
pubmed: 16719673
Br J Psychiatry. 2003 Feb;182:135-40
pubmed: 12562741
J Ment Health. 2012 Dec;21(6):548-55
pubmed: 22958107
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015 Nov;42(6):672-81
pubmed: 25315183
Borderline Personal Disord Emot Dysregul. 2018 Feb 27;5:3
pubmed: 29556397
Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2002 May;37(5):225-9
pubmed: 12107714
Am J Psychiatry. 2005 Oct;162(10):1911-8
pubmed: 16199838
Bull Menninger Clin. 1987 May;51(3):261-76
pubmed: 3580661
Behav Res Ther. 2015 Dec;75:11-9
pubmed: 26496225
Eval Program Plann. 2014 Apr;43:55-63
pubmed: 24333657
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006 Jun;63(6):649-58
pubmed: 16754838
Behav Res Ther. 2011 Jan;49(1):4-10
pubmed: 20970117
Psychiatr Serv. 2002 Feb;53(2):171-8
pubmed: 11821547
Implement Sci. 2009 Apr 07;4:18
pubmed: 19351400