Development and refinement of the open dialog adherence protocol in complex mental health care.
adherence
measure
mental health
open dialogue
protocol
reliability
Journal
Frontiers in psychology
ISSN: 1664-1078
Titre abrégé: Front Psychol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101550902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2022
2022
Historique:
received:
10
09
2022
accepted:
07
12
2022
entrez:
23
1
2023
pubmed:
24
1
2023
medline:
24
1
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Open dialog (OD) is a both a therapeutic practice and a service delivery model that offers an integrated response to mental health care through mobilizing resources within the service user's family and community networks through joint network meetings. Therapist adherence is a crucial to the effective delivery of interventions. A key way to measure this is through structured observation tools. The aim of this research project is to develop and refine the Dialogic Practice Adherence Scale, for use in OD research trials in the United Kingdom. This study was a mixed methods approach to the development of an OD practitioner adherence measure. Initial steps involved meetings and discussions with experts and a review of the literature. Content validation studies were completed using a modified Delphi technique. To assess reliability of the measure, OD network meetings were audio-recorded, and tapes were rated by two independent researchers. Inter-rater reliability and internal consistency were assessed through quantitative approaches assessing variance. Results provide a description of how the OD Adherence Manual was developed in collaboration. Validation surveys showed high levels on consensus among experts in the field on the key elements of OD network meetings. Inter-rater reliability for the total score was excellent and internal consistency analyses suggest the scale is highly reliable. The scale presented here is an initial attempt at rating practitioner adherence in OD network meetings. It provides encouraging evidence that this can be done with strong validity and reliability and can be completed by a range of raters with varying levels of clinical experience.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36687823
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1041375
pmc: PMC9853976
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1041375Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Lotmore, Ziedonis, Alvarez Monjaras, Hopfenbeck, Razzaque, Wilson and Pilling.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The reviewer TB declared a past co-authorship with the author MH to the handling editor.
Références
BMJ. 2005 Sep 17;331(7517):599
pubmed: 16103032
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 1983 Jun;17(2):160-7
pubmed: 6578788
JAMA. 2008 Oct 1;300(13):1551-65
pubmed: 18827212
PLoS One. 2012;7(11):e50119
pubmed: 23185552
Br J Psychiatry. 2011 Jul;199(1):71-6
pubmed: 21292926
Community Ment Health J. 2011 Jun;47(3):278-85
pubmed: 20419348
J Subst Abuse Treat. 2012 Dec;43(4):382-8
pubmed: 23021098
Psychol Bull. 1979 Mar;86(2):420-8
pubmed: 18839484
Clin Psychol Rev. 2011 Feb;31(1):79-88
pubmed: 21130938
Psychometrika. 1965 Jun;30:179-85
pubmed: 14306381
BMC Psychiatry. 2014 Feb 14;14:39
pubmed: 24528545
Ann Fam Med. 2005 Jan-Feb;3(1):73-81
pubmed: 15671195
BMC Psychiatry. 2015 Apr 08;15:74
pubmed: 25879674
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1993 Aug;61(4):620-30
pubmed: 8370857
Ann Gen Psychiatry. 2013 Oct 23;12(1):32
pubmed: 24148707
Psychiatr Serv. 2019 Jan 1;70(1):46-59
pubmed: 30332925
J Consult Clin Psychol. 1981 Apr;49(2):156-67
pubmed: 7217482
Fam Process. 2000 Spring;39(1):83-103
pubmed: 10742933
J Consult Clin Psychol. 2009 Apr;77(2):212-8
pubmed: 19309181
Behav Cogn Psychother. 2016 Sep;44(5):620-4
pubmed: 26898543
Am J Community Psychol. 2008 Jun;41(3-4):327-50
pubmed: 18322790
Int J Eat Disord. 2015 Jan;48(1):91-9
pubmed: 25142619