Advertisement

Implementing for Sustainability: Promoting Use of a Measurement Feedback System for Innovation and Quality Improvement

  • Susan Douglas
  • Suzanne Button
  • Susan E. Casey
Point of View

Abstract

Measurement feedback systems (MFSs) are increasingly recognized as evidence-based treatments for improving mental health outcomes, in addition to being a useful administrative tool for service planning and reporting. Promising research findings have driven practice administrators and policymakers to emphasize the incorporation of outcomes monitoring into electronic health systems. To promote MFS integrity and protect against potentially negative outcomes, it is vital that adoption and implementation be guided by scientifically rigorous yet practical principles. In this point of view, the authors discuss and provide examples of three user-centered and theory-based principles: emphasizing integration with clinical values and workflow, promoting administrative leadership with the ‘golden thread’ of data-informed decision-making, and facilitating sustainability by encouraging innovation. In our experience, enacting these principles serves to promote sustainable implementation of MFSs in the community while also allowing innovation to occur, which can inform improvements to guide future MFS research.

Keywords

Measurement feedback system Implementation Innovation Quality improvement Sustainability 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper was partially supported by the National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01MH087814. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

References

  1. Amble, I., Gude, T., Stubdal, S., Just Andersen, B., & Wampold, B. E. (2014). The effect of implementing the Outcome Questionnaire-45.2 feedback system in Norway: A multisite randomized clinical trial in a naturalistic setting. Psychotherapy Research, 7, 1–9. doi: 10.1080/10503307.2014.928756.Google Scholar
  2. Bickman, L. (2008). A measurement feedback system (MFS) is necessary to improve mental health outcomes. Journal of the American Association of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 47, 1114–1119. doi: 10.1097/CHI.0b013e3181825af8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bickman, L., Douglas Kelley, S., & Athay, M. (2012). The technology of measurement feedback systems. Journal of Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 1(4), 274–284.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bickman, L., Douglas Kelley, S., Breda, C., de Andrade, A. R., & Riemer, M. (2011). Effects of routine feedback to clinicians on mental health outcomes of youths: Results of a randomized trial. Psychiatric Services, 62, 1423–1429. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.002052011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bickman, L., Douglas, S., Vides de Andrade, A. R., Tomlinson, M., Gleacher, A., & Olin, S. (2014). Implementing a measurement feedback system: A tale of two sites. Manuscript under review. Google Scholar
  6. Boswell, J. F., Kraus, D. R., Miller, S. D., & Lambert, M. J. (2013). Implementing routine outcome monitoring in clinical practice: Benefits, challenges, and solutions. Psychotherapy research, 26, 1–14. doi: 10.1080/10503307.2013.817696.Google Scholar
  7. Carlier, I. V., Meuldijk, D., Van Vliet, I. M., Van Fenema, E., Van der Wee, N., & Zitman, F. G. (2012). Routine outcome monitoring and feedback on physical or mental health status: Evidence and theory. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 18, 104–110. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01543.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chambers, D. A., Glasgow, R. E., & Stange, K. C. (2013). The dynamic sustainability framework: Addressing the paradox of sustainment amid ongoing change. Implementation Science, 8, 117.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Chorpita, B. F., Bernstein, A. D., & Daleiden, E. L. (2011). Empirically guided coordination of multiple evidence-based treatments: An illustration of relevance mapping in children’s mental health services. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79, 470–480.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Chorpita, B. F., Bernstein, A. D., Daleiden, E. L., & The Research Network on Youth Mental Health. (2008). Driving with roadmaps and dashboards: Using information resources to structure the decision models in service organizations. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 35, 114–123.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. de Jong, K. (2014). Deriving effective implementation strategies for outcome monitoring from feedback theory. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, Current issue.Google Scholar
  12. De Leon, P. H., & Pachter, W. S. (2010). Children’s mental health care: A surprisingly steady evolution. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 37, 149–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dorsey, S., Pullmann, M. D., Deblinger, E., Berliner, L., Kerns, S. E., Thompson, K., et al. (2013). Improving practice in community-based settings: A randomized trial of supervision—study protocol. Implementation Science, 8, 89. doi: 10.1186/1748-5908-8-89.
  14. Douglas Kelley, S., & Bickman, L. (2009). Beyond outcomes monitoring: Measurement feedback systems in child and adolescent clinical practice. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 22, 363–368. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0b013e32832c9162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duncan, E. A. S., & Murray, J. (2012). The barriers and facilitators to routine outcome measurement by allied health professionals in practice: A systematic review. BMC Health Services Research, 12, 96. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-96.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Edbrooke-Childs, J., Wolpert, M., & Deighton, J. (2014). Using Patient Reported Outcome Measures to Improve Service Effectiveness (UPROMISE): A service evaluation of training for clinicians to use outcome measures in child mental health. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, Current issue.Google Scholar
  17. Evans, C. (2012). Cautionary notes on power steering for psychotherapy. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 53(2), 131–139. doi: 10.1037/a0027951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fitzpatrick, M. (2012). Blurring practice–research boundaries using progress monitoring: A personal introduction to this issue of Canadian psychology. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 53(2), 75–81. doi: 10.1037/a0028051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231).Google Scholar
  20. Glasgow, R. E., & Chambers, D. (2012). Developing robust, sustainable implementation systems using rigorous, rapid and relevant science. Clinical and Translational Science, 5(1), 48–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Goodman, J. D., McKay, J. R., & DePhilippis, D. (2013). Progress monitoring in mental health and addiction treatment: A means of improving care. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 44(4), 231–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gresham, F. M. (2014). Measuring and analyzing treatment integrity data in research. In L. M. Hagermoser Sanetti & T. R. Kratochwill (Eds.), Treatment integrity: A foundation for evidence-based practice in applied psychology (pp. 109–130). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hall, C. L., Taylor, J., Moldavsky, M., Marriott, M., Pass, S., Newell, K., et al. (2014). A qualitative process evaluation of electronic session-by-session outcome measurement in child and adolescent mental health services. BMC Psychiatry, 14, 113. doi: 10.1186/1471-244X-14-113.
  24. Harmon, S. C., Lambert, M. J., Smart, D. M., Hawkins, E., Neilson, S. L., Slade, K., et al. (2007). Enhancing outcome for potential treatment failures: Therapist-client feedback and clinical support tools. Psychotherapy Research, 17(4), 379–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  26. Kazdin, A. E. (2008). Evidence-based treatment and practice: New opportunities to bridge clinical research and practice, enhance the knowledge base, and improve patient care. American Psychologist, 63(3), 146–159.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lambert, M. J., Hansen, N. B., & Finch, A. E. (2001). Patient-focused research: Using patient outcome data to enhance treatment effects. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69(2), 159–172.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Lambert, M. J., Harmon, C., Slade, K., Whipple, J. K., & Hawkins, E. J. (2005). Providing feedback to psychotherapists on their patients’ progress: Clinical results and practice suggestions. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61(2), 165–174.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Lambert, M. J., & Hawkins, E. J. (2001). Using information about patient progress in supervision: Are outcomes enhanced? Australian Psychologist, 36(2), 131–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lloyd, D. (October 29, 2013). Documentation linkage and utilization management for compliance. Webinar for the National Council. Available from www.nationalcouncil.org. Retrieved on February 24, 2014.
  32. Marriott, L. K., Nelson, D. A., Allen, S., Calhoun, K., Eldredge, C. E., Kimminau, K. S., et al. (2012). Using health information technology to engage communities in health, education, and research. Science Translational Medicine, 4(119), 119mr1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Martin, A. M., Fishman, R., Baxter, L., & Ford, T. (2011). Practitioners’ attitudes towards the use of standardized diagnostic assessment in routine practice: A qualitative study in two child and adolescent mental health services. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 16(3), 407–420.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Mellor-Clark, J., Cross, S., Macdonald, J., & Skjulsvik, T. (2014). Leading horses to water: Lessons from a decade of helping psychological therapy service use routine outcome measurement to improve practice. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, Current issue.Google Scholar
  35. Morten, G., Anker, M. G., Duncan, B. L., & Sparks, J. A. (2009). Using client feedback to improve couple therapy outcomes: A randomized clinical trial in a naturalistic setting. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77, 693–704. doi: 10.1037/a0016062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Noell, G. H., & Gansle, K. A. (2014). The use of performance feedback to improve intervention implementation in schools. In L. M. Hagermoser Sanetti & T. R. Kratochwill (Eds.), Treatment integrity: A foundation for evidence-based practice in applied psychology (pp. 161–184). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Proctor, E. K., Landsverk, J., Aarons, G., Chambers, D., Glisson, D., & Mittman, B. (2009). Implementation research in mental health services: An emerging science with conceptual, methodological, and training challenges. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 36(1), 24–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Reay, W. E. (2013). Comment to Garland: “With a little help from my friends”. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 40, 39–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Riemer, M., & Bickman, L. (2011). Using program theory to link social psychology and program evaluation. In M. M. Mark, S. I. Donaldson, & B. Campbell (Eds.), Social psychology and program/policy evaluation. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  40. Riemer, M., Douglas Kelley, S., Casey, S., & Taylor Haynes, K. (2012). Developing effective research-practice partnerships for creating a culture of evidence-based decision making. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 39(4), 248–257. Special Issue: Research Practice Partnerships.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Riemer, M., Rosof-Williams, J., & Bickman, L. (2005). Theories related to changing clinician practice. Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 14, 241–254. doi: 10.1016/j.chc.2004.05.002. viii.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Sapyta, J., Riemer, M., & Bickman, L. (2005). Feedback to clinicians: Theory, research and practice. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 61, 145–153. doi: 10.1002/jclp.20107.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Sexton, T. S., & Douglas Kelley, S. (2010). Finding the common core: Evidence-based practices, clinically relevant evidence, and mechanisms of change. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 37(1–2), 81–88. Special Issue: Psychotherapy Practice in Usual Care.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Shimokawa, K., Lambert, M. J., & Smart, D. W. (2010). Enhancing treatment outcome of patients at risk of treatment failure: Meta-analytic and mega-analytic review of a psychotherapy quality assurance system. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 78(3), 298–311.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Sparks, J. A., Kisler, T. S., Adams, J. F., & Blumen, D. G. (2011). Teaching accountability: Using client feedback to train effective family therapists. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 37, 452–467.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Unsworth, G., Cowie, H., & Green, A. (2012). Therapists’ and clients’ perceptions of routine outcome measurement in the NHS: A qualitative study. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 12(1), 71–80. doi: 10.1080/14733145.2011.565125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Weisz, J. R., Ng, M. Y., & Bearman, S. K. (2014). Odd couple? Reenvisioning the relation between science and practice in the dissemination-implementation era. Clinical Psychological Science, 2(1), 58–74. doi: 10.1177/2167702613501307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wolpert, M., Curtis-Tyler, K., & Edbrooke-Childs, J. (2014). A qualitative exploration of patient and clinician views on patient reported outcome measures in child mental health and diabetes services. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, doi: 10.1007/s10488-014-0586-9.
  49. Wolpert, M., Fugard, A. J. B., Deighton, J., & Gorzig, A. (2012). Routine outcomes monitoring as part of children and young people’s Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (CYP IAPT)—improving care or unhelpful burden? Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 17(3), 129–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Worthen, V. E., & Lambert, M. J. (2007). Outcome oriented supervision: Advantages of adding systematic client tracking to supportive consultations. Counseling and Psychotherapy Research, 7(1), 48–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Susan Douglas
    • 1
  • Suzanne Button
    • 2
  • Susan E. Casey
    • 3
  1. 1.Vanderbilt UniversityNashvilleUSA
  2. 2.Astor Services for Children & FamiliesBronxUSA
  3. 3.Providence Services CorporationBowdoinhamUSA

Personalised recommendations