Introducing a Measurement Feedback System for Youth Mental Health: Predictors and Impact of Implementation in a Community Agency.

Measurement feedback systems (MFSs) that routinely collect and report client progress to mental health therapists have demonstrated beneficial impact on outcomes in numerous studies, with evidence that there is a dose-response relationship related to the implementation of the MFS. The current study examined the impact of MFS implementation (Implementation Index) on youth symptom outcomes separately by caregiver and youth self-report. Additionally, we tested the extent to which Implementation Index rates varied by individual therapists and clients, and whether therapist and client characteristics predicted MFS implementation. Methods: Administrative data (client charts, youth- and caregiver-reported Youth Outcome Questionnaires) for 229 youth (52.83% Latinx, 42.79% girls, M age = 10.33) treated during a 1-year period at a community mental health organization in Central Texas were analyzed using multi-level modeling. Caregiver-reported symptoms decreased faster for those with a higher MFS Implementation Index. Between-group differences among therapists accounted for a significant proportion of variance in the Implementation Index for caregiver report, whereas client differences accounted for most of the variance in the Implementation Index for youth self-report. Therapist trainee status predicted a significant increase in the Implementation Index for caregiver-report data. Youth symptom improvement as reported by caregivers varied with the extent of MFS implementation fidelity, and MFS implementation fidelity was higher for clients treated by trainees relative to staff therapists for caregiver report of symptoms.

A Second and Third Look at FIRST: Testing Adaptations of A Principle-Guided Youth Psychotherapy.

Objective: We examined the acceptability, integrity, and symptom trajectories associated with FIRST, a principle-guided treatment for youth internalizing and externalizing problems designed to support efficient uptake and implementation.Method: We conducted two open trials of an adapted FIRST, focusing on uptake and implementation by novice trainees in a university-affiliated clinic, limiting treatment duration to six sessions, and benchmarking findings against a 2017 FIRST trial with community therapists. In Study 1, trainees received a two-day training and weekly two-hour supervision (N = 22 youths, ages 7-17, 50% female, 54.54% Caucasian, 4.55% Latinx). In Study 2, trainees received a one-day training and weekly one-hour supervision, delivering the six-session FIRST in a predetermined sequence (N = 26 youths, ages 11-17, 42.31% female, 65.38% Caucasian, 7.69% Latinx). In Study 3, the original study therapists - now practitioners - evaluated FIRST's effectiveness and implementation difficulty, and reported their own post-study FIRST use.Results: Acceptability (treatment completion, session attendance, caregiver participation) and integrity (adherence, competence) were comparable across Study 1, Study 2 and the 2017 trial. Improvement effect sizes across ten outcome measures were in the large range in all three trials: M ES = 1.10 in the 2017 trial, 0.83 in Study 1, and 0.81 in Study 2. Study 3 showed high effectiveness ratings, low difficulty ratings, and continued use of FIRST by a majority of clinicians.Conclusions: Across two open trials and a follow-up survey, FIRST showed evidence of acceptability and integrity, with youth symptom reduction comparable to that in prior research.