Alpha 2.0
Login Register
» Articles » PMID: 39697186

Youth, Caregiver, and Clinician Perspectives of Youth Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) in a Psychological Training Clinic: Lessons from Early Adopters

Overview
Journal Curr Psychol
Publisher Springer
Specialty Psychology
Date 2024 Dec 19
PMID 39697186
Authors
Alyssa J Gatto
Hayoung Ko
Delaney M Keller
Lee D Cooper
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This study examines the applicability and utility of youth Measurement-Based Care (MBC) in a community-based psychological training clinic. Considering the complexity of youth compared to adult MBC, there is an increasing need to expand the evidence base. This study investigated how doctoral students in clinical psychology managed the selection and usage of Patient Rated Outcome Measures (PROMs) for youth and their parents. Additionally, this study evaluates youth attitudes toward MBC and PROMs and overall appropriateness and completion rates. Youth ( = 79) from 1 to 17-years-old with various mental health disorders (i.e., depression, anxiety, ADHD) completed evidence-based psychotherapy. Clinicians ( = 21) were trained to have therapy clients and their caregivers' complete weekly measures digitally as an integrated part of standard care. All clinicians, youth clients, and their parents reported attitudes supporting the utility of youth PROMs and MBC. Compared to adult clients ( = 81), youth clients were significantly less adherent in regularly completing their weekly measures. These results demonstrate the usage of MBC and utility of implementing this practice for youth clients in a training clinic. Together, there is a need for improving the specificity of training for clinicians who will administer MBC for youth above and beyond what is indicated for adult clients.

References
1.
Jensen-Doss A, Becker Haimes E, Smith A, Lyon A, Lewis C, Stanick C . Monitoring Treatment Progress and Providing Feedback is Viewed Favorably but Rarely Used in Practice. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2016; 45(1):48-61. PMC: 5495625. DOI: 10.1007/s10488-016-0763-0. View
2.
McLeod B, Jensen-Doss A, Lyon A, Douglas S, Beidas R . To Utility and Beyond! Specifying and Advancing the Utility of Measurement-Based Care for Youth. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2022; 51(4):375-388. PMC: 9246828. DOI: 10.1080/15374416.2022.2042698. View
3.
Martin A, Fishman R, Baxter L, Ford T . Practitioners' attitudes towards the use of standardized diagnostic assessment in routine practice: a qualitative study in two child and adolescent mental health services. Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2011; 16(3):407-20. DOI: 10.1177/1359104510366284. View
4.
Beidas R, Stewart R, Walsh L, Lucas S, Downey M, Jackson K . Free, brief, and validated: Standardized instruments for low-resource mental health settings. Cogn Behav Pract. 2015; 22(1):5-19. PMC: 4310476. DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpra.2014.02.002. View
5.
de Jong K, Conijn J, Gallagher R, Reshetnikova A, Heij M, Lutz M . Using progress feedback to improve outcomes and reduce drop-out, treatment duration, and deterioration: A multilevel meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2021; 85:102002. DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102002. View