Routine outcome monitoring and feedback in alcohol and other drug treatment: A qualitative study of client perspectives on implementation.
Saved in:
| Title: | Routine outcome monitoring and feedback in alcohol and other drug treatment: A qualitative study of client perspectives on implementation. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Pocuca, Nina (AUTHOR), Tisdale, Calvert (AUTHOR), Campbell, Gabrielle (AUTHOR), Beck, Alison K. (AUTHOR), Ellem, Rhiannon (AUTHOR), Quinn, Catherine A. (AUTHOR), Kelly, Peter J. (AUTHOR), Larance, Briony (AUTHOR), Baker, Amanda L. (AUTHOR), Connor, Jason P. (AUTHOR), Marsden, John (AUTHOR), Chan, Gary C. K. (AUTHOR), Connelly, Luke (AUTHOR), Lenzen, Sabrina (AUTHOR), Farrell, Michael (AUTHOR), Hides, Leanne (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Drug & Alcohol Review. Jan2025, Vol. 44 Issue 1, p226-238. 13p. |
| Subjects: | Alcoholism treatment, Customer experience, Outcome assessment (Education), Health outcome assessment, Psychological factors, Qualitative research, Thematic analysis |
| Abstract: | Introduction: Routine outcome monitoring (ROM) and feedback is an evidence‐supported strategy for evaluating alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment outcomes. However, the implementation of ROM and feedback into AOD services remains a significant challenge. Research aimed at understanding client perspectives on ROM and feedback is needed to facilitate successful implementation. This study examined experiences with and perceptions of ROM and feedback in a sample of clients receiving AOD treatment. Methods: Interviews and online surveys were conducted with N = 26 people (13 male; Mage = 36.12 years, SD = 10.29) enrolled in an AOD treatment program in Australia. Data analysis of the transcripts was guided by thematic analysis, while descriptive statistics were used to analyse quantitative survey data. Results: Four major themes were identified in the qualitative data: (i) ROM and feedback is valuable to AOD treatment; (ii) clear and concise outcome measures with an integrated feedback loop are vital to reliable ROM; (iii) desire for visual and verbal feedback that highlights progress; and (iv) ROM and feedback can be emotionally challenging. Discussion and Conclusions: Participants valued ROM when it was clearly integrated within AOD treatment and they received feedback on their responses. Potential facilitators to implementing and improving the provision of ROM and feedback in AOD treatment include: (i) a clear, treatment‐based rationale to foster client buy‐in for ROM and maximise AOD treatment benefit; (ii) brief outcome measure surveys; and (iii) graphical visualisations of ROM feedback. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Drug & Alcohol Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Introduction: Routine outcome monitoring (ROM) and feedback is an evidence‐supported strategy for evaluating alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment outcomes. However, the implementation of ROM and feedback into AOD services remains a significant challenge. Research aimed at understanding client perspectives on ROM and feedback is needed to facilitate successful implementation. This study examined experiences with and perceptions of ROM and feedback in a sample of clients receiving AOD treatment. Methods: Interviews and online surveys were conducted with N = 26 people (13 male; Mage = 36.12 years, SD = 10.29) enrolled in an AOD treatment program in Australia. Data analysis of the transcripts was guided by thematic analysis, while descriptive statistics were used to analyse quantitative survey data. Results: Four major themes were identified in the qualitative data: (i) ROM and feedback is valuable to AOD treatment; (ii) clear and concise outcome measures with an integrated feedback loop are vital to reliable ROM; (iii) desire for visual and verbal feedback that highlights progress; and (iv) ROM and feedback can be emotionally challenging. Discussion and Conclusions: Participants valued ROM when it was clearly integrated within AOD treatment and they received feedback on their responses. Potential facilitators to implementing and improving the provision of ROM and feedback in AOD treatment include: (i) a clear, treatment‐based rationale to foster client buy‐in for ROM and maximise AOD treatment benefit; (ii) brief outcome measure surveys; and (iii) graphical visualisations of ROM feedback. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 09595236 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/dar.13962 |
