Browsing by Author "Wright-Berryman, Jennifer L."

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Comparison of Assertive Community Treatment Fidelity Assessment Methods: Reliability and Validity
    (Springer, 2016-03) Rollins, Angela L.; McGrew, John H.; Kukla, Marina; McGuire, Alan B.; Flanagan, Mindy E.; Hunt, Marcia G.; Leslie, Doug L.; Collins, Linda A.; Wright-Berryman, Jennifer L.; Hicks, Lia J.; Salyers, Michelle P.; Department of Psychology, School of Science
    Assertive community treatment is known for improving consumer outcomes, but is difficult to implement. On-site fidelity measurement can help ensure model adherence, but is costly in large systems. This study compared reliability and validity of three methods of fidelity assessment (on-site, phone-administered, and expert-scored self-report) using a stratified random sample of 32 mental health intensive case management teams from the Department of Veterans Affairs. Overall, phone, and to a lesser extent, expert-scored self-report fidelity assessments compared favorably to on-site methods in inter-rater reliability and concurrent validity. If used appropriately, these alternative protocols hold promise in monitoring large-scale program fidelity with limited resources.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Consumer and Provider Responses to a Computerized Version of the Illness Management and Recovery Program
    (2013) Wright-Berryman, Jennifer L.; Salyers, Michelle P.; O'Halloran, James P.; Kemp, Aaron; Mueser, Kim T.; Diazoni, Amanda
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Factor structure of the autonomy preference index in people with severe mental illness
    (Elsevier, 2015-08-30) Bonfils, Kelsey A.; Adams, Erin L.; Mueser, Kim T.; Wright-Berryman, Jennifer L.; Salyers, Michelle P.; Department of Psychology, School of Science
    People vary in the amount of control they want to exercise over decisions about their healthcare. Given the importance of patient-centered care, accurate measurement of these autonomy preferences is critical. This study aimed to assess the factor structure of the Autonomy Preference Index (API), used widely in general healthcare, in individuals with severe mental illness. Data came from two studies of people with severe mental illness (N=293) who were receiving mental health and/or primary care/integrated care services. Autonomy preferences were assessed with the API regarding both psychiatric and primary care services. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate fit of the hypothesized two-factor structure of the API (decision-making autonomy and information-seeking autonomy). Results indicated the hypothesized structure for the API did not adequately fit the data for either psychiatric or primary care services. Three problematic items were dropped, resulting in adequate fit for both types of treatment. These results suggest that with relatively minor modifications the API has an acceptable factor structure when asking people with severe mental illness about their preferences to be involved in decision-making. The modified API has clinical and research utility for this population in the burgeoning field of autonomy in patient-centered healthcare.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    A Review of Consumer-provided Services on Assertive Community Treatment and Intensive Case Management Teams: Implications for Future Research and Practice
    (2011-01) Wright-Berryman, Jennifer L.; McGuire, Alan B.; Salyers, Michelle P.
    Background—Assertive community treatment (ACT) is an evidence-based practice that provides intensive, in vivo services for adults with severe mental illness. Some ACT and intensive case management teams have integrated consumers as team members with varying results. Methods—We reviewed the literature examining the outcomes of having consumer providers on case management teams, with attention devoted to randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results—We identified 16 published studies, including 8 RCTs. Findings were mixed, with evidence supporting consumer-provided services for improving engagement, and limited support for reduced hospitalizations. However, evidence was lacking for other outcomes areas such as symptom reduction or improved quality of life. Conclusion—Including a consumer provider on an ACT team could enhance the outreach mechanisms of ACT, using a more recovery-focused approach to bring consumers into services and help engage them over time. More rigorous research is needed to further evaluate integrating consumer providers on teams.