Illness management and recovery in community practice

dc.contributor.authorMcGuire, Alan B.
dc.contributor.authorRoudebush, Richard L.
dc.contributor.authorBartholomew, Tom
dc.contributor.authorUniversity, Rutgers
dc.contributor.authorAnderson, Adrienne I.
dc.contributor.authorBauer, Sarah M.
dc.contributor.authorMcGrew, John H.
dc.contributor.authorWhite, Dominique A.
dc.contributor.authorLuther, Lauren
dc.contributor.authorRollins, Angela
dc.contributor.authorRoudebush, Richard L.
dc.contributor.authorPereira, Angela
dc.contributor.authorSalyers, Michelle P.
dc.contributor.departmentPsychology, School of Scienceen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-12T18:15:03Z
dc.date.available2018-06-12T18:15:03Z
dc.date.issued2016-12
dc.description.abstractObjective To examine provider competence in providing Illness Management and Recovery (IMR), an evidence-based self-management program for people with severe mental illness, and the association between implementation supports and IMR competence. Methods IMR session recordings, provided by 43 providers/provider pairs, were analyzed for IMR competence using the IMR treatment integrity scale. Providers also reported on receipt of commonly available implementation supports (e.g., training, consultation). Results Average IMR competence scores were in the “Needs Improvement” range. Clinicians demonstrated low competence in several IMR elements: significant other involvement, weekly action planning, action plan follow-up, cognitive-behavioral techniques, and behavioral tailoring for medication management. These elements were commonly absent from IMR sessions. Competence in motivational enhancement strategies and cognitive-behavioral techniques differed based on the module topic covered in a session. Generally, receipt of implementation supports was not associated with increased competence; however, motivational interviewing training was associated with increased competence in action planning and review. Conclusions and Implications for Practice IMR, as implemented in the community, may lack adequate competence and commonly available implementation supports do not appear to be adequate. Additional implementation supports that target clinician growth areas are needed.en_US
dc.eprint.versionAuthor's manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.citationMcGuire, A. B., Roudebush, R. L., Bartholomew, T., University, R., Anderson, A. I., Bauer, S. M., … Salyers, M. P. (2016). Illness management and recovery in community practice. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 39(4), 343–351. https://doi.org/10.1037/prj0000200en_US
dc.identifier.issn1095-158Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1805/16473
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Psychological Associationen_US
dc.relation.isversionof10.1037/prj0000200en_US
dc.relation.journalPsychiatric rehabilitation journalen_US
dc.rightsPublisher Policyen_US
dc.sourcePMCen_US
dc.subjectillness management and recoveryen_US
dc.subjectschizophreniaen_US
dc.subjectfidelityen_US
dc.titleIllness management and recovery in community practiceen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
nihms794316.pdf
Size:
263.4 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Article
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.99 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: