Drug and alcohol review · 2025
Assessing the Processes and Experiences of Using and Implementing a Routine Data Collection System at Two Aboriginal Alcohol and Other Drug Residential Services Located in Rural Queensland.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
van de Ven Katinka, Cunningham Erin, Tully Phillip J, Ritter Alison
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Routine data collection in alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment services is essential for continuous quality improvement, yet its implementation in Aboriginal residential services remains challenging. This study evaluates the processes and experiences of implementing a routine data collection system at two Aboriginal AOD residential rehabilitation services in rural Queensland, both of which operate under a family-centric model of care.
METHODS: A participatory evaluation approach was used, engaging staff and clients to co-design and implement data collection tools. The study progressed in two phases. Phase 1 focused on developing data collection tools. Phase 2 involved implementing these tools to assess client experiences and outcomes. Data collection included the Aboriginal Resilience and Recovery Questionnaire, WHOQOL-BREF and other validated AOD outcome measures, with surveys conducted at multiple time points.
RESULTS: Staff engagement was crucial to successful implementation, though maintaining involvement over time proved challenging. Logistical and financial barriers, including IT infrastructure limitations and staff turnover, impacted sustainability. Although post-treatment follow-up was difficult, many clients found the outcome survey to be a valuable therapeutic tool. The client experience survey led to direct service improvements, whereas outcome monitoring required additional refinement for long-term feasibility.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Routine data collection can enhance service quality and client outcomes when embedded into clinical practice. However, sustainability depends on staff buy-in, streamlined processes and dedicated resources. Addressing barriers to post-treatment follow-up and ensuring data collection remains relevant to both staff and clients will be essential for ongoing implementation.
METHODS: A participatory evaluation approach was used, engaging staff and clients to co-design and implement data collection tools. The study progressed in two phases. Phase 1 focused on developing data collection tools. Phase 2 involved implementing these tools to assess client experiences and outcomes. Data collection included the Aboriginal Resilience and Recovery Questionnaire, WHOQOL-BREF and other validated AOD outcome measures, with surveys conducted at multiple time points.
RESULTS: Staff engagement was crucial to successful implementation, though maintaining involvement over time proved challenging. Logistical and financial barriers, including IT infrastructure limitations and staff turnover, impacted sustainability. Although post-treatment follow-up was difficult, many clients found the outcome survey to be a valuable therapeutic tool. The client experience survey led to direct service improvements, whereas outcome monitoring required additional refinement for long-term feasibility.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Routine data collection can enhance service quality and client outcomes when embedded into clinical practice. However, sustainability depends on staff buy-in, streamlined processes and dedicated resources. Addressing barriers to post-treatment follow-up and ensuring data collection remains relevant to both staff and clients will be essential for ongoing implementation.