Global mental health (Cambridge, England) · 2022
ENhancing Assessment of Common Therapeutic factors (ENACT) tool: adaptation and psychometric properties in South Africa.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Spedding Maxine, Kohrt Brandon, Myers Bronwyn, Stein Dan J, Petersen Inge, Lund Crick, Sorsdahl Katherine
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The ENhancing Assessment of Common Therapeutic factors (ENACT) tool measures a set of therapeutic competencies required for the effective psychological intervention, including delivery by non-specialists. This paper describes the systematic adaptation of the ENACT for the South African (SA) context and presents the tool's initial psychometric properties.
METHODS: We employed a four-step process: (1) Item generation: 204 therapeutic factors were generated by SA psychologists and drawn from the original ENACT as potential items; (2) Item relevance: SA therapists identified 96 items that were thematically coded according to their relationship to one another and were assigned to six domains; (3) Item utility: The ENACT-SA scale was piloted by rating recordings of psychological therapy sessions and stakeholder input; and (4) Psychometric properties: Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability of the final 12-item ENACT-SA were explored using Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation co-efficient (ICC) for both clinical psychologists and registered counsellors.
RESULTS: Although the original ENACT provided a framework for developing a tool for use in SA, several modifications were made to improve the applicability of the tool for the SA context, and optimise its adaptability other contexts. The adapted 12-item tool's internal consistency was good, while the inter-rater reliability was acceptable for both clinical psychologists and registered counsellors.
CONCLUSION: The ENACT-SA is a reliable tool to assess common factors in psychological treatments. It is recommended that the tool be used in conjunction with assessment protocols and treatment-specific competency measures to fully assess implementation fidelity and potential mechanisms of therapeutic change.
METHODS: We employed a four-step process: (1) Item generation: 204 therapeutic factors were generated by SA psychologists and drawn from the original ENACT as potential items; (2) Item relevance: SA therapists identified 96 items that were thematically coded according to their relationship to one another and were assigned to six domains; (3) Item utility: The ENACT-SA scale was piloted by rating recordings of psychological therapy sessions and stakeholder input; and (4) Psychometric properties: Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability of the final 12-item ENACT-SA were explored using Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation co-efficient (ICC) for both clinical psychologists and registered counsellors.
RESULTS: Although the original ENACT provided a framework for developing a tool for use in SA, several modifications were made to improve the applicability of the tool for the SA context, and optimise its adaptability other contexts. The adapted 12-item tool's internal consistency was good, while the inter-rater reliability was acceptable for both clinical psychologists and registered counsellors.
CONCLUSION: The ENACT-SA is a reliable tool to assess common factors in psychological treatments. It is recommended that the tool be used in conjunction with assessment protocols and treatment-specific competency measures to fully assess implementation fidelity and potential mechanisms of therapeutic change.