Using evaluative frameworks to examine the implementation outcomes of a cognitive behavioral therapy program for autistic students with anxiety within public school settings

Autism ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 136236132110657
Author(s):  
Katherine Pickard ◽  
Allison Meyer ◽  
Nuri Reyes ◽  
Tanea Tanda ◽  
Judy Reaven

Cognitive behavioral therapy for youth with autism spectrum disorder and anxiety is effective, but disparities exist in accessing these programs. Training school providers to deliver cognitive behavioral therapy may help to address these disparities. However, little is known about how cognitive behavioral therapy programs are implemented by interdisciplinary school providers and the broader impact of these programs. This study aimed to address this gap and was part of a larger trial that examined the effectiveness of Facing Your Fears–School-Based across 25 public schools. Study aims were to understand the impact of Facing Your Fears–School-Based and factors that impacted implementation. Thirty providers participated in exit interviews guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework. Primary themes included (1) the fit of Facing Your Fears–School-Based for diverse students; (2) the effects of Facing Your Fears–School-Based on students’ school participation; and (3) planned Facing Your Fears–School-Based maintenance. Participants also highlighted the program’s accessibility for non-mental health providers and reported adapting Facing Your Fears–School-Based in response to student needs. Results suggest that Facing Your Fears–School-Based may have a broader impact on students and highlight the importance of task sharing to overcome mental health staff shortages within public schools. Programs that can be implemented flexibly are also critical given variability in school structures and student needs. Lay abstract Cognitive behavioral therapy helps to treat anxiety symptoms in autistic youth, but it is difficult for families to access cognitive behavioral therapy in the community. Training school providers to deliver cognitive behavioral therapy may help autistic youth and their families to access these programs. Unfortunately, we do not know how cognitive behavioral therapy programs can be delivered by school providers and how these programs help the autistic students who access them. This study addressed this gap and was part of a larger study that looked at the effectiveness of Facing Your Fears–School-Based in 25 public schools. The study goals were to understand whether Facing Your Fears–School-Based helped students and the factors that made it easy or difficult to deliver Facing Your Fears–School-Based in schools. Thirty providers participated in interviews guided by the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework. Participants shared information that fell into several major categories that included (1) delivering Facing Your Fears–School-Based to many different students; (2) the positive impact of Facing Your Fears–School-Based on students’ school participation; and (3) plans to continue using Facing Your Fears–School-Based. School providers also shared that Facing Your Fears–School-Based was easy to use for non-mental health providers and reported adapting Facing Your Fears–School-Based to meet student needs. The results of this study suggest that Facing Your Fears–School-Based may help autistic students and highlight the importance of using mental health programs in schools that are flexible, able to be adapted, and that are able to be used by many different types of school providers.

2012 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 197-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rinad S. Beidas ◽  
Matthew P. Mychailyszyn ◽  
Julie M. Edmunds ◽  
Muniya S. Khanna ◽  
Margaret Mary Downey ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Torrey A. Creed ◽  
Rebecca Oziel ◽  
Danielle Reich ◽  
Margaret Thomas ◽  
Sydne O'Connor ◽  
...  

Purpose. To capitalize on investments in evidence-based practice implementation, technology is needed to scale up fidelity assessment. Stakeholder feedback may facilitate adoption of such tools. This study examined mental health providers’ perceptions of an automated fidelity-rating tool for Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). Methods. We administered online surveys before and after focus groups that included therapists (n=18) and clinical leadership (n=12) from community mental health programs implementing CBT. Discussions centered on supervision practices followed by feedback about the fidelity tool. Transcripts were analyzed using a grounded theory approach.Results. Initial perceptions of acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of automated CBT fidelity tools were positive and increased after introduction of the tool, including significant increases in ratings of acceptability and appropriateness. Standard supervision was described as collaboratively guided, either scheduled or spontaneous, and focused on clinical content, self-care, and documentation. Participants highlighted the tool’s utility for supervision, training, and professional growth, but questioned its ability to rate skills related to rapport, cultural diversity, and non-verbal communication. Concerns were raised about client and therapist privacy, and the impact of low scores on therapist confidence. Desired features included labeling of interventions used and transparency about how fidelity scores related to specific point in the session. Opportunities for asynchronous, remote, and targeted supervision were of particular value. Conclusions. Automated fidelity assessment may present an opportunity for an acceptable, appropriate, and feasible approach to large-scale EBP implementation. Continued partnership with community stakeholders will be key for designing such tools in a manner that increases the likelihood of uptake.


Author(s):  
Margaret E. Crane ◽  
Katherine E. Phillips ◽  
Colleen A. Maxwell ◽  
Lesley A. Norris ◽  
Lara S. Rifkin ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 56 (S2) ◽  
pp. 40-41
Author(s):  
Alethea Desrosiers ◽  
Carolyn Schafer ◽  
Jordan Freeman ◽  
Alpha Vandi ◽  
Miriam Hinton ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 215-223
Author(s):  
Amir Hosein Jahangir ◽  
Narges Zamani ◽  
Farzan Barati ◽  
Saeed Zamani ◽  
◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document