The global therapist competence scale for youth psychosocial treatment: Development and initial validation

Improving inter-rater reliability of the enhancing assessment of common therapeutic factors (ENACT) measure through training of raters

Background

As evidence supports task-shifting approaches to reduce the global mental health treatment gap, counselor competency evaluation measures are critical to ensure evidence-based therapies are administered with quality and fidelity.

Objective

This article describes a training technique for evaluating lay counselors' competency for mental health lay practitioners without rating scale experience.

Methods

Mental health practitioners were trained to give the Enhancing Assessment of Common Therapeutic Factors (ENACT) test to assess counselor proficiency in delivering the Common Elements Treatment Approach (CETA) in-person and over the phone using standardized video and audio recordings. A two-day in-person training was followed by a one-day remote training session. Training includes a review of item scales through didactic instructions, active learning by witnessing and scoring role-plays, peer interactions, and trainer observation and feedback. The trainees rated video and audio recordings, and ICC values were calculated.

Results

The training technique presented in this research helped achieve high counselor competency scores among lay providers with no prior experience using rating scales. ICC rated both trainings satisfactory to exceptional (ICC: .71 - .89).

Conclusions

Raters with no past experience with rating scales can achieve high consistency when rating counselor competency through training. Effective rater training should include didactic learning, practical learning with trainer observation and feedback, and video and audio recordings to assess consistency.

Examining the Relation Between Technical and Global Competence in Two Treatments for Youth Anxiety

Although technical (quality of delivering techniques from a specific treatment) and global (general clinical expertise) competence are believed to be important ingredients of successful psychosocial treatment with youth, there have been few empirical efforts to measure both dimensions. Efforts to understand the role that each competence dimension plays in the process and outcome of youth treatment starts with determining whether the dimensions can be measured separately. This study examined whether scores from measures designed to assess technical and global competence were distinct. Treatment sessions (N = 603) from 38 youths (M age = 9.84 years, SD = 1.65; 60.5% White; 52.6% male) treated for primary anxiety problems within a randomized effectiveness trial were coded. Four coders used observational measures designed to assess technical competence, global competence, protocol adherence, and the alliance. Mean item interrater reliability was .70 (SD = .09) for technical competence and .66 (SD = .05) for global competence. While most components of global competence were distinct from technical competence scores, two components showed redundancy (r > .70). Scores on both competence measures were empirically distinct (r < .70) from scores on measures of protocol adherence and the alliance. Although the measures did not fully distinguish between technical and global competence, our findings do indicate that some components of technical and global competence may provide unique information about competence.

A Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) study of medication and CBT sequencing in the treatment of pediatric anxiety disorders

BACKGROUND

Treatment of a child who has an anxiety disorder usually begins with the question of which treatment to start first, medication or psychotherapy. Both have strong empirical support, but few studies have compared their effectiveness head-to-head, and none has investigated what to do if the treatment tried first isn't working well-whether to optimize the treatment already begun or to add the other treatment.

METHODS

This is a single-blind Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) of 24 weeks duration with two levels of randomization, one in each of two 12-week stages. In Stage 1, children will be randomized to fluoxetine or Coping Cat Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT). In Stage 2, remitters will continue maintenance-level therapy with the single-modality treatment received in Stage 1. Non-remitters during the first 12 weeks of treatment will be randomized to either [1] optimization of their Stage 1 treatment, or [2] optimization of Stage 1 treatment and addition of the other intervention. After the 24-week trial, we will follow participants during open, naturalistic treatment to assess the durability of study treatment effects. Patients, 8-17 years of age who are diagnosed with an anxiety disorder, will be recruited and treated within 9 large clinical sites throughout greater Los Angeles. They will be predominantly underserved, ethnic minorities. The primary outcome measure will be the self-report score on the 41-item youth SCARED (Screen for Child Anxiety Related Disorders). An intent-to-treat analysis will compare youth randomized to fluoxetine first versus those randomized to CBT first ("Main Effect 1"). Then, among Stage 1 non-remitters, we will compare non-remitters randomized to optimization of their Stage 1 monotherapy versus non-remitters randomized to combination treatment ("Main Effect 2"). The interaction of these main effects will assess whether one of the 4 treatment sequences (CBT➔CBT; CBT➔med; med➔med; med➔CBT) in non-remitters is significantly better or worse than predicted from main effects alone.

DISCUSSION

Findings from this SMART study will identify treatment sequences that optimize outcomes in ethnically diverse pediatric patients from underserved low- and middle-income households who have anxiety disorders.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This protocol, version 1.0, was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov on February 17, 2021 with Identifier: NCT04760275 .