Comparing the Costs and Acceptability of Three Fidelity Assessment Methods for Assertive Community Treatment.

Rollins AL, Kukla M, Salyers MP, McGrew JH, Flanagan ME, Leslie DL, Hunt MG, McGuire AB. Comparing the Costs and Acceptability of Three Fidelity Assessment Methods for Assertive Community Treatment. Administration and policy in mental health. 2017 Sep 1; 44(5):810-816.

Related HSR&D Project(s)

• IIR 09-368 – Comparison of Fidelity Assessment Methods

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions

Search for Abstract from PubMed

---

Abstract:

Successful implementation of evidence-based practices requires valid, yet practical fidelity monitoring. This study compared the costs and acceptability of three fidelity assessment methods: on-site, phone, and expert-scored self-report. Thirty-two randomly selected VA mental health intensive case management teams completed all fidelity assessments using a standardized scale and provided feedback on each. Personnel and travel costs across the three methods were compared for statistical differences. Both phone and expert-scored self-report methods demonstrated significantly lower costs than on-site assessments, even when excluding travel costs. However, participants preferred on-site assessments. Remote fidelity assessments hold promise in monitoring large scale program fidelity with limited resources.