Skip to main content

Table 7 Instruments, instrument-related procedures, and measures

From: Testing the implementation and sustainment facilitation (ISF) strategy as an effective adjunct to the Addiction Technology Transfer Center (ATTC) strategy: study protocol for a cluster randomized trial

Measurement instrument Measurement instrument time points and procedures  
Staff survey
#1
(t = month 0)
Preparation phase assessment
(t = months 1–6)
Implementation phase assessment
(t = months 7–12)
Staff survey
#2
(t = month 13)
Staff survey
#3
(t = month 19)
Measure name (purpose)
Description
Independent Tape Rater Scale [26]   Xa     Time to proficiency (preparation outcome)
A continuous staff measure representing the number of days between completion of the workshop training by BI staff and their demonstration of proficiency [26, 30] in the motivational interviewing-based brief intervention (MIBI)
Independent Tape Rater Scale [26]    Xb    Implementation effectiveness [31] (implementation outcome)
A continuous staff measure representing the sum of the standardized cumulative number of MIBIs delivered by BI staff (i.e., consistency) and the cumulative integrity score of their delivery of the MIBI (i.e., quality)
Staff survey Xc    Xc Xc Level of sustainment (sustainment outcome)
A continuous staff measure (no specified range) that represents the number of MIBIs a BI staff self-reports having delivered during the past 6 months
Staff survey Xc    Xc Xc Motivational Interviewing Experience (moderator variable)
A staff measure indicating a BI staff’s perception of their motivational interviewing experience (0 = none, 1 = beginner, 2 = intermediate, 3 = advanced, 4 = expert)
Staff survey Xc    Xc Xc Readiness for implementing change (moderator variable)
A continuous organization measure (ranges from 1 to 5) that represents the organizational average of 6 items, each rated on a 5-point scale (1 = disagree, 2 = somewhat disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = somewhat agree, 5 = agree) and adapted from Shea et al.’ readiness measure [106]
Staff survey Xc    Xc Xc Implementation climate (moderator variable)
A continuous organization measure (ranges from 1 to 5) that represents the organizational average of 6 items, each rated on a 5-point scale (1 = disagree, 2 = somewhat disagree, 3 = neither agree nor disagree, 4 = somewhat agree, 5 = agree) and adapted from Jacobs et al.’ implementation measure [107]
Staff survey Xc    Xc Xc Leadership engagement (moderator variable)
A continuous organization measure (ranges from 0 to 6) that represents the organizational average of 4 items, each rated on a 7-point scale (0 = not at all to 6 = highest extent possible) and developed for this study based on the leadership engagement construct described by Damschroder et al.—commitment, involvement, and accountability of leaders with the implementation [108]
Staff
Survey
Xc    Xc Xc Tension for change (moderator variable)
A continuous organization measure (ranges from 0 to 6) that represents the organizational average of 3 items, each rated on a 7-point scale (0 = not at all to 6 = highest extent possible) and developed for this study based on the tension for change construct described by Damscroder et al.—stakeholders’ shared perception of the extent to which a change is important, needed, and desired [108]
  1. aRatings during the preparation phase were completed by one of the co-authors (DV)
  2. bRatings during the implementation phase were rated by one of 15 experienced raters, each of which were trained, calibrated, and monitored by one of the co-authors (SM)
  3. cStaff surveys (electronically administered) required approximately 30 min to complete, and staff received one $25 e-gift card per completed survey as compensation