PEI Outcomes Data Presentation Mental Health Board Family, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
pei outcomes data presentation mental health board family
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

PEI Outcomes Data Presentation Mental Health Board Family, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dec 17, 2023 10 likes •237 views

PEI Outcomes Data Presentation Mental Health Board Family, Adolescent, and Childrens Committee January 9, 2014 Special thanks to: Alum Rock Counseling Center, EMQ Families First, Community Solutions, Rebekah Childrens Services, and

slide-1
SLIDE 1

PEI Outcomes Data Presentation Mental Health Board Family, Adolescent, and Children’s Committee January 9, 2014

Special thanks to: Alum Rock Counseling Center, EMQ Families First, Community Solutions, Rebekah Children’s Services, and Catholic Charities.

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Numbers Served : Year 1

  • PEI outcomes data is built on a

comprehensive package of assessment tools; Numbers served is just the beginning. Total served since program inception: 1,320

  • January 2013 – March 2013 = 298
  • April – June 2013 = 464
  • July – September 2013 = 558

Not inclusive of outreach, promotion, or one time case management – Trending up.

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory

Child Outcomes—Preliminary Data

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

PEI Assessment Tools:

  • ECBI:

“My child gets angry when doesn’t get own way.” “My child refuses to obey until threatened with punishment.”

  • SESBI:

– Sutter-Eyberg Student Behavior Inventory – Teacher ratings of conduct problem behavior.

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

ECBI: Clinical Definitions

Eyberg Child Inventory (ECBI) Scoring Process

Intensity Scale: If four or more items are unanswered the scale is invalid and should not be scored.

Measures the frequency of behavior (e.g., never to always) that child's behaviors reportedly occur

Missed responses count as 1 (Never). Total the circled responses to derive the raw score (minimum score = 36, maximum score = 252). Raw Scores Cutoff for Clinical Significance: ≥ 131 T-Scores Cutoff for Clinical Significance: ≥ 60

Problem Scale: Allows parents to identify the degree to which

the child’s/youth’s behavior is problematic When there are four or more missed items, the scale is invalid and should not be scored. Missed responses count as a “No” response. Total “Yes” responses to derive the raw score (minimum score = 0, maximum score = 36). Raw Scores Cutoff for Clinical Significance: ≥ 15 T-Scores Cutoff for Clinical Significance: ≥ 60 Note: Because scores are weighted, higher scores (over clinical cutoff) reflect greater concern about the child's behaviors

slide-6
SLIDE 6

ECBI Outcomes

6

66% 96% 34% 4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Pre Post

ECBI Intensity Score: Pre vs. Post-test Clinical Profile (based on T-Scores)

Below clinical cutoff Above Clinical Cutoff

57% 85% 43% 15% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Pre Post

ECBI Problem Score: Pre vs. Post-test Clinical Profile (based on T-scores)

Below clinical cutoff Above Clinical Cutoff

Pre-test N = 155; Post-test N = 27 Changes were statistically significant a p < 0.05

slide-7
SLIDE 7

UCLA PTSD RI Initial Data

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

PEI Assessment Tools: TF-CBT

  • UCLA PTSD – RI
  • Mapped onto DSM IV
  • Also includes identification of trauma

– “Right after the bad thing happened to you, were you scared that you would die?” – “I have dreams about what happened or other bad dreams.” – “Did you feel that you could not stop what was happening?

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

UCLA PTSD-RI Child Profile

PTSD-RI severity score based on counts ARCC EMQ Community Solutions Grand Total Not in clinical range 1 1 1 3 Sub-clinical (26-37) 3 1 4 Clinical range (38+) 1 3 3 7 Grand Total 5 4 5 14

20% 60% 20% 25% 0% 75% 20% 20% 60%

Not in clinical range SUBCLINICAL (26-37) Clinical range (38+)

Clinical Profile of Children--Initial PTSD-RI Severity Scores

ARCC EMQ Community Solutions Total N = 14

slide-10
SLIDE 10

YOQ, YOQ-SR

Child Outcomes—Preliminary Data

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

PEI Assessment Tools - YOQ

  • YOQ: Child’s general quality of life and

functioning.

– Child completed version (Never to always): “I want to be alone more than others my age.” “I feel that I would be better off dead.” “I have a hard time trusting friends and family.” – Parent completed version “My child appears sad or unhappy.”

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

42% 32% 63% 53% 48% 36% 41% 22% 13% 56% 43% 21% 24% 12% Intrapersonal Distress Somatic Interpersonal Relations Social Problems Behavioral Dysfunction Critical Items YOQ Total Score

YOQ Percentages Above Clinical Cutoff

Pre % Above Clinical Range Post % Above Clinical Range

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13

65% 65% 63% 48% 68% 53% 62% 35% 48% 76% 33% 43% 33% 38% Intrapersonal Distress Somatic Interpersonal Relations Social Problems Behavioral Dysfunction Critical Items YOQ Total Score

YOQ-SR Percentages Above Clinical Cutoff

Pre % Above Clinical Range Post % Above Clinical Range

YOQ-SR

Item

Pre % Above Clinical Range Post % Above Clinical Range

Intrapersonal Distress 65% 35% Somatic 65% 48% Interpersonal Relations 63% 76% Social Problems 48% 33% Behavioral Dysfunction 68% 43% Critical Items 53% 33% YOQ Total Score 62% 38%

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14

YOQ Scale Clinical Cutoff Intake Means n = 205 Discharge Means n = 63 Intrapersonal Distress (ID) 16 14.64 8.68 Somatic (S) 5 3.87 2.30 Interpersonal Relations (IR) 4 5.93 4.38 Social Problems (SP) 3 3.68 2.54 Behavioral Dysfunction (BD) 12 11.35 7.40 Critical Items (CI) 5 3.90 2.73 Total Score 46 42.25 24.87

14.64 3.87 5.93 3.68 11.35 3.90 42.25 8.68 2.30 4.38 2.54 7.40 2.73 24.87

10 20 30 40 50

Intrapersonal Distress (ID) Somatic (S) Interpersonal Relations (IR) Social Problems (SP) Behavioral Dysfunction (BD) Critical Items (CI) Total Score

YOQ Outcomes

Clinical Cutoff Intake Means n = 205 Discharge Means n = 63

All improvements were statistically significant at p < 0.01 All improvements were statistically significant at p < 0.01

YOQ Outcomes

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15

YOQ-SR Scale Clinical Cutoff Intake Means n = 40 Discharge Means n = 20 Intrapersonal Distress (ID) 17 20.30 12.95 Somatic (S) 6 7.43 4.67 Interpersonal Relations (IR) 3 5.80 4.67 Social Problems (SP) 3 3.55 2.52 Behavioral Dysfunction (BD) 11 14.70 8.67 Critical Items (CI) 6 6.88 4.43 Total Score 47 58.18 34.62

20.30 7.43 5.80 3.55 14.70 6.88 58.18 12.95 4.67 4.67 2.52 8.67 4.43 34.62

10 20 30 40 50 60

Intrapersonal Distress (ID) Somatic (S) Interpersonal Relations (IR) Social Problems (SP) Behavioral Dysfunction (BD) Critical Items (CI) Total Score

YOQ-SR Outcomes

Clinical Cutoff Intake Means n = 40 Discharge Means n = 20

All improvements were statistically significant at p < 0.01

slide-16
SLIDE 16

OQ

Caregiver Outcomes—Preliminary Data

16

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17

PEI Assessment Tools: OQ

  • OQ: Parents’/ Adults’ functioning

“I am concerned with family troubles.” “I feel loved and wanted.” “I have thoughts of ending my life.”

  • If the interventions are for the child, why

are we asking about the parents well- being?

  • What has the data shown?
slide-18
SLIDE 18

18

22.44 11.29 20.52 41.42 15.31 8.31 8.49 29.00

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Symptom Distress (SD) Interpersonal Relations (IR) Social Role (SR) Total Score

OQ Scale Outcomes (Ages 19+) Average Scores

Clinical Cutoff Intake Means n = 170 Discharge Means n =58

All improvements were statistically significant at p < 0.01

OQ Scale (19+ years

  • ld)*

Clinical Cutoff Intake Means n = 170 Discharge Means n =58 Symptom Distress (SD) 36 22.44 15.31 Interpersonal Relations (IR) 25 11.29 8.31 Social Role (SR) 12 20.52 8.49 Total Score 63 41.42 29.00

* counts lower than total submissions due to missing data on pre/post identifier

slide-19
SLIDE 19

CSQ – 18b

Caregiver Outcomes—Preliminary Data

19

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

3.7 3.3 3.6 3.4 3.6 3.9 3.9 3.8 2.6 3.8 3.6 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.5 3.7 3.9

1 2 3 4 Promptness at Initial Visit Facility Comfort Office/Building Amount of Help Received Appropriateness of Services Service Effectiveness Listening Skills Received Desired Service Service Needs Therapist Level of Understanding Therapist Competence Service Quality Overall Satisfaction Recommend Service to Others Program Staff Level of… Extent to Which Needs Were Met Respect of Rights Would Return for Services

Average Score for all Reporting Agencies: CSQ-18

n = 74

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

N = 74 Mean SD Lowest Score Highest Score Q1 Promptness at Initial Visit 3.68 0.50 2 4 Q2 Facility Comfort 3.34 1.17 1 4 Q3 Office/Building 3.63 0.87 1 4 Q4 Amount of Help Received 3.45 1.04 1 4 Q5 Appropriateness of Services 3.55 0.92 1 4 Q6 Service Effectiveness 3.92 0.27 3 4 Q7 Listening Skills 3.92 0.27 3 4 Q8 Received Desired Service 3.76 0.43 3 4 Q9 Service Needs 2.57 1.06 1 5 Q10 Therapist Level of Understanding 3.81 0.49 1 4 Q11 Therapist Competence 3.65 0.63 1 4 Q12 Service Quality 3.83 0.38 3 4 Q13 Overall Satisfaction 3.89 0.32 3 4 Q14 Recommend Service to Others 3.88 0.33 3 4 Q15 Program Staff Level of Understanding 3.76 0.43 3 4 Q16 Extent to Which Needs Were Met 3.53 0.58 2 4 Q17 Respect of Rights 3.72 0.45 3 4 Q18 Would Return for Services 3.90 0.30 3 4

slide-22
SLIDE 22

PEI Panelists

Deanna Flores, EMQ – North County/Central Region Veronica Guzman, EMQ – Central Scott Lafraconi, ARCC – Central/East Regions Ava Pham, ARCC – East Region Angela Albright, Catholic Charities – East Region Marianne Marafino, Community Solutions – South County Diana Wilson, Rebekah Children’s Services – South County

22