Evolution of the Treatment Integrity Concept: Current Status and Future Directions

By F. Gresham, Lisa M. Hagermoser Sanetti, Thomas Kratochwill. School psychology review, 2009

122 citations recorded by the source corpus.

This special series on treatment integrity is a timely and salient contribution to the fields of intervention science in general and school psychology in particular. Theoretical and empirical developments regarding the concept of treatment integrity have lagged behind advances in the development, delivery, and validation of evidence-based interventions. The guest editors, Lisa Sanetti and Tom Kratochwill, have done the field a valuable service by providing a set of outstanding articles detailing major conceptual and empirical issues, some resolved and many unresolved, in the area of treatment integrity. At the heart of the importance of treatment integrity to intervention science is that empirical demonstration of measurable changes in a dependant variable (e.g., behavior or academic achievement) must be attributable to systematic and controlled manipulations in the independent variable (i.e., the "treatment"). In the absence of objective and documented specification of an independent variable (i.e., operationally defined), as well as accurate independent variable application (i.e., treatment integrity), incontrovertible conclusions regarding the relation between a treatment and behavior change are not possible (Gresham, 1989; McIntyre, Gresham, DiGennaro, & Reed, 2007: Moncher & Prinz, 1991). The concept of treatment integrity cuts across a diversity of fields involved with providing treatments or interventions to individuals. In medical treatments, the concept of treatment compliance or treatment adherence is an important and problematic issue. In the field of nutrition, the concept of dietary adherence is important for successful outcomes. In the fields of rehabilitation and substance abuse, the term program implementation captures the concept of treatment integrity. In clinical psychology, a common term for this concept is treatment fidelity. Finally, in the field of applied behavior analysis, the concept of procedural reliability is commonly used to refer to treatment integrity. Despite variations in terminology across these diverse fields, the concern that treatments or interventions are delivered as prescribed or intended is of utmost importance to document that changes in individuals' functioning (medical, nutritional, psychological, or behavioral) are from those treatments and from extraneous variables. Treatment integrity is usually conceptualized as involving three dimensions: (a) treatment adherence, or the degree to which an intervention is implemented as planned or intended; (b) interventionist competence, or the interventionist's skill and experience in implementing a particular treatment; and (c) treatment differentiation, or the extent to which interventions differ on critical dimensions (Nezu & Nezu, 2008; Perepletchikova, Treat, & Kazdin, 2007). Conceptually, treatment adherence represents a quantitative dimension of treatment integrity in that it can be measured in terms of the number of critical treatment components that are implemented. Therapist competence might be conceptualized as more of a qualitative dimension of treatment integrity because it reflects how well treatment procedures are delivered. Finally, treatment differentiation represents theoretical distinctions between different aspects of two or more treatments. The relationship between treatment adherence and interventionist competence is somewhat clouded because competence presupposes adherence, but adherence does not presuppose competence (McGlinchey & Dobson, 2003). One can adhere to a particular intervention with perfect integrity yet do so in an incompetent manner. A breakdown in treatment integrity in this case would dictate training and feedback to ensure a more competent delivery of a treatment. A breakdown in adherence would dictate performance feedback and training in key components of an intervention plan. Recent Estimates of Treatment Integrity Reporting As indicated by numerous intervention studies, the assessment and reporting of treatment integrity is uncommon in the intervention literature. …

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5641ed1ee970abd7568715f5f7bbf008732fdb5e

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

Citations in the corpus

The Interaction Effects of Program Training, Dosage, and Implementation Quality on Targeted Student Outcomes for The RULER Approach to Social and Emotional Learning (2012, background): “For example, the number of lessons taught significantly affected students’ healthy eating in one intervention (Story et al., 2000) and students’ perceptions of healthy sexual behaviors in another (James, Reddy, Ruiter, McCauley, & van den Borne, 2006).”
The Incredible Years Teacher Classroom Management Training: The Methods and Principles That Support Fidelity of Training Delivery (2011, methodology): “Fidelity can be conceptualized in three dimensions: (1) treatment adherence, or trainer delivery of core program content and intervention dosage (number of hours of training) in the recommended sequence, (2) interventionist competence, or the IY trainer’s skill level of using the training methods, p”
A meta‐analysis of school‐wide positive behavior support: An exploratory study using single‐case synthesis (2012, background): “Treatment fidelity is a critical component of any intervention plan (Gresham, 1989, 2009), particularly true with regard to SWPBS, which relies largely on a consultee-based approach (Caplan, 1970).”
The importance of studying the implementation of interventions in school settings (2012, background): “Conversely, if outcomes are achieved as expected, it cannot be assumed that this was as a direct result of the intervention rather than other contextual factors if it has not been confirmed that the programme was implemented as intended (Gresham, 2009).”
Evidence-based Practice: A Framework for Making Effective Decisions (2012, background): “For example, there is a growing research base on monitoring fidelity of implementation, interpreting these results, and intervening to improve fidelity (Bartels & Mortenson, 2005; Codding, Livanish, Pace, & Vaca, 2008; Gresham, 2009; Mortenson & Witt, 1998).”