TY - JOUR
T1 - Satisfaction with cognitive remediation therapy
T2 - its effects on implementation and outcomes using the cognitive remediation satisfaction scale
AU - Evans, Joanne
AU - Tinch-Taylor, Rose
AU - Csipke, Emese
AU - Cella, Matteo
AU - Pickles, Andrew
AU - McCrone, Paul
AU - Stringer, Dominic
AU - Oliver, Abigail
AU - Reeder, Clare
AU - Birchwood, Max
AU - Fowler, David
AU - Greenwood, Kathryn
AU - Johnson, Sonia
AU - Perez, Jesus
AU - Ritunnano, Rosa
AU - Thompson, Andrew
AU - Upthegrove, Rachel
AU - Wilson, Jon
AU - Kenny, Alex
AU - Isok, Iris
AU - Joyce, Eileen M.
AU - Wykes, Til
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to thank all our participants and clinical staff who supported this study and generously gave their time. In particular, we would like to thank all members of our Patient Advisory Group who provided support throughout this research programme. This study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme grant for Applied Research (NIHR-PGfAR RP-PG-0612-20002). The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study, collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2023, Springer Nature Limited.
PY - 2023/12
Y1 - 2023/12
N2 - Cognitive Remediation (CR) improves cognition and functioning but is implemented in a variety of ways (independent, group and one-to-one). There is no information on whether service users find these implementation methods acceptable or if their satisfaction influences CR outcomes. We used mixed participatory methods, including focus groups, to co-develop a CR satisfaction scale. This was refined using three psychometric criteria (Cronbach’s alpha, item discrimination, test-retest agreement) to select items. Factor analysis explored potential substructures. The refined measure was used in structural equation joint modelling to evaluate whether satisfaction with CR is affected by implementation method and treatment engagement or influences recovery outcome, using data from a randomised controlled trial. Four themes (therapy hours, therapist, treatment effects, computer use) generated a 31-item Cognitive Remediation Satisfaction scale (CRS) that reduced to 18 Likert items, 2 binary and 2 open-ended questions following psychometric assessment. CRS had good internal consistency (Alpha = 0.814), test-retest reliability (r= 0.763), and concurrent validity using the Working Alliance Inventory (r = 0.56). A 2-factor solution divided items into therapy engagement and therapy effects. Satisfaction was not related to implementation method but was significantly associated with CR engagement. Therapy hours were significantly associated with recovery, but there was no direct effect of satisfaction on outcome. Although satisfaction is important to therapy engagement, it has no direct effect on outcome. CR therapy hours directly affect outcome irrespective of which implementation model is used, so measuring satisfaction early might help to identify those who are likely to disengage. The study has mixed methods design.
AB - Cognitive Remediation (CR) improves cognition and functioning but is implemented in a variety of ways (independent, group and one-to-one). There is no information on whether service users find these implementation methods acceptable or if their satisfaction influences CR outcomes. We used mixed participatory methods, including focus groups, to co-develop a CR satisfaction scale. This was refined using three psychometric criteria (Cronbach’s alpha, item discrimination, test-retest agreement) to select items. Factor analysis explored potential substructures. The refined measure was used in structural equation joint modelling to evaluate whether satisfaction with CR is affected by implementation method and treatment engagement or influences recovery outcome, using data from a randomised controlled trial. Four themes (therapy hours, therapist, treatment effects, computer use) generated a 31-item Cognitive Remediation Satisfaction scale (CRS) that reduced to 18 Likert items, 2 binary and 2 open-ended questions following psychometric assessment. CRS had good internal consistency (Alpha = 0.814), test-retest reliability (r= 0.763), and concurrent validity using the Working Alliance Inventory (r = 0.56). A 2-factor solution divided items into therapy engagement and therapy effects. Satisfaction was not related to implementation method but was significantly associated with CR engagement. Therapy hours were significantly associated with recovery, but there was no direct effect of satisfaction on outcome. Although satisfaction is important to therapy engagement, it has no direct effect on outcome. CR therapy hours directly affect outcome irrespective of which implementation model is used, so measuring satisfaction early might help to identify those who are likely to disengage. The study has mixed methods design.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85173778376&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1038/s41537-023-00390-9
DO - 10.1038/s41537-023-00390-9
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85173778376
SN - 2754-6993
VL - 9
JO - Schizophrenia
JF - Schizophrenia
IS - 1
M1 - 67
ER -