Tailored isn't always better: Impact of standardized versus tailored training on intention to use measurement-based...

Background: Brief educational trainings are often used for disseminating and implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs). However, many accessible trainings are ubiquitously standardized. Tailored training focused on modifying individual or contextual factors that may hinder EBP implementation is recommended, but there is a dearth of research comparing standardized versus tailored training. This study sought to: (a) assess the impact of MBC training on clinician intention to use measurement-based care (MBC); (b) compare the effect of standardized versus tailored training on clinician intention to MBC; and (c) identify clinician-level predictors of intention. Methods: Clinicians (n = 152) treating adult clients with depression at 12 community mental health clinics were randomized to either tailored or standardized MBC training. Clinic-specific barriers and facilitators were used to inform training content and structure tailoring. Linear mixed modeling tested the association between training condition and post-training intention to use MBC, as well as hypothesized individual-level predictors of post-training intention (e.g., age, gender). Results: Clinician intention pre- and post-training increased across training conditions (B = 0.38, t = -5.95, df = 36.99, p < .01, Cohen's d = 0.58). Results of linear mixed modeling procedures suggest no significant difference in clinician intention between conditions post-training (B = -0.03, SE = .19, p > .05, Cohen's d = .15). Only baseline intention emerged as a predictor of post-training intention (B = 0.39, SE = .05, p < .05). Conclusions: These findings suggest the additional effort to tailor training may not yield incremental benefit over standardized training, at least in the short term. As a result, implementation efforts may be able to reserve time and finances for other elements of implementation beyond the training component.

Educational training is a common approach for enhancing knowledge about research-supported mental health treatments. However, these trainings are often not tailored to meet the needs of the trainees, and there is insufficient evidence about whether tailoring might improve the impact of training compared to a one-size-fits-all, standard version. This study compared the impact of a tailored versus standard training on mental health clinician's intentions to use measurement-based (MBC) care for monitoring treatment progress for clients with depression. Study results indicated that intention to use MBC improved for clinicians receiving both the tailored and standard training after training completion. There were no differences in intention to use MBC care when the two types of training were compared. These study findings suggest that tailoring, which may require substantial time and effort, may not be a necessary step to improve the short-term impact of educational trainings.