Improving the feasibility of fidelity measurement for community-based quality assurance: Partial- versus full-session observations of supervisor adherence and competence.

When delivering evidence-based mental health interventions in community-based practice settings, a common quality assurance method is clinical supervision. To support supervisors, assessment methods are needed, and those methods need to be both efficient and effective. Ideally, supervision sessions would be recorded, and trained coders would rate the supervisor's use of specific strategies. In most settings, though, this requires too many resources. The present study evaluated a more efficient approach. The data came from an existing randomized trial of an Audit and Feedback intervention for enhancing supervisor Adherence and Competence. This included 57 supervisors and 374 sessions across seven months of monitoring. Instead of rating full supervision sessions, a more efficient approach was to have coders rate partial sessions. Two types of partial observations were considered: a randomly selected 15-minute segment of the session and the first case discussion of the session. The aim was to see if partial observations and full observations led to similar conclusions about Adherence and Competence. In all cases, they did. The scores were most similar for sessions with moderate levels of Adherence and Competence. If Adherence and Competence were low, partial observations were underestimates, but if they were high, partial observations were overestimates. Observing partial sessions is more efficient, but in terms of accuracy, the benefits and limitations should be evaluated in light of how the scores will be used. Additionally, future research should consider whether Audit and Feedback interventions have the same effect if feedback is based on observations of partial sessions.