ADAPTATION OF INTERPERSONAL COUNSELLING FOR ADOLESCENTS (IPC-A) FOR FINNISH STUDENT WELFARE SERVICES – RETROSPECTIVE EVALUATION BY USING AN EXPANDED FRAMEWORK FOR REPORTING ADAPTATIONS AND MODIFICATIONS (FRAME)
ABSTRACT Background: Interpersonal counselling for adolescents (IPC-A) is a brief, individual-based psychosocial intervention focusing on interpersonal relations as a factor of resilience in depressive symptoms. It has been adapted from IPC for adults in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2015. IPC-A was...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
The Finnish Foundation for Psychiatric Research
2024-11-01
|
| Series: | Psychiatria Fennica |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.psykiatriantutkimussaatio.fi/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Psychiatria_Fennica%E2%94%ACa2024_Seilo_et_al.pdf |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | ABSTRACT
Background: Interpersonal counselling for adolescents (IPC-A) is a brief, individual-based psychosocial intervention
focusing on interpersonal relations as a factor of resilience in depressive symptoms. It has been adapted from IPC for
adults in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2015. IPC-A was first adapted to Finnish student welfare services in a pilot study,
conducted in 2016-2018. Further modifications were made during national implementation between 2020 and 2023. However,
the description of the adaptation process is lacking. To support both implementation and research, we wanted to describe
adaptation of the IPC-A retrospectively. We chose an expanded framework for reporting adaptations and modifications
to evidence-based interventions (FRAME) for structured description of the adaptation. Objectives: 1) To retrospectively
describe the adaptation of the Finnish IPC-A by using FRAME 2) To evaluate the utility of the FRAME in retrospective
description of an IPC-A adaptation in a real-life context. Materials and methods:Information about the IPC-A adaptation
was collected iteratively: 1) from the published reports and articles, 2) by comparing UK and Finnish IPC-A manuals, and 3)
by interviewing key stakeholders involved. Snowball method was used to identify interviewees. Identified IPC-A modifications
were classified by using the FRAME framework supplemented with the FRAME coding manual. The coding was made
by the first two authors and reviewed by the last author. The six domains of FRAME used were: 1) what was modified,
2) who made the decision to modify, 3) what was the goal, 4) when did the modification occur, 5) were the modifications
fidelity-consistent, and 6) were adaptations planned. Results: The adaptation process of the IPC-A was conducted by several
actors in research and healthcare, and it seemed uncoordinated. More than 30 modifications were made to IPC-A during
the pilot and national implementation. Most adaptations occurred in the pilot phase, were proactive and were executed to
improve feasibility and outcome. No fidelity-inconsistent modifications were recognized. FRAME framework showed clear
added value in recognizing and categorizing modifications, even retrospectively, and provided a useful, structured framework
for a retrospective description. Conclusions: National implementation and adaptation of interventions requires systematic
processes, resources and clear responsibilities which were only partly evident in the case of IPC-A, but can be improved in
the future. We recommend the use of FRAME for guiding and reporting future adaptations of psychosocial interventions in
Finland. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2489-6152 |