A naturalistic pilot study 49 Outcomes and Estimation Table 2 gives an overview of the feasibility objectives, outcome measures, feasibility criteria and outcomes of the IMR pilot study. TABLE 2 Overview of IMR pilot study (main feasibility objectives and outcomes) Objectives Outcome measures Feasibility criteria Outcomes 1 To include sufficient participants Monitoring; interviews 60 people 81 people included of 167, assessed for eligibility (49%); sufficient for 6 IMR groups 2 Clients’ and clinicians’ satisfaction with IMR Interviews Satisfaction of most participants and clinicians with IMR Completers and trainers: (very) positive about IMR 3 IMR outcome (pre-post design) IMR Scale client version (11) IMR Scale clinician version (11) RMQ (54) Significant results on our outcome measures IMRS clinician version (p < 0.001, d = 0.84)* IMRS client version (p = 0.063; d = 0.41) RMQ (p = 0.003, d = 0.52)* 4 Satisfactory fidelity IMR fidelity scale (49) Total fidelity scores of at least 4.0. Total score (six groups): Mean (SD) = 4.0 (0.20) Three groups: total scores ≥ 4.0 Three groups: total scores < 4.0 5 Trainers' education and supervision Interviews Two-day training and supervision of two hours per week Two-day course before start of the pilot Supervision bi-weekly for two hours Additional training 2 x per year for 4 hours 6 Dropout from IMR Monitoring; interviews Exploration, no targets set Dropout from IMR of 51% 7 Duration of the IMRprogram Monitoring; interviews Predictable 9–12 months M = 12.7 months, SD = 3.14 * Significant improvement in completers; RMQ = Recovery Markers Questionnaire A. Primary feasibility outcomes Number of participants The institute succeeded in running the six IMR groups planned, all of which completed the whole curriculum and which, between them, succeeded in recruiting 81 participants of 167 people assessed for eligibility, so more than the 60 participants needed; see “influx and outflux of participants in IMR,” above. Satisfaction On the day of the last session of their IMR group, or some days later, 20 completers were interviewed (50% of all completers), 17 in group interviews and three individually. All twelve clinicians who had trained the six IMR groups were interviewed individually.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw