Skip to main content

Table 1 TMACT subscales and items at 12 months and 30 months (12 teams)

From: Model fidelity and team members’ experiences of assertive community treatment in Norway: a sequential mixed-methods study

  T1
(12 months)
T2
(30 months)
Cohen’s da
Mean SD Mean SD
TMACT total score 3.3 0.32 3.6 0.28 0.83
Operations and Structure (OS) Subscale 3.9 0.41 4.1 0.36 1.59
OS1 Low Ratio of Consumers to Staff 5.0 0.00 4.9 0.29 − 0.29
OS2 Team Approach 3.3 1.29 3.2 1.47 − 0.16
OS3 Daily Team Meeting (Frequency and Attendance) 3.8 1.59 4.2 1.34 0.19
OS4 Daily Team Meeting (Quality) 4.1 1.00 4.7 0.65 0.59
OS5 Program Size 2.7 1.83 3.3 1.82 0.47
OS6 Priority Service Population 4.3 1.23 4.7 1.16 0.51
OS7 Active Recruitment 2.7 0.49 2.8 1.03 0.15
OS8 Gradual Admission Rate 4.7 0.49 4.8 0.39 0.29
OS9 Transition to Less Intensive Services 3.1 0.67 4.1 0.90 1.17
OS10 Retention Rate 4.6 0.67 4.8 0.62 0.29
OS11 Involvement in Psychiatric Hospitalization Decisions 4.7 0.65 4.8 0.45 0.12
OS12 Dedicated Office-Based Program Assistance 3.4 1.78 3.4 1.62 0.00
Core Team (CT) Subscale 3.6 0.55 3.9 0.46 0.68
CT1 Team Leader on Team 2.5 1.24 3.0 1.21 0.40
CT2 Team Leader is Practicing Clinician 3.3 0.78 3.3 0.99 0.00
CT3 Psychiatric Care Provider on Team 4.3 1.23 4.5 0.91 0.29
CT4 Role of Psychiatric Care Provider in Treatment 2.6 1.38 3.3 1.06 0.68
CT5 Role of Psychiatric Care Provider within Team 3.3 0.99 3.7 0.65 0.68
CT6 Nurses on Team 5.0 0.00 5.0 0.00 0.00
CT7 Role of Nurses 4.3 0.62 4.5 0.52 0.55
Specialist Team (ST) Subscale 2.5 0.62 2.5 0.70 0.12
ST1 Substance Abuse Specialist on Team 3.5 1.45 3.7 1.23 0.10
ST2 Role of Substance Abuse Specialist in Treatment 3.2 1.59 3.7 1.07 0.43
ST3 Role of Substance Abuse Specialist within Team 3.3 1.37 3.8 1.22 0.34
ST4 Vocational Specialist on Team 2.4 1.31 1.9 0.9 − 0.36
ST5 Role of Vocational Specialist in Employment Services 2.3 1.16 2.3 1.14 − 0.11
ST6 Role of Vocational Specialist within Team 2.9 1.09 2.6 1.24 − 0.29
ST7 Peer Specialist on Team 1.2 0.39 1.2 0.58 0.00
ST8 Role of Peer Specialist 1.3 0.45 1.2 0.58 − 0.16
Core Practices (CP) Subscale 3.6 0.40 3.7 0.37 0.25
CP1 Community-Based Services 5.0 0.00 5.0 0.00 0.00
CP2 Assertive Engagement 4.6 0.52 4.9 0.29 0.68
CP3 Intensity of Service 3.8 0.75 3.3 0.89 − 0.62
CP4 Frequency of Contact 2.9 0.79 2.8 0.62 − 0.29
CP5 Frequency of Contact with Natural Supports 2.8 0.75 2.3 0.78 − 0.42
CP6 Responsibility for Crisis Services 1.4 0.52 1.7 0.49 0.55
CP7 Full Responsibility for Psychiatric Services 3.8 1.34 4.7 0.65 0.75
CP8 Full Responsibility for Psych. Rehabilitation Services 4.2 1.03 4.5 0.67 0.34
Evidence-Based Practices (EP) Subscale 2.9 0.69 3.4 0.38 0.90
EP1 Full Responsibility for Dual Disorders Treatment 3.0 1.28 4.0 1.04 0.89
EP2 Full Responsibility for Vocational Services 3.3 1.56 3.6 1.56 0.11
EP3 Full Responsibility for Wellness Man. and Recovery 1.0 0.00 1.1 0.29 0.29
EP4 Integrated Dual Disorders Treatment Model 3.0 0.95 4.0 0.43 1.05
EP5 Supported Employment Model 2.3 0.65 2.5 0.91 0.23
EP6 Engagement & Psychoeducation with Natural Supports 3.8 1.12 4.5 0.80 0.68
EP7 Empirically Supported Psychotherapy 2.3 1.49 3.2 1.19 0.92
EP8 Supportive Housing Model 4.3 1.06 4.3 1.06 0.00
Person-Centered Planning and Practices (PP) Subscale 2.9 0.52 3.6 0.59 0.75
PP1 Strengths Inform Treatment Plan 2.6 0.90 3.3 0.99 0.78
PP2 Person-Centered Planning 1.3 0.49 1.8 0.97 0.53
PP3 Interventions Target Broad Range of Life Domains 3.6 1.00 4.3 1.14 0.36
PP4 Consumer Self-Determination and Independence 4.1 0.67 4.8 0.45 0.86
  1. aInterpretation of Cohen’s d: 0.2 indicates a small effect, 0.5 a moderate effect and 0.8 a large effect [41]