DDBT Adapted Problem Solving Treatment for Primary Care

A 7-item screener for generalized anxiety. It consists of items related to GAD. Participants rate on a scale of 0-3 how much they have experienced in the last two weeks. Total scores range from 0 - 21. The scale is a valid screener for GAD. High scores indicate higher anxiety symptom severity. Data points were collected from each individual multiple times across the course of the study. For comparisons we conducted a multiple case study design examining each person's individual trajectory. The means and standard deviations reported are for all available observations stratified by condition.

Time frame: Patient participants will complete the GAD-7 at baseline and weekly for 10 weeks, single value calculated averaging across all available observations.

Population: Sample sizes were too small to appropriately run any tests of statistical significance. Data points were collected from each individual multiple times across the course of the study. For comparisons we conducted a multiple case study design examining each person's individual trajectory. The means and standard deviations above are for all available observations stratified by condition.

9 item patient self report measure of mood, where each item as rated on a 0 (no problem) to 3 (every day) scale. Total scores range from 0 - 27. Higher scores indicate increased depression, a score of 10 or greater is considered to be clinical depression. Data points were collected from each individual multiple times across the course of the study. For comparisons we conducted a multiple case study design examining each person's individual trajectory. The means and standard deviations reported are for all available observations stratified by condition.

Time frame: Patient participants will complete the PHQ-9 at baseline and weekly for 10 weeks, single value calculated averaging across all available observations.

Population: Sample sizes were too small to appropriately run any tests of statistical significance. Data points were collected from each individual multiple times across the course of the study. For comparisons we conducted a multiple case study design examining each person's individual trajectory. The means and standard deviations above are for all available observations stratified by condition.

This is a four item measure of intervention acceptability, where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all acceptable and 5 = very acceptable. Total scores are calculated taking the mean of the four items, reporting a range of 1 - 5.

Time frame: Clinician participants will complete the AIM at baseline and 3-month follow-up.

Population: Clinicians in the task sharing arm.

This is a four-item measure of intervention feasibility, where each item is rated on a 1-5 scale, with 1 = not at all acceptable and 5 = very acceptable. Higher scores indicate higher levels of feasibility. Total scores are calculated taking the mean of the four items, reporting a range of 1 - 5.

Time frame: Clinician participants will complete the FIM at baseline and 3-month follow-up

Population: Clinicians in the task sharing arm.

This is a four item measure of intervention appropriateness, where each item is rated on a 1-5, with 1 = not at all acceptable and 5 = very acceptable. High scores (min: 1, max:5) indicate higher levels of appropriateness. Total scores are calculated taking the mean of the four items, reporting a range of 1 - 5.

Time frame: Clinician participants will complete the IAM at baseline and 3-month follow-up

Population: Clinicians in the task sharing arm.

This is a 20 item scale, where each item rates clinician competencies in the delivery of PST, using a 0 (not competent) to 5 (expert level) scale. Higher scores indicate greater competence. IN this use case, we will be measuring the time to which clinicians receive their first score below 3 (average) on the PST Adherence Checklist

Time frame: We will rate nine therapy sessions per clinician over a six month period.

Population: No data displayed because outcome measure data was not collected therefore zero total participants analyzed.

This is a 10-item scale with each item ranked on a five point system of low to high usability. The scale score is calculated by adding the item scores and multiplying by 2.5. This is your total score and can range from 0 - 100. A score of 68 or better is considered to be above average usability. A score less than 68 is considered to be poor usability. In this study, a score of 80 or more is considered our cut off for high usability.

Time frame: Clinician participants will complete the SUS at baseline and 3-month follow-up

Population: Clinicians in the task sharing arm.

We will record the number of hours needed for clinicians in each group to be trained in their assigned intervention.

Time frame: Hours toward certification will be collected over a three month period.

Population: No data displayed because outcome measure data was not collected therefore zero total participants analyzed.

The User Burden Scale is a 26-item scale that assesses six domains of user burden: use, physical burden, time/social burdens, mental/emotional burden, privacy concerns and financial burdens. The scale is calculated item measure of perceived burden of use that covers 6 domains: difficulty of use, emotional burden, physical burden, time and social burden, financial burden and privacy. Each item is rated on a 04- scale, with a maximum score of 104 (high burden) and minimum score of 0 (low burden). We will compare the ratings of intervention burden between groups to determine if the new intervention is considered less burdensome than the traditional model.

Time frame: Clinician participants will complete the UBS at baseline and 3-month follow-up.

Population: Clinicians in the task sharing arm.