Assessing provider perceptions of training: Initial evaluation of the Acceptability, Feasibility, and Appropriateness Scale

Abstract

There is a well-documented gap between research and practice in the treatment of mental health problems. One promising approach to bridging this gap is training community-based providers in evidence-based practices (EBPs). However, a paucity of valid, reliable measures to assess a range of outcomes of such trainings impedes our ability to evaluate and improve training toward this end. The current study examined the factor structure of the Acceptability, Feasibility, Appropriateness Scale (AFAS), a provider-report measure that assesses three perceptual implementation outcomes of trainings that may be leading indicators of training success (i.e., acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness). Providers who attended half-day EBP trainings for common mental health problems reported on the acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness of these trainings using the AFAS ( N = 298). Confirmatory factor analysis indicates good fit to the hypothesized three-factor structure (RMSEA = .058, CFI = .990, TLI = .987). Acceptability, feasibility, and appropriateness were three distinct but related constructs. Cronbach's alpha ranged from .86 to .91, indicating acceptable internal consistency for the three subscales. Acceptability and feasibility, but not appropriateness, scores varied between workshops, though variability across workshops was generally limited. This initial evaluation of the AFAS is in line with recent efforts to enhance psychometric reporting practices for implementation outcome measures and provides future directions for further development and refinement of the AFAS. Plain Language Summary Clinician training in evidence-based practices is often used to increase implementation of evidence-based practices in mental health service settings. However, one barrier to evaluating the success of clinician trainings is the lack of measures that reliably and accurately assess clinician training outcomes. This study was the initial evaluation of the Acceptability, Feasibility, Appropriateness Scale (AFAS), a measure that assesses the immediate outcomes of clinician trainings. This study found some evidence supporting the AFAS reliability and its three subscales. With additional item refinement and psychometric testing, the AFAS could become a useful measure of a training's immediate impact on providers.