Including routine client feedback can increase the effectiveness of mental health interventions for children, especially when implemented as intended. Rate of implementation, or dose, of such feedback interventions has been shown to moderate results in some studies. Variation in implementation and use of client feedback may also contribute to the mixed results observed within the feedback literature. This study evaluates dose-response associations of client feedback using a novel Measurement Feedback System (MFS) within an indicated group intervention. The primary aim was to determine whether the rate of MFS implementation predicts symptom reduction in anxiety and depression among school-aged children. The secondary aim was to assess whether the rate of MFS implementation influences children\'s satisfaction with the group intervention or their dropout rates. Data were collected via a randomized factorial study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT04263558) across 58 primary schools in Norway. Children aged 8 to 12 years (N = 701) participated in a group-based, transdiagnostic intervention targeting elevated symptoms of anxiety or depression. Half of the child groups also received the feedback intervention using the MittEcho MFS. Group leaders (N = 83), recruited locally, facilitated the interventions. The MFS dose was measured using the Implementation Index, which combines the use of MFS by both children and providers (group leaders) into a single dose variable. Results showed no significant additional effect of dose of MFS on change in depression or anxiety scores, on user satisfaction with the intervention or on intervention dropout. The discussion addresses potential reasons for these non-significant findings and implications for MFS implementation in preventive, group-based interventions in school settings.

Outcome of acquired brain injury (ABI) and the potential for neurorehabilitation are subject to distinct heterogeneity between patients. Limited knowledge of the complex constellation of determinants at play interferes with the possibility to deploy precision medicine in neurorehabilitation. Measurement Feedback Systems (MFS) structure clinical data collection and deliver the measurement results as feedback to clinicians, thereby facilitating progress monitoring, promoting balanced patient-centered discussion and shared decision making. Accumulation of clinical data in the MFS also enables data-driven precision rehabilitation medicine. This article describes the development and implementation of a MFS for neurorehabilitation after ABI. The MFS consists of specialized measurement tracks which are developed together with representatives of each discipline in the multidisciplinary team. The MFS is built into a digital platform that automatically distributes measurements among clinicians, at predetermined time points during the inpatient treatment, outpatient treatment and follow-up. The results of all measurements are visualized in individual patient dashboards that are accessible for all clinicians involved in treatment. Since step-wise implementation, 124 patients have been registered on the MFS platform so far, providing an average of more than 200 new measurements per week. Currently, more than 15,000 clinical measurements are captured in the MFS. The current overall completion rate of measurements is 86,4%. This study shows that structured clinical assessment and feedback is feasible in the context of neurorehabilitation after severe ABI. The future directions are discussed for MFS data in our Health Intelligence Program, which aims at periodic care evaluation and the transition of neurorehabilitation care towards precision medicine.

A randomized experiment was conducted in two outpatient clinics evaluating a measurement feedback system called contextualized feedback systems. The clinicians of 257 Youth 11-18 received feedback on progress in mental health symptoms and functioning either every 6 months or as soon as the youth\'s, clinician\'s or caregiver\'s data were entered into the system. The ITT analysis showed that only one of the two participating clinics (Clinic R) had an enhanced outcome because of feedback, and only for the clinicians\' ratings of youth symptom severity on the SFSS. A dose-response effect was found only for Clinic R for both the client and clinician ratings. Implementation analyses showed that Clinic R had better implementation of the feedback intervention. Clinicians\' questionnaire completion rate and feedback viewing at Clinic R were 50 % higher than clinicians at Clinic U. The discussion focused on the differences in implementation at each site and how these differences may have contributed to the different outcomes of the experiment.