AnalyzingOutcomeAssessmentsOutcomeQuestionnaire452 Week 7 Submission Essay

Submitted By BerryJeanne1
Words: 1061
Pages: 5

Analyzing Outcome Assessments: Outcome Questionnaire 45.2
Jean Berry
Walden University

Analyzing Outcome Assessments: Outcome Questionnaire 45.2

The rigorous mandates of Insurance companies, HMO’s and Doctor-Hospital networks necessitate that counselor measure the efficacy of the services provided (Lambert & Hawkins, 2004). With intent and purpose to respond to such needs, the writers who developed the Outcome Questionnaire 45.2 (OQ-45.2) established a 45 piece assessment as a reference point and continuing instrumental tool aiding professionals in the psychological field to establish and assess treatment progress (Lambert, Gregersen, & Burlingame, 2005). The OQ-45.2 is extensively used in the United States as well as independent regions for both hospital and office care in mental health (Lambert, Gregersen & Burlingam, 2005). This instrument consists of three factors allowing for the assessment of Symptom Distress, Interpersonal Relations, and Social Role performance (Boswell, White, Sims, Harrist, & Romans, 2013).
Assessment of the Outcome Questionnaire 45.2
Evidence of Validity
Concurrent validity was determined using ten instruments separate from the Outcome Questionnaire 45.2; this determination included the Beck Depression Inventory; which all measured equal or parallel constructs (Hanson & Merker, 2005). Even though, the corresponding three subscale coefficients fell between .44 and .92, and for the entire result being.54 to .88. These results bring lacking and incomplete indication of the general validity of the OQ-45.2 (Hanson & Merker, 2005). Connections amongst the resulting scores of the Outcome Questionnaire-45.2 along with the scores from GAF Score and Structured Clinical Interviews for DSM-IV Disorders provided co-existing validity (Hanson & Merker, 2005). The attained marks respectively correlated at .78 and .87.
In order to determine the reliability, two samples were used. The first sample was comprised 157 college students, consisting of 103 females and 54 males, (Hanson & Merker, 2005). A second assemblage used numbering 298 people from an employee assistance program, from hospitals and clinics (Hanson & Merker, 2005). No data was provided on gender, age, or ethnic backgrounds of the second group used. In the sample, internal consistency estimates fell between .70 and .93. Using three-week periods between testing’s gave approximations of test-retest reliability that fell between .78 and .84. In a separate sample, that used periods of ten weeks between studies; coefficients were between .82 in pre-test and .66 in the post-test (Pfeiffer, 2005). The standard inaccuracy of measurement was .93 (Pfeiffer, 2005).
The OQ-45.2 measures the functioning of a client’s life through a 45 item assessment using three subscales. The subscales consist of Symptom Distress (SD), Interpersonal Relations (IR), and Social Role (SR) (Pfeiffer, 2005). The over-all sum is a wide-ranging suggestion of psychological well-being (Hanson & Merker, 2005). The SD subscale covers 25 objects, which address independent trouble related to change, temper and anxiety complaints, addiction issues, and stress-related maladies (Hanson & Merker, 2005). The interpersonal relations (IR) subscales addresses personal satisfaction in relationships using eleven items (Hanson & Merker, 2005). There are nine items encompassed in the SR subscale addressing the measurement of difficulty, unhappiness, familial conflict, career issues, and societal positions (Pfeiffer, 2005). The OQ-45.2 provides scoring over-all as well as scores for the individual subscales. Higher scores insinuate disorder is prevalent in a subscale (Pfeiffer, 2005).
The advantages of this outcome assessment include its briefness, simple administration, ease of scoring and interpretation as well as its adaptability in both clinical and research settings. It is a valuable assessment that is low in cost, succinct, track-able as well as flexible