Comparison of self- versus clinician-administered GAIN-Q3 MI

Background Substance abuse services treatment providers are challenged in making decisions regarding evidence-based assessment tools and processes, given the many options available in terms of length/coverage and administration options, including clinician versus self-administration. In Ontario, Canada, we have pilot-tested an assessment tool designed for clinician administration (the GAIN Q3-MI), with the aim being to replace a suite of tools suitable for self-completion. Feedback from the agencies involved in the pilot testing raised concerns about the impact on agency waiting lists if the treatment network was to move to a clinician-administered option. The present project was a small-scale experiment of face-toface versus self-administration of the GAIN tool, intended to assess differences in data quality and completeness, staff feedback on pros and cons, and client feedback on acceptability of the alternative methods of administration.