The effects of pretreatment orientations on the utilization of treatment by Spanish-speaking Hispanics, bilingual Hispanics and non-Hispanics in treatment at a child guidance center

Pretreatment Orientations were provided to children and families (N = 295) seeking services at a child guidance center. They were contrasted to a comparison group (N = 247) of children and families also seeking services at the same center. The Pretreatment Orientations were designed to screen out rejectors of treatment, and prepare eventual clients by educating them about the services provided by the center. It was initially hypothesized that Spanish speaking Hispanics and Bilingual Hispanics would be less likely to engage in outpatient services, compared to Non-Hispanics. This belief was related to the theories that Hispanics would reject professional services, in preference for culturally sanctioned resources, and that Hispanics had less access to professional services because of organizational barriers. The hypothesis was not supported by the study, with results indicating that Hispanics (Bilingual and Spanish speaking) were as likely to initially engage in services as Non-Hispanics. It was also hypothesized that clients who received a Pretreatment Orientation would display improved utilization of services, evidenced by improved attendance and being less likely to reject services or drop out of treatment prematurely. Results indicated that clients displayed improved continuance in treatment (more cases terminated therapy in mutual agreement with their therapists), but there was no significant improvement in attendance measures. It is speculated that attendance measures are not accurate indicators of client involvement in treatment for low income populations. An additional hypothesis indicated that the time prospective clients spent on a waiting list would be decreased, because of the Orientation\u27s ability to screen out those who would eventually reject services. This hypothesis was not supported by the data. Time on a waiting list was not decreased. Results indicated that clients spent more time with therapists (more sessions per case), negating any potential benefit derived from screening out potential rejectors of treatment