. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Nov 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Subst Use Addict Treat. 2024 Jul 1;166:209445. doi: 10.1016/j.josat.2024.209445

Table 2.

Quantitative Associations Between Provider Survey Items and Aggregate Sustainment Ratings

		PRESS Aggregate Score
			95% CI
Alignment Type(s)	Model #: Predictor Item	B (SE)	LL	UL	p value	Effect Size

Innovation-Provider and Internal Systems Misalignment	Model 1: Finding time to prepare for A-CRA is difficult	−.71 (.39)	−1.50	.07	.07	.07
Innovation-Provider and Internal Systems Misalignment	Model 2: Recruiting staff to work on A-CRA is difficult	−.96 (.35)	−1.67	−.26	.008^*	.14

Internal Systems Misalignment	Model 3: Financing A-CRA was difficult	−.74 (.41)	−1.56	.08	.08	.07
Internal Systems Misalignment	Model 4: Our agency has done a good job of finding adequate funding for evidence-based practices	1.69 (.41)	.85	2.52	<.001^*	.27

Note. PRESS Aggregate Score = Provider REport of Sustainment Scale average score aggregated at the treatment organization level; CI = confidence interval; LL = lower limit; UL = upper limit;

p < .05