Efficacy of immediate patient feedback in emergency psychiatry: a randomized controlled trial in a crisis intervention & brief therapy team

BMC Psychiatry

Jack Dekker²  Jaap Peen³  Irene Visch³  Robert Schoevers¹  Rien Van³  Suzy Schipper³  Flip Jan van Oenen³ 

[1] Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen, Hanzeplein 1, 9713 Groningen, GZ, The Netherlands;Klinische Psychologie Vrije Universiteit van Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1105, 1081 Amsterdam, HV, The Netherlands;Arkin, Klaprozenweg 111, 1033 Amsterdam, NN, The Netherlands

关键词: Outcome monitoring;    Efficacy;    Crisis intervention;    Randomized controlled trial;    Patient feedback;   

Others  :  1123865
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-244X-13-331

 received in 2012-08-07, accepted in 2013-11-11,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

This study looks at the effect of immediate session-by-session feedback using short questionnaires for evaluating outcome of and alliance in the therapy. Research data strongly suggests that using this feedback informed treatment improves the outcome of therapy. However, until now, this method of Miller and Duncan has only been examined in clients (generally students) with mild problems and in partner counselling. The question addressed by this study is whether immediate feedback is also effective when applied during crisis intervention and subsequent brief therapy in a psychiatric patient population in emergency situations. It also looks at whether 'feedback-informed treatment' affects the quality of the alliance.

Method/Design

To test the hypotheses, all patients seeking help from the Crisis Intervention & Brief Therapy Team over a two-year period will be followed throughout their treatment up to a maximum of six months and a follow-up period of three months after ending the treatment. Patients are randomly assigned to two conditions: treatment without feedback and treatment with immediate feedback for each session. The therapists all operate in both conditions and so they deliver both treatments. An estimated total of 180 patients, aged 18 years and over, will be included in the study.

Discussion

The aim of this study is to make clear whether, and to what extent, systematic feedback from the patient in this target group during therapy determines the course and outcomes of therapy. We also look at whether, and to what extent, the quality of the alliance and the motivation of the person delivering treatment with respect to the instruments play a role.

Trial registration

NTR3168

【 授权许可】

   
2013 van Oenen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Cuijpers P, van Straten A, Andersson G, van Oppen P: Psychotherapy for depression in adults: a meta-analysis of comparative outcome studies. J Consult Clin Psychol 2008, 76:909-922.
• [2]Imel ZE, Wampold BE, Miller SD, Fleming RR: Distinctions without a difference: direct comparisons of psychotherapies for alcohol use disorders. Psychol Addict Behav 2008, 22:533-543.
• [3]Luborsky L, Singer B, Luborsky L: Comparative studies of psychotherapies: Is it true that" everyone has won and all must have prizes"? Arch Gen Psychiatry 1975, 32:995-1008.
• [4]Miller S, Wampold B, Varhely K: Direct comparisons of treatment modalities for youth disorders: A meta-analysis. Psychother Res 2008, 18:5-14.
• [5]Rosenzweig S: Some implicit common factors in diverse methods of psychotherapy. Am J Orthopsychiatry 1936, 6:412-415.
• [6]Smith ML, Glass GV: Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies. Am Psychologist 1977, 32:752-760.
• [7]Wampold BE, Mondin GW, Moody M, Stich F, Benson K, Ahn H: A meta-analysis of outcome studies comparing bona fide psychotherapies: Empiricially," all must have prizes.". Psycholo Bull 1997, 122:203-215.
• [8]Howard KI, Moras K, Brill PL, Martinovich Z, Lutz W: Evaluation of psychotherapy: Efficacy, effectiveness, and patient progress. Am Psychologist 1996, 51:1059-1064.
• [9]Lambert M: Presidential address: What we have learned from a decade of research aimed at improving psychotherapy outcome in routine care. Psychother Res 2007, 17:1-14.
• [10]Lueger RJ, Howard KI, Martinovich Z, Lutz W, Anderson EE, Grissom G: Assessing treatment progress of individual patients using expected treatment response models. J Consult Clin Psychol 2001, 69:150-158.
• [11]Miller SD: Feedback informed treatment: Improving outcome with male patients one man at a time. In Doing psychotherapy with Men: Practicing ethical psychotherapy and counselling with men. Edited by Ashley JA. St. Peters: The Australian Institute of male Health and Studies; 2011:194-207.
• [12]Brown J, Dreis S, Nace DK: What really makes a difference in psychotherapy outcome? Why does managed care want to know? In The Heart and Soul of Change: What Works in Therapy. Edited by Hubble MA, Duncan BL, Miller SD. Washington DC: American Psychological Association; 1999:389-406.
• [13]Duncan BL, Miller SD, Wampold BE, Hubble MA: The heart and soul of change: Delivering what works in therapy. Washington DC: American Psychological Association; 2010.
• [14]Howard KI, Lueger RJ, Maling MS, Martinovich Z: A phase model of psychotherapy outcome: Causal mediation of change. J Consult Clin Psychol 1993, 61:678-685.
• [15]Lambert MJ, Whipple JL, Smart DW, Vermeersch DA, Nielsen SL: The effects of providing therapists with feedback on patient progress during psychotherapy: Are outcomes enhanced? Psychother Res 2001, 11:49-68.
• [16]Whipple JL, Lambert MJ, Vermeersch DA, Smart DW, Nielsen SL, Hawkins EJ: Improving the effects of psychotherapy: The use of early identification of treatment and problem-solving strategies in routine practice. J Couns Psychol 2003, 50:59-68.
• [17]Haas E, Hill RD, Lambert MJ, Morrell B: Do early responders to psychotherapy maintain treatment gains? J Clin Psychol 2002, 58:1157-1172.
• [18]Lutz W, Martinovich Z, Howard KI: Patient profiling: An application of random coefficient regression models to depicting the response of a patient to outpatient psychotherapy. J Consult Clin Psychol 1999, 67:571-577.
• [19]Garfield SL: Research on client variables in psychotherapy. In Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change. Edited by Bergin A, Garfield SL. London: John Wiley & Sons; 1994:190-228.
• [20]Hannan C, Lambert MJ, Harmon C, Nielsen SL, Smart DW, Shimokawa K, et al.: A lab test and algorithms for identifying clients at risk for treatment failure. J Clin Psychol 2005, 61:155-163.
• [21]Lutz W, Stulz N, K+Âck K: Patterns of early change and their relationship to outcome and follow-up among patients with major depressive disorders. J Affect Disord 2009, 118:60-68.
• [22]Lambert MJ, Whipple JL, Hawkins EJ, Vermeersch DA, Nielsen SL, Smart DW: Is it Time for Clinicians to Routinely Track Patient Outcome? A meta-analysis. Clin Psychol: Sci Pract 2003, 10:288-301.
• [23]Lambert MJ, Harmon C, Slade K, Whipple JL, Hawkins EJ: Providing feedback to psychotherapists on their patients' progress: clinical results and practice suggestions. J Clin Psychol 2005, 61:165-174.
• [24]Knaup C, Koesters M, Schoefer D, Becker T, Puschner B: Effect of feedback of treatment outcome in specialist mental healthcare: meta-analysis. Br J Psychiatry 2009, 195:15-22.
• [25]Kd J: Beproefd-Monitoren van behandelresultaten: betere gezondheidsuitkomsten of kortere behandelduur? MGV 2009, 64:1119-1121.
• [26]Duncan BL, Miller SD, Sparks JA, Claud DA, Reynolds LR, Brown J, et al.: The Session Rating Scale: Preliminary psychometric properties of a 'working' alliance measure. J Brief Ther 2003, 3:3-12.
• [27]Miller SD, Duncan BL, Brown J, Sparks JA, Claud DA: The outcome rating scale: A preliminary study of the reliability, validity, and feasibility of a brief visual analog measure. J Brief Ther 2003, 2:91-100.
• [28]Lambert MJ, Shimokawa K: Collecting client feedback. Psychotherapy 2011, 48:72-79.
• [29]Reese RJ, Norsworthy LA, Rowlands SR: Does a continuous feedback system improve psychotherapy outcome? Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice. Training 2009, 46:418-431.
• [30]Reese RJ, Toland MD, Slone NC, Norsworthy LA: Effect of client feedback on couple psychotherapy outcomes. Psychother Theory Res Pract Train 2010, 47:616-630.
• [31]Anker MG, Duncan BL, Sparks JA: Using client feedback to improve couple therapy outcomes: A randomized clinical trial in a naturalistic setting. J Consult Clin Psychol 2009, 77:693-704.
• [32]Harmon SC, Lambert MJ, Smart DM, Hawkins E, Nielsen SL, Slade K, et al.: Enhancing outcome for potential treatment failures: Therapist -client feedback and clinical support tools. Psychother Res 2007, 17:379-392.
• [33]Hawkins EJ, Lambert MJ, Vermeersch DA, Slade KL, Tuttle KC: The therapeutic effects of providing patient progress information to therapists and patients. Psychother Res 2004, 14:308-327.
• [34]Jong K, van Sluis P, Nugter MA, Heiser WJ, Spinhoven P: Understanding the differential impact of outcome monitoring: Therapist variables that moderate feedback effects in a randomized clinical trial. Psychother Res 2012, 22:464-474.
• [35]Jong K, Timman R, Roijen Lv H, Vermeulen P, Kooiman K, Passchier J, et al.: The effect of outcome monitoring feedback to clinicans and patients in outpatient mental health: randomized controlled trial. In A chance for change: building an outcome monitoring feedback system for outpatient mental health care. Edited by Jong K. Leiden: Clinical, Health and Neuropsychology, Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Leiden University; 2012.
• [36]Horvath AO, Del Re AC, Fluckiger C, Symonds D: Alliance in individual psychotherapy. In Relationships that work. Edited by Norcross JC. New York: Oxford University Press; 2011:25-69.
• [37]Crits-Christoph P, Gibbons MBC, Hamilton J, Ring-Kurtz S, Gallop R: The dependability of alliance assessments: The allianceΓÇôoutcome correlation is larger than you might think. J Consult Clin Psychol 2011, 79:267-278.
• [38]Horvath AO, Symonds BD: Relation between working alliance and outcome in psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. J Couns Psychol 1991, 38:139-149.
• [39]Hafkenscheid A: Routine Process Monitoring: ervaringen uit de praktijk. Tijdschrift Cli+½ntgerichte Psychotherapie 2008, 46:327-345.
• [40]Kazdin AE, Holland L, Crowley M: Family experience of barriers to treatment and premature termination from child therapy. J Consult Clin Psychol 1997, 65:453-463.
• [41]Anker MG, Owen J, Duncan BL, Sparks JA: The alliance in couple therapy: Partner influence, early change, and alliance patterns in a naturalistic sample. J Consult Clin Psychol 2010, 78:635-645.
• [42]Baldwin SA, Wampold BE, Imel ZE: Untangling the alliance-outcome correlation: Exploring the relative importance of therapist and patient variability in the alliance. J Consult Clin Psychol 2007, 75:842-852.
• [43]Watson JC, Schein J, McMullen E: An examination of clients' in-session changes and their relationship to the working alliance and outcome. Psychother Res 2010, 20:224-233.
• [44]Miller SD, Duncan BL, Brown J, Sorrell R, Chalk MB: Using formal client feedback to improve retention and outcome: Making ongoing, real-time assessment feasible. J Brief Ther 2006, 5:5-22.
• [45]Slade K, Lambert MJ, Harmon SC, Smart DW, Bailey R: Improving psychotherapy outcome: The use of immediate electronic feedback and revised clinical support tools. Clin Psychol Psychother 2008, 15:287-303.
• [46]Flückigir C, Grosse Holtforth M, Znoj HJ, Caspar F, Wampold BE: Is the relation between early post-session reports and treatment outcome an epiphenomenon of intake distress and early response? A multi-predictor analysis in outpatient psychotherapy. Psychother Res 2013, 23:1-13.
• [47]Oenen FJv, Bernardt C: Post Lvd: Praktijdboek crisisinterventie: de kunst van het intervenieren in moeilijke behandelsituaties in de spoedeisende psychiatrie en psychotherapie. Utrecht: de Tijdstroom; 2007.
• [48]Mulder CL, Hemert A: Evidentie en wetenschappelijke onderbouwing. In Handboek spoedeisende psychiatrie. Edited by Achilles RA, Beerthuis RJ, van Ewijk WM. Amsterdam: Benecke; 2011:37-45.
• [49]Fergusson D, Aaron SD, Guyatt G, H+®bert P: Post-randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis. BMJ 2002, 325:652-654.
• [50]Sparks JA, Miller SD, Bohanske RT, Claud DA: Giving youth a voice: A preliminary study of the reliability and validity of a brief outcome measure for children, adolescents, and caretakers. J Brief Ther 2006, 5:66-82.
• [51]Bringhurst DL, Watson CW, Miller SD, Duncan BL: The reliability and validity of the Outcome Rating Scale: A replication study of a brief clinical measure. J Brief Ther 2006, 5:23-30.
• [52]Hafkenscheid A, Duncan BL, Miller SD: The outcome and session rating scales. A cross-cultural examination of the psychometric properties of the Dutch translation. J Brief Ther 2010, 7:1-12.
• [53]Hafkenscheid A: De Outcome rating scale (ORS) en de Session rating scale (SRS). Tijdschrift voor psychotherapie 2010, 36:394-403.
• [54]Oenen FJv: Het is mijn vriend die mij mijn fouten toont'. Cliëntfeedback als leidraad voor behandeling. MGV-Maandblad Geestelijke Volksgezondheid 2011, 66:120-135.
• [55]Lambert MJ, Burlingame GM, Umphress V, Hansen NB, Vermeersch DA, Clouse GC, et al.: The reliability and validity of the Outcome Questionnaire. Clin Psychol Psychother 1996, 3:249-258.
• [56]Flückigir C, Del Re AC, Wampold BE, Znoj H, Caspar F, J+Ârg U: Valuing clients' perspective and the effects on the therapeutic alliance: A randomized controlled study of an adjunctive instruction. J Couns Psychol 2012, 59:18.
• [57]De Beurs E, Zitman FG: De Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI). De betrouwbaarheid en validiteit van een handzaam alternatief voor de SCL-90. Maandblad Geestelijke Volksgezondheid 2006, 61:120-141.
• [58]Luborsky L, Barber JP, Siqueland L, Johnson S, Frank A, Najavits LM, et al.: The revised Helping Alliance questionnaire (HAq-II): psychometric properties. J Psychother Pract Res 1996, 5:260-271.
• [59]Hendriksen M, Van R, Schoevers R, Oudejans S, Peen J, Dekker J: Towards further predictive and conceptualization of the Helping alliance Questionnaire. Psychother Res 2010, 20:589-598.
• [60]Guy W: Clinical global impression scale. The ECDEU Assessment Manual for Psychopharmacology-Revised Volume DHEW Publ No ADM 76 1976, 338:218-222.
• [61]Zaider TI, Heimberg RG, Fresco DM, Schneier FR, Liebowitz MR: Evaluation of the clinical global impression scale among individuals with social anxiety disorder. Psychol Med 2003, 33:611-622.
• [62]Katz R, Shaw BF, Vallis TM, Kaiser AS, et al.: The assessment of severity and symptom patterns in depression. In Handbook of depression. Edited by Gotlid IH, Hammen CL. New York: Guilford Press; 1995:61-85.
• [63]Wampold BE: The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. [s.l.]: Routledge; 2001.
• [64]Pinsof WM, Zinbarg RE, Lebow JL, Knobloch-Fedders LM, Durbin E, Chambers A, et al.: Laying the foundation for progress research in family, couple, and individual therapy: The development and psychometric features of the initial Systemic Therapy Inventory of Change. Psychother Res 2009, 19:143-156.