Search

Objective Routine outcome monitoring (ROM) of psychotherapy improves client outcomes and reduces premature terminations. Two ROM systems with the most empirical support are the OQ System (Lambert, 2010) and the Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS; Duncan, 2012; Miller et al., 2005). We evaluated if the global distress measures, the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS; PCOMS) and the Outcome Questionnaire–45.2 (OQ-45; OQ System) show similar outcome trajectories and rates of reliable and clinically significant change when completed by the same clients. Method Participants (N= 290) were clients from archived data collected in a training clinic for a psychology doctoral program in the western United States, who completed both the ORS and OQ-45 across treatment. Results Bi-variate correlations between the ORS and OQ-45 were highly correlated at the first session (r = -.73), and for later sessions linear and quadratic estimates were only moderately related (rs = -.31 to -.57). Statistically significantly more clients indicated both reliable change and clinically significant change on the ORS compared to the OQ-45. Discussion The results indicate that these measures are correlated but not interchangeable in relation to the conclusions they generate about treatment outcomes. Measurement tools should be carefully considered given the potential for different conclusions to be drawn regarding treatment progress and outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this clinical paper, the focus is on the use of questionnaires in family therapy practice. Psychotherapy research has indicated that the quality of the therapeutic relationship is the most robust predictor of therapeutic change. While the therapeutic relationship is even more important in family therapy than in individual therapy, it is also more complex. As will be illustrated in this paper, questionnaires can be useful in clinical practice to deal with the complex alliances in family therapy. In this paper, we will introduce two questionnaires: the Worries Questionnaire and the Dialogical Feedback Questionnaire. As illustrated in detailed case stories, we use these questionnaires in our practice as conversational tools rather than measuring instruments. They serve as the starting point for the therapist's reflection and for dialogues with family members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Issues Approach Key Findings Conclusions Routine outcome monitoring (ROM) involves regularly measuring clients' outcomes during treatment, which can then be fed back to clinicians and/or clients. In the mental health field, ROM and feedback have been shown to improve client outcomes; however, no systematic reviews have examined whether improvement is also seen in alcohol and other drug (AOD) treatment outcomes. This review examines whether feedback to clients and/or clinicians of ROM data in AOD treatment improves future client outcomes.This systematic review of papers identified in Medline, PsycInfo and Scopus examines the effect on client outcomes of feeding back ROM data to clinicians and/or clients in AOD treatment settings. Key client outcomes included substance use, treatment attendance and wellbeing measures.Ten studies were included—five randomised controlled trials and five pre–post within‐subjects designs. Six studies were deemed good‐ or fair‐quality. Of these six, three provided feedback to clinicians only, one to clients only, and two to both clients and clinicians. Only one of the six found feedback was associated with significant reductions in substance use and only among off‐track clients. Four of the six found feedback improved other outcomes, including treatment retention, global functioning, therapeutic alliance and mood symptoms.There may be some positive effects for clients of providing feedback to clients and/or clinicians; however, the small number of randomised trials and the heterogeneity of methods, outcome measures and findings, mean that firm conclusions cannot be drawn about the efficacy of feedback until larger randomised studies are conducted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Engaging communities in the design, implementation and monitoring of health services is critical for delivering high‐quality, person‐centred services that keep people living with HIV engaged in care. The USAID‐funded Integrated HIV/AIDS Project in Haut‐Katanga (IHAP‐HK) integrated an electronic client feedback tool into continuous quality improvement (CQI) processes. We aimed to demonstrate this system's impact on identifying and improving critical quality‐of‐care gaps. Methods: Through stakeholder and empathy mapping, IHAP‐HK co‐designed a service quality monitoring system—comprising anonymous exit interviews and ongoing monitoring through CQI cycles—with people living with HIV, facility‐based providers and other community stakeholders. IHAP‐HK trained 30 peer educators to administer oral, 10‐ to 15‐minute exit interviews with people living with HIV following clinic appointments, and record responses via the KoboToolbox application. IHAP‐HK shared client feedback with facility CQI teams and peer educators; identified quality‐of‐care gaps; discussed remediation steps for inclusion in facility‐level improvement plans; and monitored implementation of identified actions. IHAP‐HK tested this system at eight high‐volume facilities in Haut‐Katanga province from May 2021 through September 2022. Results: Findings from 4917 interviews highlighted wait time, stigma, service confidentiality and viral load (VL) turnaround time as key issues. Solutions implemented included: (1) using peer educators to conduct preparatory tasks (pre‐packaging and distributing refills; pulling client files) or escort clients to consultation rooms; (2) limiting personnel in consultation rooms during client appointments; (3) improving facility access cards; and (4) informing clients of VL results via telephone or home visits. Due to these actions, between initial (May 2021) and final interviews (September 2022), client satisfaction with wait times improved (76% to 100% reporting excellent or acceptable wait times); reported cases of stigma decreased (5% to 0%); service confidentiality improved (71% to 99%); and VL turnaround time decreased (45% to 2% informed of VL results 3 months after sample collection). Conclusions: Our results showed the feasibility and effectiveness of using an electronic client feedback tool embedded in CQI processes to collect client perspectives to improve service quality and advance client‐responsive care in the Democratic Republic of Congo. IHAP‐HK recommends further testing and expansion of this system to advance person‐centred health services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although studies have shown that client feedback can improve treatment outcome, little is known about which factors might possibly moderate the effects of such feedback. The present study investigated potential therapist variables that might influence whether frequent client feedback is effective, including the Big Five personality traits, internal/external feedback propensity and self‐efficacy. Data from two previous studies, a quasi‐experimental study and a randomized controlled trial, were combined. The sample consisted of 38 therapists and 843 clients (55.4% females, mean age = 42.05 years, SD = 11.75) from an outpatient mental health institution. The control condition consisted of cognitive‐behavioural therapies combined with low frequency monitoring of clients' symptoms. In the experimental condition, high‐intensity (i.e., frequent) client feedback as an add‐on to treatment as usual was provided. Outcomes were measured as adjusted post‐treatment symptom severity on the Symptom Checklist‐90 and drop out from treatment. The final model of the multilevel analyses showed that therapists with higher levels of self‐efficacy had poorer treatment outcomes, but when high‐intensity client feedback was provided, their effectiveness improved. Furthermore, higher self‐efficacy was associated with a higher estimation of therapists' own effectiveness, but therapists' self‐assessment of effectiveness was not correlated with their actual effectiveness. The results of this study might indicate that therapists with high levels of self‐efficacy benefit from client feedback because it can correct their biases. However, for therapists with low self‐efficacy, client feedback might be less beneficial, possibly because it can make them more insecure. These hypotheses need to be investigated in future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper explores the use of the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS) and the Session Rating Scale (SRS) in clinical practice through the perspective of the client. These assessment tools are designed to provide clinicians with direct feedback from clients about the client’s views on progress in therapy and their views on the quality of each session provided by the clinician. In this qualitative study, 13 clients were interviewed to explore their perceptions of the use of the ORS and SRS in their sessions. Results indicate generally highly favorable reactions to use of these assessment tools with some exceptions. There is a discussion of the implications of these findings for clinical practitioners who wish to use the ORS and SRS.

Abstract Introduction Engaging communities in the design, implementation and monitoring of health services is critical for delivering high‐quality, person‐centred services that keep people living with HIV engaged in care. The USAID‐funded Integrated HIV/AIDS Project in Haut‐Katanga (IHAP‐HK) integrated an electronic client feedback tool into continuous quality improvement (CQI) processes. We aimed to demonstrate this system's impact on identifying and improving critical quality‐of‐care gaps. Methods Through stakeholder and empathy mapping, IHAP‐HK co‐designed a service quality monitoring system—comprising anonymous exit interviews and ongoing monitoring through CQI cycles—with people living with HIV, facility‐based providers and other community stakeholders. IHAP‐HK trained 30 peer educators to administer oral, 10‐ to 15‐minute exit interviews with people living with HIV following clinic appointments, and record responses via the KoboToolbox application. IHAP‐HK shared client feedback with facility CQI teams and peer educators; identified quality‐of‐care gaps; discussed remediation steps for inclusion in facility‐level improvement plans; and monitored implementation of identified actions. IHAP‐HK tested this system at eight high‐volume facilities in Haut‐Katanga province from May 2021 through September 2022. Results Findings from 4917 interviews highlighted wait time, stigma, service confidentiality and viral load (VL) turnaround time as key issues. Solutions implemented included: (1) using peer educators to conduct preparatory tasks (pre‐packaging and distributing refills; pulling client files) or escort clients to consultation rooms; (2) limiting personnel in consultation rooms during client appointments; (3) improving facility access cards; and (4) informing clients of VL results via telephone or home visits. Due to these actions, between initial (May 2021) and final interviews (September 2022), client satisfaction with wait times improved (76% to 100% reporting excellent or acceptable wait times); reported cases of stigma decreased (5% to 0%); service confidentiality improved (71% to 99%); and VL turnaround time decreased (45% to 2% informed of VL results 3 months after sample collection). Conclusions Our results showed the feasibility and effectiveness of using an electronic client feedback tool embedded in CQI processes to collect client perspectives to improve service quality and advance client‐responsive care in the Democratic Republic of Congo. IHAP‐HK recommends further testing and expansion of this system to advance person‐centred health services.

The Session Rating Scale (SRS) is a widely used clinical tool to measure the client-therapist working alliance. This study investigated the psychometric properties, the cut-off value, and longitudinal invariance of the SRS in a Chinese clinical population. The analyses were conducted separately in a sample of college students in counseling (n = 403) and in a sample of clients in outpatient therapy (n = 246). Participants completed the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS) before each session and the SRS after each session. To test concurrent validity, a subset of participants also completed the Working Alliance Questionnaire at the end of each session. In both samples, the results indicated high internal consistency (α =.92 ~ 0.97) and adequate test-retest reliability over four sessions (university sample: r =.69 ~.78; outpatient sample: r =.52 ~.66). Construct validity was evident in a one-factor structure, and concurrent validity was established based on a strong correlation with the Working Alliance Questionnaire (r =.64 ~.70). In addition, regression analysis indicated that early alliance ratings (at the third session) on the SRS predicted post-ORS scores. The cut-off value for the SRS in the Chinese context was established as 34. The longitudinal measurement invariance was tested by a longitudinal confirmatory factor analysis. Full scalar invariance of the SRS was supported. This study supported the use of the SRS in China and that a single-factor solution stayed stable over time, providing preliminary evidence for subsequent mean comparisons. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: We investigated the value of systematic client feedback in youth mental health and addiction care. In the present study, we examined whether a client feedback intervention would result in improved therapeutic alliance and treatment outcomes. Methods: Two hundred and four adolescents participated in the study using a – non-randomized – between-group A/B design. In the first study group, 127 patients were offered 4 months of treatment as usual (TAU), and in the second study group, 77 patients received the client feedback intervention as an add-on to TAU during 4 months. Results: Youths who received systematic client feedback in addition to TAU did not show better treatment outcomes or better alliance ratings after 4 months than youths receiving TAU only. Sensitivity analyses, in which we compared the more adherent patients of the second study group with patients receiving TAU, did not show significant beneficial effects of client feedback either. Also, the client feedback intervention did not result in lower rates of early treatment drop-out. Discussion/Conclusion: Our results cautiously suggest that client feedback does not have incremental effects on alliance and the treatment outcome for youth in mental health and addiction treatment. Moreover, our study highlights the challenges of implementing client feedback in clinical practice and the need for additional research addressing these challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]