Search

Personalizing psychotherapy can be challenging within standardized group Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT), in which sessions are structured according to a protocol and must accommodate the needs and preferences of multiple patients. In the current study, we aimed to examine patients' and therapists' experiences of standardized group CBT and identify their perceptions of different patient needs. Furthermore, we explored how these needs can inform possible content of add-on interventions for patients who are not improving as expected during group CBT.We conducted 21 individual in-depth interviews with patients with depression and their therapists about their experiences during group CBT with Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM) and feedback. Interviews were analyzed by using a hermeneutic-phenomenological thematic analysis. Five themes, representing different patient needs, were identified: (1) Individual attention, (2) Psychological exploration, (3) A focus on the patient's life outside of therapy, (4) Extended assessment, and (5) Agreement on therapeutic tasks.The study supports that "one size does not fit all" when it comes to psychotherapy. Patients have varying needs when they are not making progress in therapy, and these needs, when unmet, can negatively impact the overall experience of group CBT. By acknowledging the unique needs of each patient and providing additional individual sessions as necessary, we can move towards a more personalized approach that maximizes the benefits of group psychotherapy., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

We face increasing demand for greater access to effective routine mental health services, including telehealth. However, treatment outcomes in routine clinical practice are only about half the size of those reported in controlled trials. Progress feedback, defined as the ongoing monitoring of patients' treatment response with standardized measures, is an evidence-based practice that continues to be under-utilized in routine care. The aim of the current review is to provide a summary of the current evidence base for the use of progress feedback, its mechanisms of action and considerations for successful implementation. We reviewed ten available meta-analyses, which report small to medium overall effect sizes. The results suggest that adding feedback to a wide range of psychological and psychiatric interventions (ranging from primary care to hospitalization and crisis care) tends to enhance the effectiveness of these interventions. The strongest evidence is for patients with common mental health problems compared to those with very severe disorders. Effect sizes for not-on-track cases, a subgroup of cases that are not progressing well, are found to be somewhat stronger, especially when clinical support tools are added to the feedback. Systematic reviews and recent studies suggest potential mechanisms of action for progress feedback include focusing the clinician's attention, altering clinician expectations, providing new information, and enhancing patient-centered communication. Promising approaches to strengthen progress feedback interventions include advanced systems with signaling technology, clinical problem-solving tools, and a broader spectrum of outcome and progress measures. An overview of methodological and implementation challenges is provided, as well as suggestions for addressing these issues in future studies. We conclude that while feedback has modest effects, it is a small and affordable intervention that can potentially improve outcomes in psychological interventions. Further research into mechanisms of action and effective implementation strategies is needed., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Intended for researchers and clinical leaders, this article suggests that embedded program evaluation is a good fit with the desired features of practice-oriented research. The systematic nature of evaluation that is built into the operational workflow of a practice setting may increase the diversity of methods available to explore processes and outcomes of interest. We propose a novel conceptual framework that uses a human-centered systems lens to foster such embedded evaluation in clinical routine. This approach emphasizes the evaluator-practitioner partnership to build confidence in the bi-directional learning of practice-based evidence with evidence-based practice. The iterative cycles inherent to design thinking are aimed at developing better evaluation questions. The attention to structure and context inherent to systems thinking is intended to support meaningful perspectives in the naturally complex world of health care. Importantly, the combined human-centered systems lens can create greater awareness of the influence of individual and systemic biases that exist in any endeavor or institution that involves people. Recommended tools and strategies include systems mapping, program theory development, and visual facilitation using a logic model to represent the complexity of mental health treatment for communication, shared understanding, and connection to the broader evidence base. To illustrate elements of the proposed conceptual framework, two case examples are drawn from routine outcome monitoring (ROM) and progress feedback. We conclude with questions for future collaboration and research that may strengthen the partnership of evaluators and practitioners as a community of learners in service of local and system-level improvement., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

In the past decade, there has been an increase in research related to the routine collection and active use of standardized patient data in psychotherapy. Research has increasingly focused on personalization of care to patients, clinical skills and interventions that modulate treatment outcomes, and implementation strategies, all of which appear to enhance the beneficial effects of ROM and feedback. In this article, we summarize trends and recent advances in the research on this topic and identify several essential directions for the field in the short to medium term. We anticipate a broadening of research from the focus on average effects to greater specificity around what kinds of feedback, provided at what time, to which individuals, in what settings, are most beneficial. We also propose that the field needs to focus on issues of health equity, ensuring that ROM can be a vehicle for increased wellbeing for those who need it most. The complexity of mental healthcare systems means that there may be multiple viable measurement solutions with varying costs and benefits to diverse stakeholders in different treatment contexts, and research is needed to identify the most influential components in each of these contexts., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background: Progress feedback, also known as measurement-based care (MBC), is the routine collection of patient-reported measures to monitor treatment progress and inform clinical decision-making. Although a key ingredient to improving mental health care, sustained use of progress feedback is poor. Integration into everyday workflow is challenging, impacted by a complex interrelated set of factors across patient, clinician, organizational, and health system levels. This study describes the development of a qualitative coding scheme for progress feedback implementation that accounts for the dynamic nature of barriers and facilitators across multiple levels of use in mental health settings. Such a coding scheme may help promote a common language for researchers and implementers to better identify barriers that need to be addressed, as well as facilitators that could be supported in different settings and contexts., Methods: Clinical staff, managers, and leaders from two Dutch, three Norwegian, and four mental health organizations in the USA participated in semi-structured interviews on how intra- and extra-organizational characteristics interact to influence the use of progress feedback in clinical practice, supervision, and program improvement. Interviews were conducted in the local language, then translated to English prior to qualitative coding., Results: A team-based consensus coding approach was used to refine an a priori expert-informed and literature-based qualitative scheme to incorporate new understandings and constructs as they emerged. First, this hermeneutic approach resulted in a multi-level coding scheme with nine superordinate categories and 30 subcategories. Second-order axial coding established contextually sensitive categories for barriers and facilitators., Conclusions: The primary outcome is an empirically derived multi-level qualitative coding scheme that can be used in progress feedback implementation research and development. It can be applied across contexts and settings, with expectations for ongoing refinement. Suggestions for future research and application in practice settings are provided. Supplementary materials include the coding scheme and a detailed playbook., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)