Blog

Owen, J., Adelson, J., Budge, S., Wampold, B., Kopta, M., Minami, T., & Miller, S. (2015). Trajectories of change in psychotherapy. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 71(9), 817–827.

Knowing the rate, or the trajectory, or the shape of client change across sessions of therapy can inform our understanding of how patients change, our policies of how many sessions to provide clients, and our clinical decisions if clients are no longer improving. The most popular models of client change across sessions include the “dose-effect model” and the “good-enough level model”. The dose-effect suggests that the more therapy patients receive the more they improve but, at a certain point, more sessions result in diminishing returns. In the August, 2013 PPRNet blog, I reviewed a chapter suggesting that 17% to 50% partially improve after about 7 sessions, and 50% patients fully recover after receiving about 21 sessions of therapy. Dose effect models might encourage some agencies to provide only the average number of sessions so that most patients will improve. The good-enough level model, on the other hand suggests that patients stay in therapy for varying lengths of time, and the number of sessions is determined by the point at which they feel better. In this study by Owen and colleagues, the authors take a different approach by looking at the patterns or trajectories of change that represent how and at what rate patients improve over time. In this very large study, they gathered session-by-session outcome data for over 10,000 clients seen at 47 treatment centres by over 500 different therapists. Client presenting problems and therapy orientations varied. Owen and colleagues identified 3 classes of patient change trajectories by using advanced statistical modeling of general distress outcomes across 5 to 25 sessions of therapy (average = 9.4 sessions). The largest class, representing 75% of clients, typified those who rapidly improved to session 5 and whose improvement plateaued to session 11, after which they improved again. This was called the “early and late change” class. The second largest class of patients, representing almost 20% of the sample, showed consistent linear change across the sessions. This was called the “slow and steady change” class. The third class of clients, representing about 5% of the sample, showed an initial decline in functioning up to session 5, followed by a steady improvement up to session 9, and then a plateau in improvement after session 9. This was called the “got worse before they got better” class.  This last group of clients had the most severe symptoms at the outset.

Practice Implications

This study indicates that one size does not fit all when it comes to how rapidly and in what manner patients change. “Early and late change” patients improve early on and then show another round of improvement later on in therapy. “Slow and steady” change patients show mild but consistent improvement across sessions of therapy. And those whose symptoms are more severe at the outset may “get worse before they get better”. This means that it may not be feasible to set an average fixed number of sessions for all patients, but rather therapists and agencies must rely on indices of reliable or good-enough change to determine optimal therapy length for each client. For example, “early and late change” patients may be working on different issues at different stages of therapy. Whereas clients who “show slow and steady” change may need to be in therapy longer before they realize sufficient improvement. For those patients with more severe symptoms who “get worse before they get better”, the therapy initially may be difficult but may ultimately induce change in the long run. In this case, therapists may need to provide enough of the current therapeutic approach before considering a change in the course of therapy.

Author email: Jesse.owen@louisville.edu

Farrell, N.R. & Deacon, B.J. (2015). The relative importance of relational and scientific characteristics of psychotherapy: Perceptions of community members vs. therapists. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2015.08.004

The American Psychological Association defines evidence-based practice (EBP) in psychotherapy as based on: (a) research evidence, (b) clinical expertise, and (c) client characteristics and preferences. We know for example, that clients who receive their preferred treatments better engage with therapy, drop out at a lower rate, and achieve better symptom outcomes. However, we know very little about clients’ preferences for the relative importance of the therapeutic relationship with an empathic therapist versus the scientific merit of the treatment they receive. We do know that therapists generally prefer research on the therapeutic relationship, and that therapists may place greater value on relationship issues versus research support for the treatments they provide. In this study Farrell and Deacon sample 200 members of the community about the relative importance of the relationship with a therapist versus the scientific basis of the treatment. The authors also surveyed a similar number of therapists about what therapists thought clients would prefer (relationship vs research evidence) in psychotherapy. Not surprisingly, community members rated both the therapeutic relationship and research evidence highly when indicating what they preferred should they receive psychotherapy. However, the authors found that members of the community rated the therapeutic relationship much more highly than they rated research evidence (d = 1.24). But the difference shrank (d = .24) when it came to treating panic disorder or obsessive compulsive disorder. Therapists tended to under-estimate the importance of community members’ preferences for scientific evidence for psychotherapy. The under-estimation was greater for therapists who placed less value on research. In other words, therapists who valued research less in their own practice were more likely to underestimate the importance of scientific credibility to members of the general public.

Practice Implications

This is by no means a perfect study. As readers of this blog know, I prefer to write about meta analyses, which are much more reliable than findings from a single study. However, it is quite rare to have a study on a large sample of members of the community, let alone one that asks about their perceptions and preferences about psychotherapy. The findings from this study suggest that members of the community highly value the therapeutic relationship and factors like therapist empathy. However, members of the community also place much faith in the scientific evidence that supports the use of psychotherapy. The preference for both a good therapeutic relationship coupled with research evidence may be very important to most people who may seek therapy. Therapists, particularly those who place less weight on research, should keep in mind that clients value the scientific evidence for psychotherapy.

Author email: bdeacon@uow.edu.au

Abbass, A., Kisely, S., Rasic, D., Town, J.M., & Johansson, R. (2015). Long-term healthcare cost reduction with Intensive Short-term Psychodynamic Psychotherapy in tertiary psychiatric care. Journal of Psychiatric Research, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.03.001

Several years ago Lazar (2010) published a book detailing the cost-effectiveness of psychotherapy for a variety of disorders. That is, her systematic review found that on most economic indicators (lost income, decreased disability, decreased health utilization) psychotherapy resulted in an immediate cost reduction over and above the cost of the treatment. In this study from Halifax, Canada, Abbass and colleagues looked at the effects of psychotherapy, specifically of Intensive Short-term Dynamic Psychotherapy (ISTDP), on the long-term reduction in hospital costs and physician visits. Abass and colleagues argue that adverse childhood events are an important determinant of adult mental health problems and of increased costs to the health system likely because of the consequence of problems with emotion regulation. Psychotherapies like ISTDP specifically address issues that are a consequence of childhood maltreatment and so might reduce some of the consequent health care costs. Abbass and colleagues provided ISTDP to 890 patients in the Halifax health care system who were referred to the psychotherapy service from emergency departments, physicians, and mental health providers. These patients’ outcomes were compared to 192 patients not seen by the clinic for various reasons. Most common diagnoses of the total sample were: somatoform disorder, anxiety disorder, personality disorder, and depressive disorder. Participant completed measures of psychological distress, and the research team were able to access provincial health usage data tracked over 3 years. Fifty eight therapists of various skill levels (psychiatrists, psychologists, family physicians, trainees) provided ISTDP. The average patient attended 7.3 sessions which cost $708 (estimated by salaries in 2006). Patients receiving psychotherapy had physician and hospital costs that decreased from $3,224 to $4759 in Canadian dollars per year over three years (again in 2006 dollars). Patients in the control condition not receiving ISTDP showed health care costs that increased from $368 to $2,663 per year. These trajectories of health care costs were significantly different. Yearly physician and health care costs for patients prior to being treated with ISTDP were greater than those of the general Canadian population, but 3 years post ISTDP their health care costs were less than the general Canadian population. In addition, compared to control patients those treated with psychotherapy showed a significant reduction in psychological distress.

Practice Implications

This study by Abbass and colleagues demonstrates that short term psychotherapy provided to a broad range of patients and targeting health and illness behaviors related to problems with emotion regulation can reduce health care costs. These reductions in hospital and physician visits occurred in the short term and were sustained over several years. Some patients may require longer treatment, but the evidence suggests that short term interventions should be tried first.

Author email: allan.abbass@dal.ca

The Great Psychotherapy Debate: Since in April, 2015 I review parts of The Great Psychotherapy Debate (Wampold & Imel, 2015) in the PPRNet Blog. This is the second edition of a landmark, and sometimes controversial, book that surveys the evidence for what makes psychotherapy work. You can view parts of the book in Google Books.

Wampold, B.E. & Imel, Z.E. (2015). The great psychotherapy debate: The evidence for what makes psychotherapy work (2^nd edition). New York: Routledge.

In this part of the chapter on efficacy, Wampold and Imel provide convincing evidence from numerous reviews of meta analyses that the average effect size of psychotherapy across diverse treatments and patients is about d = .80. This is a reliable figure and is considered a “large” effect by commonly accepted standards. Put another way, the average psychotherapy patient is better off than 79% of untreated clients, psychotherapy accounts for 14% of the outcome variance, and for every 3 patients who receive psychotherapy, one will have a better outcome than had they not received psychotherapy. In other words, psychotherapy is remarkably efficacious. These effect size estimates are mostly drawn from randomized clinical trials that are highly controlled (i.e., therapists are highly trained and supervised, patients are sometimes selected to have no co-morbid problems, treatment fidelity to a manual is closely monitored, etc.). Some argue that the context of these trials renders them artificial, and that findings from these trials reveal little about psychotherapy practiced in the real world with complex patients. How do findings from controlled clinical trials compare to everyday clinical practice? Wampold and Imel review the evidence from three areas of research: clinical representativeness, benchmarking, and comparisons to treatment as usual. With regard to clinical representativeness, a meta analysis (k > 1,000 studies) coded the studies for type of treatment setting, therapist characteristics, referral sources, use of manuals, client heterogeneity, etc. The meta analysis found that therapies that were most representative of typical practice had similar effects to what is observed in highly controlled studies. With regard to benchmarking, a large study (N > 5,700 patients) compared treatment effects observed in naturalistic settings to clinical trial benchmarks. Benchmarks were defined as scores on an outcome (e.g., on a depression scale) that are within 10% of scores reported in clinical trial research. Treatment effects in naturalistic settings were equivalent to and sometimes better than those achieved using clinical trial benchmarks. Further, therapists in practice settings achieved the same outcomes in fewer sessions than in clinical trials. With regard to comparisons to treatment as usual, a meta analysis (k = 30 studies) for personality disorders looked at studies that compared evidence-based treatments tested in clinical trials to treatment as usual. The meta analysis found that evidence-based treatments were significantly more effective than treatment as usual with moderate effects. These results suggest that when it comes to personality disorders, special training and supervision, which are common in clinical trials, might be beneficial.

Practice Implications

Wampold and Imel argue that psychotherapy as tested in clinical trials is remarkably effective such that the average treated patient is better off than 79% of untreated controls. The evidence also suggests that psychotherapy practiced in clinical settings is effective and probably as effective as psychotherapy tested in controlled clinical trials. It is possible that therapists who treat those with personality disorders may benefit from additional training and supervision to improve patient outcomes in everyday practice.

Erlangsen, A., Lind, B. D., Stuart, E. A., Qin, P., Stenager, E., Larsen, K. J., ... & Nordentoft, M. (2014). Short-term and long-term effects of psychosocial therapy for people after deliberate self-harm: A register-based, nationwide multicentre study using propensity score matching. The Lancet Psychiatry. Early Online Publication: doi:10.1016/S2215-0366(14)00083-2.

Between 9 million and 35 million suicide attempts occur yearly in the world, and suicide accounts for over 800,000 deaths every year worldwide. Suicide attempts are associated with future attempts and with mortality. Within the first year, 16% of people attempt suicide again. Despite the occurrence of suicide attempts and its effects, there has been inconclusive evidence of the effectiveness of interventions to reduce future attempts and death. That is why this Danish nationwide study by Erlangsen is so important. Another impressive aspect of this study is its size and scope. Since 1992, psychological therapies have been offered to people at risk of suicide in specialized clinics throughout Denmark. The aim of Erlangsen and colleagues’ study was to assess if those who received these psychological interventions had a reduced risk of suicidal behavior and mortality compared to people who did not receive the interventions. The authors collected data from 1992 to 2010 from Danish national health registries. This procedure was possible in Denmark because the health system is nationally coordinated and each individual has a traceable national health ID. In order to be included in the study, those who were offered specialized psychological interventions had to receive at least one session of treatment. Therapy included cognitive behavioral therapy, problem solving therapy, dialectical behavior therapy, psychodynamic therapy, systemic therapy and others. The interventions consisted of up to 8 to 10 individual outpatient sessions. The comparison group received “standard care” that consisted of admission to hospital, referral to a general practitioner, or discharge with no referral. The primary outcomes were: repeated self-harm, death by suicide, and death by any other cause. Of the people receiving psychotherapy, 5,678 had useable data. The “standard care” sample was much larger and consisted of 58,281 individuals who were matched to the psychological intervention group on many variables including sex, age, education, antidepressant medications, and psychiatric diagnosis. For those receiving psychotherapy, the rate of repeated suicide attempts in the first year was 6.7% and 15.5% at 10 years. For those receiving standard care, rate of repeated suicide attempts in the first year was 9.0% and 18.4% at 10 years. The odds of another suicide attempt one year post treatment was 73% lower among those receiving psychotherapy. Death by any other cause at the 10 year mark was also significantly lower in the psychological therapy group (5.3%) versus the no-therapy group (7.9%). The authors estimated that over the 20 year span of their data, psychological therapy: prevented repeated suicide attempts in 145 people, prevented deaths by any other cause in 153 people, and prevented 30 suicide deaths. Psychosocial interventions were associated with fewer repeated suicide attempts in women but not in men, and adolescents and young adults benefited most from psychological therapies.

Practice Implications

This is the largest long term follow up study ever of psychological interventions after a suicide attempt. Psychotherapy was associated with reduced risk of self-harm and mortality in the short and long term. This was especially true for women and in adolescents and young adults. Those receiving psychotherapy might have been a select group resulting in biased results. However, the extensive matching of the psychotherapy group to the no-therapy control group reduced the likelihood that factors other than psychotherapy influenced the findings. The study indicates strong support for providing psychological interventions to people at risk of suicide.

Puig, A., Yoon, E., Callueng, C., An, S., & Lee, S. M. (2014). Burnout syndrome in psychotherapists: A comparative analysis of five nations. Psychological Services, 11(1), 87-96.

Psychotherapists can experience severe stress when working with some clients. The stress can be the result of work conditions like budget cuts and increased therapy caseloads, and from characteristics of the work itself like remaining compassionate with clients who experience significant emotional pain and trauma. In the May 2014 blog, I reported on research on secondary trauma experienced by therapists as an occupational hazard of working with traumatized patients. Although secondary trauma is distinct from burnout, the accumulation of these experiences by therapists coupled with other demands of the work can lead to burnout. Burnout syndrome is often defined as the failure to perform clinical tasks well because of discouragement, apathy, and the experience of emotional or physical drain. Burnout can affect both the therapist’s well being and patient outcomes. In this study by Puig and colleagues, the Counsellor Burnout Inventory (CBI) was given to therapists in five countries. The CBI measures therapist Exhaustion, sense of Incompetence, Negative Work Environment, and Deterioration in Personal Life. The samples of therapists were from countries that included the United States (n = 750), Korea (n = 382), Japan (n = 257), Philippines (n = 218), and Hong Kong (n = 222). Puig and colleagues argue that countries like the US may be characterized by a more individualistic cultural context, whereas other countries in Asia may have more collectivistic values. These cultural values and differing professional practice contexts may affect the experience of burnout by psychotherapists. The majority of therapists were female (67.3% to 85.3%) with average experience ranging from 5.34 years in Korea to 12.33 years in the US. Puig and colleagues translated the CBI from English and then conducted a confirmatory factor analysis that showed that the CBI is reliable and valid within each of these samples of therapists from different countries. Therapists in Hong Kong and the US had the highest scores on the Exhaustion scale. Puig and colleagues suggested that burnout in Hong Kong and US may be most affected by demands of the work that psychotherapists do in those countries. Psychotherapists from Japan reported highest levels on the Incompetence scale, suggesting that burnout in Japanese therapists might be most affected by a sense of low self efficacy and efficiency. Of all the nations, US therapists perceived their working environments most negatively. Deterioation in Personal Life scores were highest in Korea suggesting that burnout may contribute to low personal quality of life for Korean psychotherapists. All therapists reported low mean scores on the Devaluing Client scale, but those in the US and Philippines had the lowest mean scores. It appears that burnout is least affected by negative relationships with clients for all therapist groups.

Practice Implications

Therapists, policymakers, and administrators need to attend to increased stress related to psychotherapists’ work, the environment, and characteristics of clients who experience trauma. The impact of stress and burnout can be seen in therapists’ performance their personal lives and well-being. In addition, burnout can affect patient outcomes. Puig and colleagues suggest that psychotherapists can participate in professional development activities (e.g., workshops) to enhance their knowledge and skills in managing stress and maintaining a healthy and balanced work and personal life. Organizations should consider restructuring the social and work environment (e.g., workload), and clarifying and reassessing their expectations of therapists in order to prevent conflict and ambiguity. On his web site, Ken Pope provides a list of resources for therapist well-being and preventing burnout, and he discusses the ethics of therapist self-care.