Blog

Aajes-van Doorn, K., Bekes, V., & Prout, T. (2020). Grappling with our therapeutic relationship and professional self-doubt during COVID-19: Will we use video therapy again? Counselling Psychology Quarterly, DOI: 10.1080/09515070.2020.1773404

Social restrictions caused by COVID-19 required many therapists to use video therapy to provide treatment to patients remotely. Video therapy offers many benefits like allowing for real-time (synchronous) interactions with patients who would otherwise not have access to mental health care. However most therapists have no training or experience in this modality, and previous surveys suggest that therapists believe video therapy to be less effective than face to face therapy. And some evidence suggests that the level of the working alliance in video therapy is lower than in face to face therapy. In this small survey of 141 therapists about video therapy, Aajes-van Doorn and colleagues examined psychotherapists’ view of the working alliance, therapists’ level of confidence in providing video therapy, and their intentions to use video therapy in the future. Psychotherapists were from the US, Canada, and Europe who treated adult patients in private practice. One third of therapists previously attended a webinar on how to use video conferencing for psychotherapy. The most frequently reported challenges for therapists concerned technical difficulties (61.0% of therapists), having a suitable space for therapy (48.2%), risk of patient or therapist getting distracted (41.1%), and difficulty feeling or expressing empathy to the client (20.6%). On a standardized scale, therapists responded feeling less connected to their patients during video therapy sessions, but they nevertheless reported a good therapeutic alliance compared to published norms. On two other measures, therapists providing video therapy felt more professional self-doubt, less competent, and less confident than levels reported in a previous study of therapists providing face to face therapy. Although therapists’ views of video therapy became more positive since the start of the pandemic, therapists still perceived video therapy to be less effective than face to face treatment. Therapists on average were undecided as to whether they would continue using video therapy in the future, and those who were more likely to continue using had prior experience with the modality.

Practice Implications

Although this is a small survey, it does provide a window into therapists’ experiences with video therapy. The study highlights the added stressors upon therapists in conducting video therapy including higher self-doubt and lower competence and confidence. Also, although the therapeutic alliance in video therapy was good, it seemed to be lower than reported in previous studies of face to face therapy.  Therapists may benefit from more clinical training and support in managing the various technical and clinical challenges of video therapy. With the permission of their patients and following appropriate ethical guidelines, therapists might consider video recording their sessions and reviewing these recordings in consultation/supervision to improve their work with clients in a virtual setting.

Clients of Therapists Who Are Flexible Have Better Outcomes

Katz, M., Hilsenroth, M. J., Gold, J. R., Moore, M., Pitman, S. R., Levy, S. R., & Owen, J. (2019). Adherence, flexibility, and outcome in psychodynamic treatment of depression. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 66(1), 94–103.

Psychodynamic and cognitive-behavioral (CB) treatments are quite different in how therapy is delivered, but both are equally effective for depression. Such findings suggest that various types of specific interventions can positively impact client outcomes. A possible mechanisms of therapeutic action is that effective therapists may be particularly responsive to their clients’ behaviors and needs. That is, effective therapists may be flexible in how adherent they are to the techniques of a therapeutic orientation. Therapists who are flexible in their adherence to a therapeutic technique may promote a better therapeutic alliance (i.e., a therapist’s and client’s collaborative agreement on the goals of therapy and what to do in therapy). In this study, Katz and colleagues examined whether the flexible use of some CB techniques by psychodynamic therapists was related to better client outcomes in terms of depressive symptoms. Forty six patients diagnosed with depression were treated by 26 advanced graduate student therapists who were trained to practice psychodynamic therapy. Psychodynamic therapy techniques included: a focus on affect and affect expression, identifying relational patterns and patterns of thoughts and feelings, emphasizing past experiences and interpersonal relationships, working on the therapeutic alliance, and restructuring defense mechanisms. The researchers video recorded two early sessions of therapy which were independently rated to assess the degree to which therapists adhered to psychodynamic therapy principles or to CB therapy principles. Client depression outcomes were assessed pre- and post-therapy. Higher ratings of psychodynamic therapy adherence were related to better patient depression outcomes at post-treatment. In addition, the clients of psychodynamic therapists who used some CB techniques early in therapy had the best outcomes. In other words, the use of psychodynamic techniques was sufficient for clients to improve, but flexible use of some CB techniques by psychodynamic therapists provided added benefit. The CB techniques that were most often integrated by the therapists included: actively initiating topics and therapeutic activities, explaining the rationale of an intervention, focusing on the future, and providing psychoeducation about symptoms.

Practice Implications

Clients in this study improved on average from psychodynamic therapy, and psychodynamic interventions were related to better outcomes. However, clients of therapists who flexibly integrated a small amount of CB techniques benefitted more from the psychodynamic techniques. Research is increasingly showing that therapist flexibility in treatment adherence is related to better patient outcomes. For psychodynamic therapists, flexibility in treatment adherence leads to clients being more responsive to the interventions and having better outcomes.

Owen, J., Tao, K. W., Imel, Z. E., Wampold, B. E., & Rodolfa, E. (2014). Addressing racial and ethnic microaggressions in therapy. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 45(4), 283–290.

Overt forms of racism and prejudice still occur in society, and less overt forms are likely more prevalent. Microaggression are those less overt forms of racism and prejudice that may include direct and indirect insults, slights, and discriminatory messages. Specific types of microaggression are: microinvalidations (e.g., denying that racism exists), microassaults (e.g., direct racism but done in private), and microinsults (e.g., believing a group’s cultural norms are pathological). Microaggression are by definition ambiguous and subtle, and they may target culture, race, gender, sexual orientation, and other group identities. Microaggressions are associated with psychological distress in the recipient. Microaggressions can also occur in therapy if a patient perceives a therapist’s dismissing or negating messages about the patient’s culture, or if a therapist engages in culturally inappropriate interventions. Microaggressions represent a special type of therapeutic alliance rupture that could lead to negative patient outcomes. It is also possible that therapists and clients who address microaggressions after they occur are capable of repairing the alliance rupture and moving forward with a stronger relationship. However, there is very little research of the impact of client perceived microaggressions on the therapeutic alliance. In this unique study, Owen and colleagues asked 120 racial and ethnic minority university counselling centre patients treated by 33 different therapists (23 of whom were White) to rate their experience microaggressions, to indicate if the microaggression was discussed, and to rate the therapeutic alliance. In total, 53.3% of patients experienced a microaggression in therapy, and of those patients, 68.4% were treated by a racial or ethnic minority therapist. Clients who reported fewer microaggressions also reported stronger therapeutic alliances (r = .28, p = .01). Of the patients who reported a microaggression, only 24% (13 patients) reported that the microaggression was discussed by the therapist. Of these 13 patients, almost all (12 patients) reported that the discussion was successful. Therapist and patient dyads who successfully discussed the microaggression: (1) had alliance scores comparable to patients who did not experience a microaggression, and (2) had alliance scores that were significantly higher than dyads who experienced but did not discuss the microaggression.

Practice Implications

Microaggressions appear to be ubiquitous in daily life and in psychotherapy – no therapist is immune. More than 53% of patients in this study reported a microaggression, despite what was likely their therapists’ good intentions. Microaggression are a special case of therapeutic alliance ruptures, which are known to be associated with poor patient outcomes. Therapists must develop a strong multicultural orientation and take a culturally humble stance with clients from a different culture or group. This involves therapists being attuned to the possibility of committing a microaggression, inviting patients to alert the therapist should a microaggression occur, and being open to clarifying misunderstandings and owning missteps.

Hill, C. E., Knox, S., & Pinto-Coelho, K. G. (2018). Therapist self-disclosure and immediacy: A qualitative meta-analysis. Psychotherapy, 55(4), 445-460.

Different writers and theorists in psychotherapy have disagreed on the need for or the wisdom of therapists disclosing about themselves during therapy. Recently, however, both humanistic therapists and some psychodynamic therapists tend to see therapist self-disclosure or immediate discussion of the therapeutic relationship more positively. Therapist self-disclosure is a therapist statement that reveals something personal about the therapist (“That makes me angry too”). On the other hand, immediacy refers to comments about and processing the therapeutic relationship by client and therapist in the here and now (“You said that people inevitably let you down, I wonder if you expect that I will let you down too”). Immediacy, also known as metacommunication, is particularly useful to address therapeutic alliance ruptures. In this qualitative meta-analysis, Hill and colleagues (2018) examined research that studied the effects of therapist disclosures and immediacy on subsequent client processes right after the disclosure or immediacy occurred. The authors included in their review 21 studies with a total sample of 184 cases. Five studies with 99 cases looked specifically at the effect of therapist disclosure. Therapist self-disclosure occurred relatively infrequently in 0% to 4% of all therapist responses. The most frequently occurring subsequent processes after therapist disclosure included an enhanced therapy relationship (reported in 64% of studies), greater client insight (reported in 46% of studies), and improved client mental health (reported in 45% of studies). Negative effects of therapist disclosure included negative client feelings or reactions (reported in 30% of studies) and impaired therapeutic relationship (reported in 16% of studies). Fifteen studies with 78 cases looked specifically at immediacy. Therapists used immediacy more extensively in between 12% to 38% of cases. The most frequently occurring subsequent processes following immediacy included an enhanced therapy relationship (reported in 40% of studies), and increased client self-disclosure (reported in 40% of studies). Negative effects of immediacy included a negative impact for the therapist (reported in 11% of studies) that referred to a heightened sense of therapist vulnerability.

Practice Implications

Reviews and theoretical guidelines stress that therapists should sparingly and deliberately use self-disclosure and immediacy. In fact, this review by Hill and colleagues indicated that therapist self-disclosure is relatively rare, whereas immediacy might be more common. Therapists might consider self-disclosure when the client is feeling alone and in need of support. But, as Hill and colleagues indicate, therapists must be thoughtful and strategic about self-disclosure, therapists should disclose only personally resolved material, and therapists must focus their disclosures exclusively on the client’s needs. On the other hand, immediacy may be a useful strategy to negotiate and address problems in the therapeutic relationship by talking about interactions and intentions in the relationship (i.e., metacommunicate about the relationship). Therapists have to consider that immediacy may require lengthy processing, and therapists should be attentive to the role of countertransference and seek consultation in order to be sure to act in the best interest of the client.

Author email: cehill@umd.edu

Morales, K., Keum, B. T., Kivlighan, D. M., Jr., Hill, C. E., & Gelso, C. J. (2018). Therapist effects due to client racial/ethnic status when examining linear growth for client- and therapist-rated working alliance and real relationship. Psychotherapy, 55(1), 9-19.

Racial and ethnic minority (REM) clients tend to have less access to health care services, are less likely to seek services for mental illness, and may receive lower quality care. It is also possible that REM clients may be treated differently by psychotherapists, so that REM clients may have a different experience from non-REM clients of the therapeutic alliance (i.e., the collaborative agreement on tasks and goals of therapy, and the bond with the therapist). The alliance is a well-known factor that is related to client outcomes. If there is such a difference in how REM and non-REM clients experience the alliance, it is likely because of the therapist’s ability to establish and grow the alliance. Previous research showed that therapists and not clients are largely responsible for the alliance – outcome association. Research also demonstrated that some therapists are less effective with REM than with non-REM clients, possibly because of the differing experiences of and development of the therapeutic alliance. In this study, Morales and colleagues measured the therapeutic alliance after every session of therapy for 144 clients seen in a counselling center, almost half of whom were REM clients. The clients saw one of 19 therapists, so that each therapist (10 of whom were REM therapists) saw at least two REM and two non-REM clients. So, the researchers were able to see how each therapist developed a therapeutic alliance differently with REM and non-REM clients. The study found that higher therapeutic alliance between therapists and clients early in therapy was associated with clients remaining in therapy longer, and that the therapeutic alliance statistically significantly increased across sessions. However, therapists varied significantly in the alliance growth depending on whether they were treating REM or non-REM clients. Some therapists showed significant growth in the alliance with REM clients but not with non-REM clients, whereas other therapists showed significant growth in the alliance with non-REM but not with REM clients.

Practice Implications

There were significant differences between therapists in how they were able to develop a therapeutic alliance with racial and ethnic minority (REM) clients vs non-REM clients. The authors speculated that this difference might be due to the therapists’ level of multicultural orientation. A multicultural orientation is a way of being with clients that consists of cultural humility, using opportunities to examine culture, and cultural comfort. Having a multicultural orientation likely increases the level of therapeutic alliance and promotes its growth over time. Research shows that a client benefits when the therapist integrates the client’s cultural narrative into the psychotherapy.

Author email: kmorales@umd.edu

Okiishi, J., Lambert, M. J., Nielsen, S. L., & Ogles, B. M. (2003). Waiting for supershrink: An empirical analysis of therapist effects. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 10(6), 361-373.

Much of psychotherapy research has focused on searching for effective psychotherapies rather than focusing on effective psychotherapists. Research on psychotherapies generally assumes that therapists are equally effective or relatively less important to patient outcomes than the interventions themselves. Therapists in clinical trials are trained to follow a manual in an attempt to reduce the therapists’ impact on patient outcomes, and to focus the study on the specific ingredients of the therapy itself. However, research indicates that the degree to which a therapist follows a manual has little bearing on patient outcomes, and that therapists do differ in terms of their patients’ outcomes. In one large study, between 33% and 65% of therapists was ineffective or harmful. Okiishi and colleagues asked if it is possible to identify highly effective therapists (“super-shrinks”) and highly ineffective therapists (“pseudo-shrinks”) based on their patients’ outcomes. The therapists were 56 men and women who treated 1779 clients in a university counselling centre. Each therapist saw at least 15 clients, so that there was a good sampling of therapists’ outcomes across a variety of clients. Therapists had a range of experience, training, and theoretical orientations. Clients were adults who had moderate to severe problems with anxiety, depression, or adjustment. Outcomes were measured after every session, and the average number of sessions was 5.16 (SD = 7.20). On average clients improved so that their level of distress significantly declined. Therapist characteristics (sex, experience, training background, theoretical orientation) did not predict patient outcomes. However, client change varied significantly, so that some clients improved at a faster rate than others, some did not change, and some got worse. There were no differences between therapists in their clients’ level of distress, so therapists had equivalent caseloads in terms of client initial distress. However, therapists significantly differed from each other in terms of their clients’ outcomes. For example, the top 3 therapists consistently had clients who got better (super-shrinks), and the bottom 3 therapists consistently had clients who got worse (pseudo-shrinks).

Practice Implications

One would hope that a loved one would get to see a “super-shrink” therapist, since these therapists seem to consistently have clients who do well in therapy. But what about the average or “pseudo-shrink” therapist– what can be done to elevate their skills and their patients’ outcomes? We’ve discussed in this blog several things therapists can do to improve their outcomes, including: using progress monitoring in their practice, receiving training focused on deliberate practice, and seeking out specific continuing education around developing, maintaining, and repairing the therapeutic alliance.