Blog

Lutz, W., de Jong, K., Rubel, J.A., & Delgadillo, J. (2021). Measuring, predicting, and tracking change in psychotherapy. In M. Barkham, W. Lutz, and L.G. Castonguay (Eds.) Bergin and Garfield’s Handbook of Psychotherapy and Behavior Change (7^th ed.). Wiley. Chapter 4.

In this part of the chapter, Lutz and colleagues review research methods related to patients dropping out of psychotherapy. Drop outs represent an important problem. For the clinician, a patient who drops out may represent loss of income due to missed appointments, extra work, administrative costs, and a lower sense of professional self-efficacy. Not all patients who terminate therapy early have a poorer outcome. But the research indicates that overall, patients who drop out of treatment do have poorer outcomes, higher hospitalization rates, lower work productivity, and higher social costs than patients who complete treatment. Hence, when a patient drops out of therapy it should be defined as a failure of the treatment that could lead to further demoralization of the patient. Defining a drop out is tricky in that some studies indicate that if a patient does not attend a minimum number of sessions, then they have dropped out. However, a more realistic definition might be that if a patient unilaterally decides to end therapy against a therapist’s advice, then the patient can be considered to have dropped out. Estimates of patient drop out from therapy vary widely depending on the treatment context and patient characteristics. For example, highly controlled studies report dropout rates of about 19.7%, but less controlled studies that might be closer to real world practice report average dropout rates of 26%. But the range of dropout rates across studies was very wide from 0% to 74.2%. Patient characteristics that led to higher dropout rates included higher initial impairment, younger age, lower level of education, a personality disorder diagnosis, and negative expectations about treatment. Therapists had a significant impact on dropping out as well. Therapist effects accounted for 12.6% of the variance in dropping out – that is a moderate but important effect. That is, some therapists have higher dropout rates than others, and this is likely independent of patient characteristics. This is like therapist effects on patient outcomes, in which it is estimated that about 10.1% of patient deterioration is predicted by the therapist’s effect.

Practice Implications

Patients dropping out from psychotherapy is an important problem that negatively affects the patient, the therapist, and that has broader social, health, and economic consequences as well. Aligning the patient’s and therapist goals for the therapy, coming to a collaborative agreement on how therapy will work, and developing an emotional and empathic bond with the patient may be ways of reducing the number of dropouts from therapy. These are all elements of the therapeutic alliance that must be negotiated very early in therapy to forestall a negative outcome such as the patient dropping out.

Lilliengren, P., Johansson, R., Lindqvist, K., Mechler, J., & Andersson, G. (2016). Efficacy of experiential dynamic therapy for psychiatric conditions: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Psychotherapy, 53(1), 90-104.

There is growing research support for the efficacy of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapies to treat common mental health problems. A subtype of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapies is called experiential-dynamic therapy (EDT), which goes by a number of different names such as Fosha’s accelerated experiential-dynamic psychotherapy, and McCullough’s affect phobia therapy. A fundamental assumption of EDT is that conditions like depression, anxiety and personality disorders are by-products of an individual’s attempts to regulate strong emotions associated with adverse experiences in attachment relationships during childhood. When the attachment system and associated affects are re-awakened in current relationships, the individual may engage in maladaptive coping that leads to difficulties in relationships. While EDTs may focus on helping patients to understand how their attachment difficulties lead to inhibitory affects and maladaptive defenses, the treatment favors interventions that facilitate direct experience of underlying emotions in the here and now of the therapy. In this meta-analysis, Lilliengren and colleagues reviewed 28 studies with 1,782 adult patients who had a mood, anxiety, personality, or mixed disorder. Compared to inactive controls, EDT showed a moderate and significant effect at post-treatment (range: d = .39 to .65) and at follow-up assessments (range: d = .26 to .62), with largest effects for depression and anxiety. When researchers compared EDT to cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) in five studies, there were no significant effects at post-treatment (d = .02, 95% CI: -.24, .28) or follow-up (d = .07, 95% CI: -.22, .36). The average quality of EDT studies was good. In fact, studies with larger samples, that used blind randomization and assessments, and appropriate statistical tests showed larger effects for EDT. Drop-out rates for EDT (16.3%) were similar to other treatments.

Practice Implications

Experiential-dynamic therapy (EDT), which is a variant of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy, was more effective than no-treatment and just as effective as evidence-based treatments like CBT. The findings are similar to those reported in many comparative outcome studies in which any bona-fide psychotherapy is effective for many disorders. The average quality of the EDT studies was quite good, suggesting that the findings were reliable and valid, and perhaps underestimating the true effects of EDT.

Author email: peter.lilliengren@psychology.su.se

Reich, C.M. & Berman, J.S. (2018). Are psychotherapies with more dropouts less effective? Psychotherapy Research. Online first publication.

The client dropout rate in clinical studies is about 20%, and almost double that in regular clinical practice. A dropout is a unilateral decision on the part of the patient to discontinue treatment after the first session. This is often viewed as a treatment failure, but it is possible that some patients feel better enough to not continue with therapy, and others may have practical constraints like transportation or childcare difficulties. In three meta analyses, Reich and Berman ask: (1) do those who drop out experience more distress than completers to begin with?, (2) do completers have better outcomes than drop outs?, and (3) do less effective treatments also have more drop outs? In general, the studies included different types of psychotherapy but most were CBT (~75%), most therapists had a masters or doctoral degree (~33%) but many studies also included student therapists (~25%), client problems included depression (~17%), anxiety (25%), or other disorders, and most studies were randomized controlled trials (~61%). To answer the first question the authors conducted a meta analysis of 76 studies. Clients who dropped out of therapy were in more distress prior to beginning treatment than individuals who completed the treatment (d= − 0.14, 95% CI [− 0.08, − 0.20], p < .001). The effect was small but significant. Younger and male clients tended to be in more distress at pre-treatment. To answer the second question, the authors conducted a meta analysis of 43 studies. Clients who dropped out of therapy were significantly more distressed following therapy than individuals who completed treatment (d = .0.56, 95% CI [.0.37, 0.70] p < .001). This was a moderately large and significant effect. To answer the third question, the authors completed a meta regression of data in 34 studies. Overall, treatments with more drop outs also had completers with worse outcomes at post treatment, β = -.37, SE = 0.17, p < .05. Also, when treatments were shorter in length, greater overall dropout was associated with even worse outcomes for treatment completers, β = − 1.28, SE = 0.35, p < .001.

Practice Implications

These meta analyses support the notion that on average those who drop out do so because they do not find the treatment to be helpful. Patients who drop out tend to be more distressed to begin with, and are more likely to be young and male. An intriguing finding was that those treatments with more drop outs also tended to be less effective for those who completed the therapy. In other words, effective treatments also tended to maintain more patients. Previously, writers suggested clinically useful methods to reduce premature termination from psychotherapy. These include: providing patients with information about duration of therapy and how change occurs, educating patients about therapist and patient roles, taking into account patient preferences when deciding on treatment methods and therapist stances, strengthening early hope, fostering the therapeutic alliance, and assessing and discussing treatment progress on an ongoing basis.

Foa, E., McLean, C.P., Zang, Y., Rosenfield, D., Yadin, E… Peterson, A. (2018). Effect of prolonged exposure therapy delivered over 2 weeks vs 8 weeks vs present-centered therapy on PTSD symptom severity in military personnel: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 319, 354-364.

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) can affect 10% to 20% of military personnel returning from combat. PTSD is often chronic and debilitating, and is associated with symptoms that are distressing, that lower quality of life, and that negatively impact family and loved ones. Prolonged exposure therapy (PE) has been tested in the past, and researchers have claimed that it is an efficacious treatment in civilians and veterans. PE is a form of behavior therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy characterized by re-experiencing the most traumatic event through remembering it and engaging with, rather than avoiding reminders of the trauma. In their treatment guidelines, the American Psychological Association (APA) proposed PE as a recommended treatment for PTSD. In this randomized controlled trial, Foa and colleagues assess if providing PE in intensive short time frame (massed exposure; 10 sessions over 2 weeks) was as effective as standard exposure (10 sessions over 8 weeks) for 370 military personnel in the US with PTSD. That is, the authors were interested to see if providing the same amount of therapy based on exposure in a shorter time was just as effective. They also compared the two versions of PE (massed and standard exposure) to two control conditions: present centred therapy (PCT) that is largely supportive therapy that does not rely on exposure to the trauma, and a no treatment control condition. The main outcomes were reductions in level of PTSD symptoms and reductions in PTSD diagnoses at post-treatment and up to 6 months post-treatment. Massed and standard PE were equally effective in reducing symptoms and diagnoses of PTSD compared to no treatment. However, PE was not more effective than PCT in reducing symptoms and diagnoses, and PCT was more effective than no treatment. Overall, reductions in PTSD symptoms and reduction in PTSD diagnoses were modest. Drop out rates were high at about 50% for all conditions.

Practice Implications

Drop out rates were high and outcomes were modest for these short-term psychological treatments for PTSD in military personnel, such that over 60% still had a diagnosis of PTSD at 6 months follow up. And PE therapy did no better than a control condition (PCT) that simply provided support with no exposure to the trauma. These findings are similar to other research in this area. Psychotherapy for trauma may require more time to work, and perhaps different models of understanding and treating the disorder. As Shedler recently remarked, it takes at least 20 sessions/weeks before 50% of clients improve. So it may not be surprising that 2 or 8 weeks of therapy had only a small impact on PTSD symptoms.

Andrzej Werbart & Mo Wang (2012). Predictors of not starting and dropping out from psychotherapy in Swedish public service settings, Nordic Psychology, 64, 128-146.

There are few empirical studies looking at patients who are offered but who do not take up psychotherapy. This is a particularly important issue in publicly funded psychotherapy programs in which large numbers of patients who need mental health services to not access the service or leave before receiving adequate treatment. Evidence from the Improving Access to Psychotherapy (IAPT) program in the United Kingdom suggests that about half of patients who are offered psychotherapy either do not take it up or drop out prematurely and unilaterally. Knowledge about what determines treatment rejection or dropping out is critical in designing and developing publicly funded psychotherapy so that not only access but also patient outcomes are improved. In this study from the national Swedish psychotherapy program that is publicly funded, Werbart and colleagues looked at data from 13 clinics in which 189 therapists treated almost 1400 patients. Therapists were experienced (median experience = 5 years), and most received advanced psychotherapy training. Patients had a wide array of problems and severity. Of the patients, 13.6% never started therapy even though they were referred and assessed for treatment, and of those who started 17.4% dropped out of treatment. So a total of 31% never received adequate treatment and did not benefit for psychotherapy. Patients who never started therapy tended to be younger, unemployed, and with higher levels of mental illness. Patients who remained in therapy once they started tended to be older, had more problems with trauma or loss, and had more severe illness although they were not a danger to themselves or others. Never starting treatment and dropping out were both associated with clinics that had greater institutional instability. Clinic instability was defined as a clinic with: unclear treatment goals and guidelines, not well adapted to providing psychotherapy, unclear policies around who and how therapy is conducted, less cooperation among professionals, and financial problems.

Practice Implications

Jurisdictions around the world, including in Canada, are looking to offer publicly funded psychotherapy, yet there is little research to guide how to improve uptake and retention of patients within the system. Such systems might focus pre-therapy efforts to retain patients who are younger and with greater mental health problems. In particular, public systems need to pay attention to clinic and institutional stability. How patients experience the clinic environment (as welcoming and integrated), how treating professionals cooperate, the clarity and structure of treatment guidelines and goals, and the financial stability of a clinic all appear to have an impact on whether patients actually access and complete a course of psychotherapy.

So, M., Yamaguchi, S., Hashimoto, S., Sado, M., Furukawa, T.A., & McCrone, P. (2013). Is computerised CBT really helpful for adult depression?-A meta-analytic re-evaluation of CCBT for adult depression in terms of clinical implementation and methodological validity. BMC Psychiatry, 13, 113. 

Depression is a major cause of disability in the world, and so efforts to improve access to its treatment have been ongoing for several decades. In particular, many researchers and clinicians propose cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) as an effective treatment with a good evidence-base. There have been many clinical trials showing the efficacy of CBT. In recent years, there have also been attempts to computerize CBT (CCBT) as a self help intervention in order to increase its accessibility for those with depression, and perhaps also to improve its cost effectiveness. In fact, the Increasing Accessibility to Psychotherapy (IAPT) program in the UK provides CCBT as the most common first treatment for depression. However there remain questions about the longer term effectiveness of CCBT to reduce symptoms of depression, its potentially high patient dropout rate (a negative outcome), and its effects on quality of life of those burdened by depression. In this meta analysis, the largest of its kind, So and colleagues assess these issues with regard to CCBT. They reviewed 14 direct comparison randomized controlled trials that provided 16 comparisons of CCBT versus a control condition (wait list or treatment as usual) for adults with depression. At post-treatment, CCBT was more effective than controls in reducing depression −0.48 [95% CI −0.63 to −0.33]. However, at follow up (up to 6 months), the effects of CCBT disappeared −0.05 [95% CI −0.19 to 0.09]. Also improvement in functioning and quality of life were not significantly different between CCBT and control conditions, −0.05 [95% CI −0.31 to 0.22]. The rate of drop out from CCBT (32%) was almost double that of control conditions (17%), RR = 1.68 [95% CI 1.31 to 2.16]. There was also evidence of publication bias (i.e., a tendency for some researchers not to publish non-significant findings), so that the positive post-treatment results in favour of CCBT might be inflated.

Practice Implications

Although CCBT may be touted as a way to increase access to treatment for depression, this meta analysis indicates some concerns about the widespread implementation of CCBT. The effects of CCBT appear to be limited to a short-term reduction of depressive symptoms that may not be sustained in the longer run. There was no appreciable impact of CCBT on quality of life relative to controls, and so CCBT may have a limited impact on the burden of depression. Most troubling was a high drop out rate of 32%. Drop out from CCBT in the IAPT program in the UK is about 50%, and this may be indicative of the actual drop out rate in real world practice.