The Therapy Process Observational Coding System: Group cohesion scale in youth anxiety treatment: Psychometric properties.

BACKGROUND: There are no well-established measures of group cohesion, defined as the collaborative bond between group members, in group cognitive behavioral therapy (GCBT) with youth. We therefore examined the Therapy Process Observational Coding System for Child Psychotherapy-Group Cohesion Scale (TPOCS-GC), which has previously only been used with adult samples, in a youth sample. METHODS: Observers coded 32 sessions from 16 groups with 83 youth aged 8 to 15 years (90.7% European White). Youth had anxiety disorders and received manualized GCBT in community clinics. We examined psychometric properties of the TPOCS-GC and its' construct validity in terms of relations with pretreatment variables, alliance and fidelity during treatment, and post-treatment variables. Group cohesion was measured twice during treatment (early and late). RESULTS: The TPOCS-GC was internally consistent (α = 0.72) and was reliably coded (M ICC = 0.61). Higher clinical severity at pretreatment predicted lower early group cohesion. Higher youth age, higher clinical severity at pretreatment, and higher youth-rated early alliance predicted lower late group cohesion. Higher therapist-rated early alliance predicted higher early group cohesion. Higher therapist-rated late alliance predicted higher late group cohesion. Higher late group cohesion predicted lower clinical severity and higher client treatment satisfaction at post-treatment. Early group cohesion did not predict any post-treatment variables. CONCLUSIONS: A four-item version of the TPOCS-GC can be reliably used in youth GCBT. The TPOCS-GC is distinct from, but associated with, multiple clinical variables.

Therapist Alliance-Building Behaviors, Alliance, and Outcomes in Cognitive Behavioral Treatment for Youth Anxiety Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: The alliance influences outcomes in CBT for youth anxiety disorders. Thus, knowledge about how therapists can enhance the alliance is needed. METHOD: Seventy-three youth with anxiety diagnoses (M age = 11.5 years, SD = 2.2; range 8 to 15 years; 47.9% boys; 90.4% white-European) participated in 10-session cognitive behavioral therapy in community clinics. Therapist alliance-building behaviors in session 2 was reliably coded with the observer-rated Adolescent Alliance-Building Behavior Scale (Revised) (AABS(R)). Alliance was measured as youth- and therapist-rated alliance, and youth-therapist alliance discrepancy in session 3. Outcomes were diagnostic recovery and anxiety symptom reduction at post-treatment and one-year follow-up, and treatment dropout. We examined the direct effects of alliance-building on alliance, alliance on outcomes, and alliance-building on outcomes in multilevel mediation models, and between- versus within-therapist variance across these effects. RESULTS: The alliance-building behaviors collaborate, present treatment model, and explore motivation positively predicted alliance, whereas actively structuring the session (i.e., dominating) negatively predicted alliance. The alliance-building behaviors attend to experience, collaborate, explore motivation, praise, and support positively predicted outcomes. The alliance-building behaviors present treatment model, express positive expectations, explore cognitions, and support negatively predicted outcomes. The effect of collaborate on symptom reduction was mediated by youth-therapist alliance discrepancy. There was almost zero between-therapist variance in alliance-building, and considerable within-therapist variance. CONCLUSION: Therapist alliance-building behaviors were directly (positively and negatively) associated with alliance and/or outcomes, with only one effect mediated by alliance. Alliance-building behaviors varied far more within therapists (i.e., across clients) than between therapists.

School-based targeted prevention compared to specialist mental health treatment for youth anxiety.

BACKGROUND: The 'FRIENDS for life' program (FRIENDS) is a 10-session cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) program used for prevention and treatment of youth anxiety. There is discussion about whether FRIENDS is best applied as prevention or as treatment. METHODS: We compared FRIENDS delivered in schools as targeted prevention to a previous specialist mental health clinic trial. The targeted prevention sample (N = 82; Mage  = 11.6 years, SD = 2.1; 75.0% girls) was identified and recruited by school nurses in collaboration with a community psychologist. The clinical sample (N = 88, Mage  = 11.7 years, SD = 2.1; 54.5% girls) was recruited for a randomized controlled trial from community child- and adolescent psychiatric outpatient clinics and was diagnosed with anxiety disorders. RESULTS: Both samples showed significantly reduced anxiety symptoms from baseline to postintervention, with medium mean effect sizes across raters (youths and parents) and timepoints (post; 12-months follow-up). Baseline youth-reported anxiety symptom levels were similar between the samples, whereas parent-reported youth anxiety was higher in the clinical sample. CONCLUSIONS: The study suggests that self-reported anxiety levels may not differ between youth recruited in schools and in clinic settings. The results indicate promising results of the FRIENDS program when delivered in schools by less specialized health personnel from the school health services, as well as when delivered in clinics by trained mental health professionals.