Do patients internalize the positive regard they are offered? A dyadic test of a Rogerian condition.

OBJECTIVE: Positive regard (PR) reflects a therapist's unconditional prizing of their patient, which meta-analytically correlates positively with patient improvement. However, most research has been limited to single-participant ratings of PR at a specific time, which neglects the dyadic and dynamic nature of PR (i.e., fundamental to benefitting from therapist-offered PR is that a patient internalizes it). Testing this premise, we hypothesized that therapist-offered PR at one session would predict patient-felt PR at a subsequent session (two sessions later), which would in turn predict the patient's next-session outcome (within-patient mediation). METHOD: Eighty-four patients with generalized anxiety disorder received cognitive-behavioral therapy with or without motivational interviewing. Therapists and patients provided postsession ratings of their offered and felt PR, respectively, at odd-numbered sessions throughout treatment. Patients rated their worry following each even-numbered session. We used multilevel structural equation modeling to test our hypothesis. We explored whether treatment condition moderated the mediational path. RESULTS: As predicted, when a therapist regarded their patient more than usual following one session, the patient felt more regarded than usual. In turn, this internalized regard was negatively associated with worry. Treatment condition did not moderate this path. DISCUSSION: Results support internalized positive regard as a treatment-common, ameliorative relationship process.

Therapist-Level Moderators of Patient-Therapist Match Effectiveness in Community Psychotherapy.

Based on patient-reported outcomes data analyzed at the provider level, there is evidence that psychotherapists can possess effectiveness strengths and weaknesses when treating patients with different presenting concerns. These within-therapist differences hold promise for personalizing care by prospectively matching patients to therapists' historical effectiveness strengths. In a double-masked randomized controlled trial (RCT; NCT02990000), such matching outperformed pragmatically determined usual case assignment-which leaves personalized, measurement-based matching to chance-in naturalistic outpatient psychotherapy (Constantino et al., JAMA Psychiatry 78:960-969, 2021). Demonstrating that personalization can be even more precise, some research has demonstrated that the strength of this positive match effect was moderated by certain patient characteristics. Notably, though, it could also be that matching is especially important for some therapists to achieve more effective outcomes. Examining this novel question, the present study drew on the Constantino et al. (JAMA Psychiatry 78:960-969, 2021) trial data to explore three therapist-level moderators of matching: (a) effectiveness "spread" (i.e., greater performance variability across patients' presenting problem domains), (b) overestimation of their measurement-based and problem-specific effectiveness, and (c) the frequency with which they use patient-reported routine outcomes monitoring in their practice. Patients were 206 adults, randomized to the match or control condition, treated by 40 therapists who were crossed over conditions. The therapist variables were assessed at the trial's baseline and patients' symptomatic/functional impairment and global distress were assessed regularly up to 16 weeks of treatment. Hierarchical linear models revealed that only therapist effectiveness spread significantly moderated the match effect for the global distress outcome; for therapists with more spread, the match effect was more pronounced, whereas the match effect was minimal for therapists with less effectiveness spread. Notably, two therapist-level covariates unexpectedly emerged as significant moderators for the symptomatic/functional impairment outcome; for clinicians who consistently treated patients with higher versus lower average severity levels and who relatedly treated a higher proportion of patients with primary presenting problems of substance misuse or violence, the beneficial match effect was even stronger. Thus, measurement-based matching may be especially potent for therapists with more variable effectiveness across problem domains, and who consistently treat patients with more severe presenting concerns or with particular primary problems, which provides further precision in conceptualizing personalized care.

Patient and therapist change process expectations: Independent and dyadic associations with psychotherapy outcomes.

Objective: Patients and therapists possess psychotherapy-related expectations, such as their forecast of what processes will promote improvement. Yet, there remains limited research on such change process expectations, including their independent and dyadic associations with psychotherapy outcome. In this study, we explored the predictive influence of participants' change process expectations, and their level of congruence, on therapeutic outcomes. METHODS: Patients (N = 75) and therapists (N = 17) rated their change process expectations at baseline, and patients rated their psychological distress at baseline and three months into treatment. RESULTS: Multilevel models indicated that patients' expectations for therapy to work through sharing sensitive contents openly and securely were positively related to subsequent improvement (B = -1.097; p = .007). On the other hand, patients' expectations for therapy to work through the exploration of unexpressed contents were negatively related to improvement (B = 1.388; p = .049). When patients rated the sharing of sensitive contents openly and securely higher than their therapists, they reported better outcomes (B = -16.528; p = .035). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that patients' expectations produce diverse effects during early stages of treatment, and that patients' belief in their ability to share sensitive contents may constitute a potential target to improve therapy effectiveness.

Therapist verification of patient self-concepts as a responsive precondition for early alliance development and subsequent introject change.

OBJECTIVE: Social psychological research has indicated that people strive for self-consistent feedback and interactions, even if negative, to preserve the epistemic security of knowing themselves. Without such self-verification, any interpersonal exchange may become frustrated, anxiety-riddled, and at risk for deterioration. Thus, it may be important for therapists to meet patients' self-verification needs as a responsive precondition for early alliance establishment and development. We tested this hypothesis with patients receiving cognitive behavioral therapy for generalized anxiety disorder-a condition that may render one's self-verification needs especially strong. We also tested the hypothesis that better early alliance quality would relate to subsequent adaptive changes in and posttreatment level of patients' self-concepts. METHOD: Eighty-four patients rated their self-concepts at baseline and across treatment and follow-up, their postsession recollection of their therapist's interpersonal behavior toward them during session 2, and their experience of alliance quality rated after sessions 3-6. RESULTS: As predicted, the more therapists verified at session 2 a patient's baseline self-concepts (which trended toward disaffiliative and overcontrolling, on average), the more positively that patient perceived their next-session alliance. Moreover, better session 3 alliance related to more adaptive affiliative and autonomy-granting self-concepts at posttreatment. CONCLUSION: Results are discussed within a therapist responsiveness framework.

A Qualitative Analysis of Stakeholder Attitudes Regarding Personalized Provider Selection and Patient-Therapist Matching.

This study explored mental health care patients and therapists' perspectives on using therapists' measurement-based and problem-specific effectiveness data to inform case assignments - a type of treatment personalization that has been shown to outperform non-measurement-based case assignment as usual (Constantino et al., 2021). We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews with 8 patients (75% women; M age = 33.75 years) and 8 therapists (75% women; M age = 47.50 years). The interview protocols were unique to stakeholder group. Recorded responses were transcribed and qualitatively analyzed by four judges using a blend of consensual qualitative research and grounded theory methods. Derived patient domains included preferred characteristics of a provider, and experiences and suggestions regarding provider selection. Within the domains, most patients expressed an interest in accessing more specific provider information online. Additionally, most patients indicated that both provider outcome track records and personal preference information (e.g., therapist characteristics) should be considered in the therapist selection process. All patients endorsed being comfortable with having the ability to select a provider based on a list of empirically well-matched recommendations. Derived therapist domains included using routine outcomes monitoring for patient-provider matching, referral source and direct patient use of preferred provider lists, and improvements to the provider selection process. Within the domains, all therapists remarked that outcome data would be useful for matching patients to providers; however, most also indicated that outcome data should not be the only factor used in provider selection. All therapists expressed a willingness to be included in preferred provider lists that incorporate track record data. Overall, both patients and therapists held generally positive views toward using therapist effectiveness data to help personalize mental health care. Yet, both stakeholder groups acknowledged that other personalization factors should be considered alongside these data. Based on these results, our team is in the process of implementing patient-therapist match strategies in larger and more diverse mental health care contexts.

Revisiting our approach to behavioral health referrals.

This system of matching referrals to behavioral health practitioners' historical effectiveness seeks to strengthen patient outcomes.

Therapist perceptions of their own measurement-based, problem-specific effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE: Patient-reported outcomes data reveal differences both in therapists' global effectiveness across their average patient (between-therapist effect) and in treating different problems within their caseload (within-therapist effects). Yet, it is unclear how accurately therapists perceive their own measurement-based, problem-specific effectiveness and whether such self-perceptions predict global between-therapist performance differences. We explored these questions in naturalistic psychotherapy. METHOD: For 50 therapists, we drew on data from a mean of 27 past patients (total N = 1,363) who completed a multidimensional outcome measure-Treatment Outcome Package (TOP)-at pre- and posttreatment. For each of 12 outcome domains (e.g., depression, anxiety), TOP data classified therapists as historically "effective," "neutral," or "ineffective." Unaware of their data-driven classifications, therapists rated their perceived effectiveness for each domain. We conducted chi-square analyses to determine whether therapists predicted their own measurement-based effectiveness classifications to a level greater than chance. We then used multilevel modeling to test whether therapists' problem-specific perceptions predicted global between-therapist performance differences. RESULTS: For all but one outcome domain, therapists were no better than chance at predicting their measurement-based effectiveness classification. Additionally, controlling for patient baseline impairment, therapists who consistently overestimated their problem-specific effectiveness had patients who reported worse global outcomes than patients whose therapist more accurately estimated their effectiveness. Conversely, therapists who underestimated their problem-specific effectiveness had patients who reported better outcomes than patients whose therapist over- or accurately estimated their effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Therapist humility may differentiate the most from least globally effective therapists, and this virtue should be cultivated in clinical trainings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Participant factors as correlates of patients' psychotherapy outcome expectation: A meta-analytic and box-count review.

OBJECTIVE: More positive pre- or early therapy patient outcome expectation (OE) has consistently correlated with better treatment outcomes. Thus, it is important to identify factors that contribute to patients' OE, which can inform therapist responsivity to such risk or facilitative markers. With growing research on OE correlates-centered primarily on patient characteristics/treatment factors and, to a lesser extent, therapist factors-a comprehensive synthesis is warranted to elucidate replicated and mixed associations and stimulate further research. Accordingly, we set a pragmatic cutoff of k ≥ 5 for meaningful empirical aggregation of participant factor-OE associations; otherwise, we conducted box counts. METHOD: We searched for articles published through March 2022 that included a clinical sample, a measure of patient's pre- or early treatment OE, and an explicit test of the factor-OE association. RESULTS: Patient problem severity, problem chronicity, education, age, and quality of life were meta-analyzed. Greater severity correlated with lower/less optimistic OE (r = -0.13, p < .001) and higher QOL correlated with higher/more optimistic OE (r = 0.18, p < .001). Box counts revealed that few variables had consistent associations with OE. CONCLUSIONS: Some factors can help forecast patient OE, though additional research is needed to enhance confidence and clinical meaning.

Baseline overly accommodating interpersonal problems in relation to parsed alliance-outcome associations in cognitive behavioral therapy for generalized anxiety disorder.

Given its interpersonal underpinnings, relational factors may be salient in psychotherapy for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Supporting this point, research has indicated a positive total alliance-improvement correlation in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for GAD. However, less research has disaggregated this correlation into within- and between-patient components, or examined theory-informed ways in which patient characteristics influence to these components. Thus, we first investigated parsed alliance-outcome associations in CBT for GAD. Second, consistent with theory that alliance may represent a direct interpersonal change correlate, we tested whether within-patient alliance improvements were especially therapeutic for patients with higher levels of an interpersonal problem prototypical of GAD-over accommodation. Also, consistent with theory that between-patient differences in overall alliance may be influenced by patients' preexisting relational characteristics, we tested whether more overly accommodating patients reported poorer average alliances that, in turn, related to worse outcomes.Sixty-nine patients received variants of CBT. Patients rated over accommodation at baseline, and alliance and outcome across treatment.As hypothesized, within-patient alliance improvements correlated with subsequent anxiety reduction, and this association was stronger for more overly accommodating patients. All between-patient associations were nonsignificant.Results help clarify the nuanced role of alliance in CBT for GAD.

Replicating patient-level moderators of CBT and IPT's comparative efficacy for depression.

Although evidence-based psychotherapies, such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT), produce comparable average outcomes, it is plausible that some patients who possess one or more specific characteristics may respond better to one over the other. Addressing this what works best for whom question, researchers have tested the moderating influence of patient characteristics on comparative treatment effects (viz. aptitude-treatment interactions [ATIs]). However, few ATIs have emerged or replicated, thereby providing little treatment-selection guidance. Informed by a systematic review of patient ATIs in trials that compared CBT versus IPT for depression (Bernecker et al., 2017), this study aimed to replicate (a) significant ATIs previously established in a single study; and (b) significant ATIs previously examined twice, with only one study demonstrating a moderating effect. Data derived from a trial in which adult outpatients with major depression were randomly assigned to 16 weeks of CBT (n = 41) or IPT (n = 39). Patient characteristics were measured at baseline, and patients rated their depression throughout treatment. Multilevel models revealed one ATI replication; for patients with more self-sacrificing interpersonal problems, CBT outperformed IPT; the reverse was true for patients with fewer such problems. Other moderators either failed to replicate or directionally contradicted prior research. Results help inform optimal treatment matching for some patients, which reflects a type of psychotherapy personalization. However, they also highlight limitations of traditional ATI research and suggest that different methods are needed to inform responsive personalization efforts more expansively and reliably. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Quiet Ego Intervention Enhances Flourishing by Increasing Quiet Ego Characteristics and Trait Emotional Intelligence: A Randomized Experiment.

The quiet ego-a personality construct characterized by empathy, inclusivity, non-defensiveness, and growth-mindedness in self-other relations-correlates positively with varied health markers. There is also emerging evidence that quiet-ego-based interventions may have a positive impact on health-related outcomes. However, no research has examined whether such interventions promote psychological flourishing and through what mechanisms. We addressed this gap with a randomized longitudinal experiment, hypothesizing that a quiet ego contemplation would improve participants' flourishing and that the link between the intervention and flourishing would be mediated by higher trait emotional intelligence (EI). Using Amazon MTurk, we randomly assigned 75 participants to a 3-session intervention or control condition. As hypothesized, participants in the intervention condition reported higher trait EI scores that, in turn, elevated their flourishing. Results extend the causal benefits of brief quiet ego interventions to psychological flourishing. Given the study's context during the COVID-19 pandemic, the findings may have implications for mitigating the negative impact of the pandemic. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10902-022-00560-z.

Patient-therapist expectancy convergence and outcome in naturalistic psychotherapy.

Research on close relationships demonstrates that dyadic convergence, or two people becoming more similar in their experiences and/or beliefs over time, is commonplace and adaptive. As psychotherapy involves a close relationship, patient-therapist convergence processes may influence treatment-specific outcomes. Although prior research supports that patients and therapists tend to converge on their alliance perspectives over time, which associates with subsequent patient improvement, no research has similarly examined belief convergence during therapy. Accordingly, this study focused on patient-therapist convergence in their outcome expectations (OE), a belief variable associated with patient improvement when measured from individual participant perspectives. We predicted both that significant OE convergence would occur and relate to better posttreatment outcome. Data derived from a trial of naturalistic psychotherapy. Patients and therapists repeatedly rated their respective OE through treatment, and patients rated their symptom/functional outcomes at posttreatment. For dyads with the requisite OE data (N = 154), we tested our questions using multilevel structural equation modeling. Counter to our hypotheses, there was no discernable OE convergence pattern over treatment (γ100 = 0.01, SE = 0.03, p = .690) and OE convergence was unrelated to outcome at the between-dyad level (γ020 = 2.37, SE = 10.28, p = .818). However, on its own, higher early patient OE was significantly associated with better outcome at the between-dyad level (γ050 = -0.04, SE = 0.01, p = .007). Results suggest that OE may be more of a facilitative patient versus relational process factor. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Evidence-based tailoring of treatment to patients, providers, and processes: Introduction to the special issue.

Given the many evidence-supported psychotherapy interventions, and the fact that no single approach or therapist can successfully help all patients, in recent years, there has been a surge in studies focused on evidence-based methods of tailoring treatment to patients, providers, and processes. Although the field still has a long way to go in reliably mapping specific empirically supported avenues to personalized therapies, emerging results from this line of research underscore the potential for such optimization. In this vein, the articles in the special issue describe some of the most auspicious recent developments in the field of personalized mental health treatment. In this introduction to the special issue, we synthesize the articles and propose a list of some of the most promising personalization principles. These include (a) a diversity of aims that the approaches seek to achieve; (b) a diversity of outcomes used to evaluate the merits of these approaches; (c) the information on which the tailoring is based; (d) the tailoring approaches themselves; and (e) the research designs used to evaluate them. These pathways can inform the most current tailoring guidelines that can help clinical decision-making and inspire future translational science in this area. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Therapist-level moderation of within- and between-therapist process-outcome associations.

OBJECTIVE: Although higher quality patient-therapist alliance and more positive patient outcome expectation (OE) consistently predict symptomatic/functional improvement in psychotherapy, most research has failed to capture the nuance in these process-outcome relations by parsing them into within-therapist (i.e., differences between patients treated by the same therapist) and between-therapist (i.e., differences between therapists' average process/outcome ratings across all patients in their caseloads) components. Moreover, the few studies that have done so have produced mixed results, suggesting the possibility of systematic variability in these associations (i.e., moderators). One potential source of such variability could be providers themselves; that is, different therapists could use these processes to differing therapeutic benefit. This study tested the alliance- and OE-outcome associations at both the within- and between-therapist levels and explored therapist-level moderators of them. METHOD: Data derived from 212 adult outpatients treated naturalistically by 42 psychotherapists as part of a randomized trial that compared different case-assignment methods. Patients completed measures of alliance, OE, and outcome repeatedly throughout treatment. Therapist characteristics were assessed at baseline. RESULTS: Multilevel structural equation models revealed that, at the between-therapist level, only higher alliance quality, but not more optimistic OE, was associated with greater caseload-level improvement. At the within-therapist level, only more optimistic OE, but not higher alliance quality, was associated with patient improvement. Finally, therapists' self-perceived alliance-fostering effectiveness and cognitive-behavioral orientation moderated the within- and between-therapist alliance-outcome associations, respectively. CONCLUSION: Results indicate that different therapists use common treatment processes to differing therapeutic benefit, which can inform more personalized clinical practices and trainings. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

For whom does a match matter most? Patient-level moderators of evidence-based patient-therapist matching.

OBJECTIVE: A double-blind, randomized controlled trial tested the effectiveness of a personalized Match System in which patients are assigned to therapists with a "track record" of effectively treating a given patient's primary concern(s) (e.g., anxiety). Matched patients demonstrated significantly better outcomes than those assigned through usual pragmatic means. The present study examined patient-level moderators of this match effect. We hypothesized that the match benefits would be especially pronounced for patients who presented with (a) greater overall problem severity, and (b) greater problem complexity (i.e., number of elevated problem domains). We also explored if patient racial/ethnic minority status moderated the condition effect. METHOD: Patients were 218 adults randomized to the Match or as-usual assignment condition, and then treated naturalistically by 48 therapists. The primary outcome was the Treatment Outcome Package (TOP), a multidimensional assessment tool that also primed the Match algorithm (based on historical, therapist-level effectiveness data), and assessed trial patients' symptoms/functioning and demographic information at baseline. Moderator effects were tested as patient-level interactions in three-level hierarchical linear models. RESULTS: The beneficial match effect was significantly more pronounced for patients with higher initial severity (-0.03, 95% CI -0.05, -0.01) and problem complexity (-0.01, 95% CI -0.02, -0.004), yet the high correlation between severity and complexity called into question the uniqueness of the complexity moderator effect. Moreover, the match effect was more pronounced for racial/ethnic minority patients (i.e., nonwhite; -0.05, 95% CI -0.09, -0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Measurement-based matching is especially effective for patients with certain characteristics, which further informs mental health treatment personalization. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Therapist affiliation and hostility in cognitive-behavioral therapy with and without motivational interviewing for severe generalized anxiety disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Although therapist supportive, rather than directive, strategies have been particularly indicated during client resistance, little systematic research has examined how therapists responsively navigate resistance in different therapy approaches and how this responsiveness is related to outcome. METHOD: In the context of disagreement episodes in cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD; Westra, H. A., Constantino, M. J., & Antony, M. M. Integrating motivational interviewing with cognitive-behavioral therapy for severe generalized anxiety disorder: An allegiance-controlled randomized clinical trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 84(9), 768-782. https://doi.org/10.1037/ccp0000098, 2016), the present study examined (1) the degree to which therapist management of resistance differed between therapists trained in CBT integrated with motivational interviewing (MI-CBT; i.e., training centered on the responsive management of resistance) and therapists trained in CBT-alone, and (2) the impact of specific therapist behaviors during disagreement on client worry outcomes immediately posttreatment and 1-year posttreatment. Episodes of disagreement were rated used the Structural Analysis of Social Behavior (Benjamin, L. S. Structural analysis of social behavior. Psychological Review, 81(5), 392-425. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0037024, 1974). RESULTS: Therapists trained in MI-CBT were found to exhibit significantly more affiliative and fewer hostile behaviors during disagreement compared to those trained in CBT-alone; both of these, in turn, were found to mediate client 1-year posttreatment outcomes, such that increased affiliation during disagreement was associated with improved outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the value of training therapists in the responsive detection and management of resistance, as well as the systematic integration of MI into CBT.

Predictors of change in patient treatment outcome expectation during cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy for generalized anxiety disorder.

Positive patient-rated psychotherapy outcome expectation at pre- or early treatment is associated with posttreatment improvement. However, there is limited research on patients' change in outcome expectation across therapy and participant factors that predict both pretreatment outcome expectation and expectation change. The present study aimed to examine (a) the overall trajectory of change in patients' outcome expectation from pretreatment through treatment's end; (b) baseline patient characteristics as predictors of their pretreatment outcome expectation; (c) early change in general self-efficacy (controlling for baseline patient characteristics, early change in symptoms, and treatment condition) as predictor of expectation change; and (d) therapist effects on patients' outcome expectation change. For patients with generalized anxiety disorder (N = 80) receiving variants of cognitive-behavioral therapy, outcome expectation was assessed at pretreatment, Session 5, Session 10, and posttreatment. Using multilevel models with repeated assessments, we found outcome expectation to linearly increase from pre- to posttreatment. When controlling for other patient characteristics at intake, higher depression severity was associated with lower pretreatment outcome expectation. When controlling for baseline patient characteristics, early reduction in generalized anxiety disorder-symptoms and global severity, and treatment condition, an increase in early general self-efficacy was associated with a less steep increase in outcome expectation over the therapy. We also found between-therapist differences in their patients' average outcome expectation change. Results shed additional light on various participant characteristics that influence patients' pretreatment outcome expectation and expectation change through therapy. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Effect of Matching Therapists to Patients vs Assignment as Usual on Adult Psychotherapy Outcomes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Psychotherapists possess strengths and weaknesses in treating different mental health problems, yet performance information is rarely harnessed in mental health care (MHC). To our knowledge, no prior studies have tested the causal efficacy of prospectively matching patients to therapists with empirically derived strengths in treating patients' specific concerns. Objective: To test the effect of measurement-based matching vs case assignment as usual (CAU) on psychotherapy outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this randomized clinical trial, adult outpatients were recruited between November 2017 and April 2019. Assessments occurred at baseline and repeatedly during treatment at 6 community MHC clinics in Cleveland, Ohio. To be eligible, patients had to make their own MHC decisions. Of 1329 individuals screened, 288 were randomized. Excluding those who withdrew or provided no assessments beyond baseline, 218 patients treated by 48 therapists were included in the primary modified intent-to-treat analyses. Interventions: Therapist performance was assessed pretrial across 15 or more historical cases based on patients' pre-post reporting across 12 problem domains of the routinely administered Treatment Outcome Package (TOP). Therapists were classified in each domain as effective (on average, patients' symptoms reliably improved), neutral (on average, patients' symptoms neither reliably improved nor deteriorated), or ineffective (on average, patients' symptoms reliably deteriorated). Trial patients were randomly assigned to good-fitting therapists (matched group) or were assigned to therapists pragmatically (CAU group). There were multiple match levels, ranging from therapists being effective on the 3 most elevated domains reported by patients and not ineffective on any others (highest) to not effective on the most elevated domains reported by patients but also not ineffective on any domain (lowest). Therapists treated patients in the matched and CAU groups, and treatment was unmanipulated. Main Outcomes and Measures: General symptomatic and functional impairment across all TOP domains (average z scores relative to the general population mean; higher scores indicate greater impairment), global distress (Symptom Checklist-10; higher scores indicate greater distress), and domain-specific impairment on each individual's most elevated TOP-assessed problem. Results: Of 218 patients, 147 (67.4%) were female, and 193 (88.5%) were White. The mean (SD) age was 33.9 (11.2) years. Multilevel modeling indicated a match effect on reductions in weekly general symptomatic and functional impairment (γ110 = -0.03; 95% CI, -0.05 to -0.01; d = 0.75), global distress (γ110 = -0.16; 95% CI, -0.30 to -0.02; d = 0.50), and domain-specific impairment (γ110 = -0.01; 95% CI -0.01 to -0.006; d = 0.60), with no adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance: Matching patients with therapists based on therapists' performance strengths can improve MHC outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02990000.

A Multimethod Study of Mental Health Care Patients' Attitudes Toward Clinician-Level Performance Information.

OBJECTIVE: Research demonstrates variability in mental health clinicians' overall and domain-specific outcomes for their patients. Despite calls to increase patient access to provider performance information, little is known about patients' attitudes toward and valuing of this information. This study explored patient attitudes, preferences, and values regarding the use of clinician outcome track records in provider selection and treatment decision making. METHODS: Community mental health patients (N=403) completed a multicomponent survey, and a subset of patients (N=15) completed a follow-up semistructured interview. Interview data were analyzed with consensual qualitative methods. RESULTS: Overall, participants endorsed valuing access to clinician outcome track record information and endorsed the belief that using such information would enhance the referral process and promote better mental health outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Harnessing measurement-based information on clinicians' effectiveness to make more personalized treatment decisions could promote better treatment engagement, retention, and outcomes.

Association between therapist attunement to patient outcome expectation and worry reduction in two therapies for generalized anxiety disorder.

Patients' higher psychotherapy outcome expectation (OE) correlates with improvement. Thus, it seems important that therapists attune to this belief, both in the moment and over time, to capitalize on its value when higher or respond to its potential risk when lower. Conceptually, attunement can have different guises, including the extent to which therapists (a) accurately estimate their patients' momentary OE level (low directional discrepancy), (b) become more accurate in estimating OE over time (convergence), (c) accurately track shifts in their patients' OE (temporal congruence), and (d) become more temporally congruent over time (alignment). To date, though, little is known empirically about therapist attunement to patient OE. Thus, we examined the presence of attunement indices and their relation to posttreatment outcome. Data derived from a randomized trial that compared cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT; n = 43) to CBT plus motivational interviewing (n = 42) for patients with generalized anxiety disorder. After each session, patients rated their OE, and therapists estimated their patients' OE. Patients rated worry at baseline and posttreatment. Dyadic multilevel modeling revealed that across both treatments, therapists were directionally discrepant in that they underestimated patients' OE (p < .001), which did not change over time (no average convergence/divergence pattern; p = .43). Additionally, therapists exhibited temporal congruence with patients' OE (p < .001) and became more aligned with this rating over time (p = .008). Only greater OE convergence, when it occurred, predicted lower worry (p = .04). A therapist's increasingly accurate empathy about their patients' OE may be therapeutic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).