Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Therapist perceptions of their own measurement-based, problem-specific effectiveness.
Constantino, Michael J; Boswell, James F; Coyne, Alice E; Muir, Heather J; Gaines, Averi N; Kraus, David R.
Afiliação
  • Constantino MJ; Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
  • Boswell JF; Department of Psychology, University at Albany, State University of New York.
  • Coyne AE; Department of Psychological Sciences, Case Western Reserve University.
  • Muir HJ; Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
  • Gaines AN; Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
  • Kraus DR; Outcome Referrals Inc.
J Consult Clin Psychol ; 91(8): 474-484, 2023 Aug.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37104803
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).
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Relações Profissional-Paciente / Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Aspecto: Patient_preference Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Consult Clin Psychol Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Relações Profissional-Paciente / Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde Tipo de estudo: Prognostic_studies Aspecto: Patient_preference Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Consult Clin Psychol Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article País de publicação: Estados Unidos