Despite the overall efficacy of psychotherapy, dropouts are substantial, many clients do not benefit, therapists vary in effectiveness, and there may be a crisis of confidence among consumers. A research paradigm called patient-focused research--a method of enhancing outcome via continuous progress feedback--holds promise to address these problems. Although feedback has been demonstrated to improve individual psychotherapy outcomes, no studies have examined couple therapy. The current study investigated the effects of providing treatment progress and alliance information to both clients and therapists during couple therapy. Outpatients (N = 410) at a community family counseling clinic were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups: treatment as usual (TAU) or feedback. Couples in the feedback condition demonstrated significantly greater improvement than those in the TAU condition at posttreatment, achieved nearly 4 times the rate of clinically significant change, and maintained a significant advantage on the primary measure at 6-month follow-up while attaining a significantly lower rate of separation or divorce. Mounting evidence of feedback effects with different measures and populations suggests that the time for routine tracking of client progress has arrived.

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between the alliance and outcome in couple therapy and examine whether the alliance predicted outcomes over and above early change. The authors also investigated partner influence and gender and sought to identify couple alliance patterns that predicted couple outcomes. Method: The authors examined the alliances and outcomes at posttreatment and follow-up of 250 couples seeking treatment for marital distress in a naturalistic setting. The Session Rating Scale was used to measure the alliance; the Outcome Rating Scale and Locke Wallace Marital Adjustment Scale were used to measure outcomes. Couples were White, Euro-Scandinavian, and heterosexual, with a mean age of 38.5 years and average number of years together of 11.8. On a subsample (n ϭ 118) that included couples with 4 or more sessions, the authors investigated the relationship between the alliance and outcome controlling for early change, and patterns of alliance development were delineated. Results: In the full sample, first-session alliances were not predictive of outcomes, but last-session alliances were predictive for both individuals and their partners. In the subsample, third-session alliances predicted outcome significantly above early change (d ϭ 0.25) that exceeded the reliable change index. Couple alliances that started over the mean and increased were associated with significantly more couples achieving reliable or clinically significant change. Gender influences were mixed. Conclusions: Given the current findings suggesting a potential alliance impact over and above symptom relief as well as the importance of ascending alliance scores, continuous assessment of the alliance appears warranted.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between client initial goal for couple therapy (i.e., improve the relationship or clarify the viability of the relationship) and the outcomes (including their relationship status, i.e., separated or together) at posttreatment as well as at 6-month follow-up. Two hundred forty-nine couples (N = 498 individuals) seeking treatment for relationship distress in a naturalistic setting were treated by 20 therapists. Client initial relationship goal was attained by intake paperwork protocol, which included client initial goal for couple therapy and client perception of partner goal. Clients who reported that their goal was to improve the relationship reported better outcomes at post. Couples who reported their goal was to improve the relationship were less likely to break up at a 6-month follow-up. Of the 115 couples stating they wanted to improve the relationship, only nine (7.8%) couples were separated at 6 months. In contrast, of the 16 couples in which both partners wanted to clarify the relationship prior to therapy, nine (56%) were separated at follow-up. Therapist awareness of each individual's relationship goal prior to couple therapy could enhance outcomes, and treatment tailored according to initial goals could set the stage for positive outcomes however defined.

Systematic client feedback (SCF) is increasingly employed in mental health services worldwide. While research supports its efficacy over treatment as usual, clinicians, especially those who highly value relational practices, may be concerned that routine data collection detracts from clinical process. This article describes one SCF system, the Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS), along a normative (standardized measurement) to communicative (conversational) continuum, highlighting PCOMS' origins in everyday clinical practice. The authors contend that PCOMS represents "both/and," providing a valid signal of client progress while facilitating communicative process particularly prized by family therapists steeped in relational traditions. The article discusses application of PCOMS in systemic practice and describes how it actualizes time-honored family therapy approaches. The importance of giving voice to individualized client experience is emphasized.

This study examined gender differences in session one alliances and in the trajectory of the alliance over the course of couple therapy. Additionally, this study examined the association between men and women's pre-therapy relationship adjustment and alliance at session one and over the course of therapy. A total of 316 couples seeking outpatient couple therapy were given the Locke-Wallace marital adjustment test at pre-therapy to measure relationship adjustment and the session rating scale after each session to measure alliance with the therapist. The results showed that men had lower alliance ratings after session one than women. Men's pre-therapy relationship adjustment was positively associated with their own session one alliance as well as their own alliance trajectory over the course of therapy. Men's pre-therapy relationship adjustment was also positively associated with their partner's session one alliance. Women's pre-therapy relationship adjustment showed no significant relationship with their own alliance or their partners at session one or the alliance trajectory over the course of therapy. The implications for how these gender differences may impact on the process of couple therapy with heterosexual couples are discussed.