Validity of a Psychotherapy Outcome Measure: The Outcome Rating Scale

Reese, Robert J.; Kodet, Jonathan; Toland, Michael D.

doi:10.1037/e652472012-001

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…There is little doubt that information is lost when relying on only four items, but both measures hold up well to psychometric scrutiny. Multiple validation studies of the ORS (Bringhurst, Watson, Miller, & Duncan, 2006; Campbell & Hemsley, 2009; Reese, Toland, & Kodet, 2012; Miller et al, 2003) as well as efficacy studies (see below) have found that the ORS generates reliable scores. Coefficient alphas have ranged from .87 to .91 in validation studies and from .82 (Reese, Norsworthy, & Rowlands, 2009; individual therapy) to .92 (Slone, Reese, Mathews-Duvall, & Kodet, 2015; group therapy) in clinical studies.…”

Section: Pcoms Psychometrics and Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS) revisiting the client’s frame of reference.

Duncan¹,

Reese²

2015

Psychotherapy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite overall psychotherapy efficacy (Lambert, 2013), many clients do not benefit (Reese, Duncan, Bohanske, Owen, & Minami, 2014), dropouts are a problem (Swift & Greenberg, 2012), and therapists vary significantly in success rates (Baldwin & Imel, 2013), are poor judges of negative outcomes (Chapman et al., 2012), and grossly overestimate their effectiveness (Walfish, McAlister, O'Donnell, & Lambert, 2012). Systematic client feedback offers 1 solution (Duncan, 2014). Several feedback systems have emerged (Castonguay, Barkham, Lutz, & McAleavey, 2013), but only 2 have randomized clinical trial support and are included in the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration's National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices: The Outcome Questionnaire-45.2 System (Lambert, 2010) and the Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS; Duncan, 2012). This article presents the current status of PCOMS, the psychometrics of the PCOMS measures, its empirical support, and its clinical and training applications. Future directions and implications of PCOMS research, training, and practice are detailed. Finally, we propose that systematic feedback offers a way, via large-scale data collection, to reprioritize what matters to psychotherapy outcome, reclaim our empirically validated core values and identity, and change the conversation from a medical model dominated discourse to a more scientific, relational perspective.

show abstract

Section: Pcoms Psychometrics and Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS) revisiting the client’s frame of reference.

Duncan¹,

Reese²

2015

Psychotherapy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Esta práctica es conocida por sus siglas en inglés ROM (Routine Outcome Monitoring, o monitorización rutinaria del resultado) (Lambert, 2010). De entre los múltiple sistemas de monitorización del progreso del paciente que surgen en los últimos años, los instrumentos más utilizados en ensayos clínicos hasta la fecha son el Outcome Questionnaire System (OQ; Lambert et al, 1996) y el Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS; Miller, Duncan, Sorrel y Brown, 2005), ambos con propiedades psicométricas contrastadas (Bringhurst, Watson, Miller y Duncan, 2006;Miller, Duncan, Brown, Sparks y Claud, 2003;Reese, Toland y Kodet, 2012;Vermeersch et al, 2004).…”

Section: La Monitorización De Los Resultados En Psicoterapiaunclassified

Práctica Deliberada en Psicoterapia en el Programa de Psicólogo Interno Residente Español

Rorger

García²

2020

rdp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A pesar de la eficacia de la psicoterapia, existe evidencia sobre sus limitaciones y posibilidades de mejora. Atendiendo al factor del terapeuta, parece que la experiencia clínica, la supervisión tradicional y los conocimientos no son garantía de una mayor eficacia. Esto tiene implicaciones respecto al programa de Psicólogo Interno Residente (PIR) español, al basarse en estos aspectos como pilares de la formación. Se han diseñado instrumentos de monitorización del resultado de la psicoterapia que pueden incrementar su eficacia. El uso de estos métodos es relevante dentro de un contexto de práctica deliberada. Este tipo de práctica se caracteriza por el establecimiento de objetivos y el entrenamiento en habilidades que exceden el nivel actual del practicante. Dentro del campo psicoterapéutico, la práctica deliberada puede contribuir a un aumento de la eficacia del terapeuta a lo largo del tiempo. El artículo realiza una revisión de estos conceptos y propone un modelo de práctica deliberada aplicable al contexto del programa PIR español, justificando su pertinencia y enfatizando el empleo de sesiones grabadas en video junto con instrumentos de monitorización del resultado.

show abstract

“…Multiple validation studies of the ORS (Bringhurst, Watson, Miller, & Duncan, 2006; Campbell & Hemsley, 2009; Miller et al, 2003; Reese, Toland, & Kodet, 2012) as well as efficacy studies have found that the ORS generates reliable scores. Coefficient alphas have ranged from .87 to .91 in validation studies and from .82 (Reese, Norsworthy, & Rowlands, 2009; individual psychotherapy) to .92 (Slone et al, 2015; group psychotherapy) in clinical studies.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient feedback as a quality improvement strategy in an acute care, inpatient unit: An investigation of outcome and readmission rates.

Reese

Duncan²,

Kodet

et al. 2018

Psychological Services

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High psychiatric readmission rates continue while evidence suggests that care is not perceived by patients as "patient centered." Research has focused on aftercare strategies with little attention to the inpatient treatment itself as an intervention to reduce readmission rates. Quality improvement strategies based on patient-centered care may offer an alternative. We evaluated outcomes and readmission rates using a benchmarking methodology with a naturalistic data set from an inpatient psychiatric facility (N = 2,247) that used a quality-improvement strategy called systematic patient feedback. Benchmarks were constructed using randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from inpatient treatment for depression, RCTs from patient feedback in outpatient settings, and national data on psychiatric hospital readmission rates. A systematic patient feedback system, the Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS), was used. Overall pre-post effect sizes were d = 1.33 and d = 1.38 for patients diagnosed with a mood disorder. These effect sizes were statistically equivalent to RCT benchmarks for feedback and depression. Readmission rates were 6.1% (30 days), 9.5% (60 days), and 16.4% (180 days), all lower than national benchmarks. We also found that patients who achieved clinically significant treatment outcomes were less likely to be readmitted. We tentatively suggest that a focus on real-time patient outcomes as well as care that is "patient centered" may provide a path toward lower readmission rates in addition to other evidence-based strategies after discharge. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

show abstract

Validity of a Psychotherapy Outcome Measure: The Outcome Rating Scale

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

The Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS) revisiting the client’s frame of reference.

The Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS) revisiting the client’s frame of reference.

Práctica Deliberada en Psicoterapia en el Programa de Psicólogo Interno Residente Español

Patient feedback as a quality improvement strategy in an acute care, inpatient unit: An investigation of outcome and readmission rates.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About