Evaluating the UE-ATR Checklist: Nuanced Attribution in Unsuccessful Therapeutic Outcomes

IF 3.2 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Sanne T. L. Houben, Anna C. P. Backus, Suzanne Hermans, Harald Merckelbach, Brechje Dandachi-FitzGerald
{"title":"Evaluating the UE-ATR Checklist: Nuanced Attribution in Unsuccessful Therapeutic Outcomes","authors":"Sanne T. L. Houben,&nbsp;Anna C. P. Backus,&nbsp;Suzanne Hermans,&nbsp;Harald Merckelbach,&nbsp;Brechje Dandachi-FitzGerald","doi":"10.1002/cpp.70091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Unwanted events in psychotherapy can hinder treatment, yet clinicians overlook them and tend to attribute treatment stagnation mainly to patient-related factors. The unwanted events–adverse treatment reaction (UE-ATR) checklist was developed to encourage a more balanced reflection on treatment difficulties, but its effectiveness remains unclear. This study investigated whether the UE-ATR checklist enables clinicians to allocate treatment difficulties in a more nuanced way across various contributing factors. Clinicians and psychology students (<i>N</i> = 104) were randomly assigned to either use the UE-ATR (<i>n</i> = 59) or not (<i>n</i> = 45) while reviewing a case vignette of a patient who experienced unwanted events during therapy and treatment stagnation. They allocated responsibility for suboptimal treatment outcome across five factors: the patient, the therapist, the treatment method, the patient's pathology or other circumstances. Attribution was analysed using the Herfindahl–Hirschman index (HHI), where higher scores indicate a monocausal and lower scores reflect a multicausal view. No significant differences were found between the conditions. Although most users found the checklist clinically useful, this positive perception did not lead to a more balanced perspective on the causes of unwanted events. Although the UE-ATR checklist can support clinical reflection, additional training is necessary to maximize its effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":10460,"journal":{"name":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","volume":"32 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cpp.70091","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpp.70091","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Unwanted events in psychotherapy can hinder treatment, yet clinicians overlook them and tend to attribute treatment stagnation mainly to patient-related factors. The unwanted events–adverse treatment reaction (UE-ATR) checklist was developed to encourage a more balanced reflection on treatment difficulties, but its effectiveness remains unclear. This study investigated whether the UE-ATR checklist enables clinicians to allocate treatment difficulties in a more nuanced way across various contributing factors. Clinicians and psychology students (N = 104) were randomly assigned to either use the UE-ATR (n = 59) or not (n = 45) while reviewing a case vignette of a patient who experienced unwanted events during therapy and treatment stagnation. They allocated responsibility for suboptimal treatment outcome across five factors: the patient, the therapist, the treatment method, the patient's pathology or other circumstances. Attribution was analysed using the Herfindahl–Hirschman index (HHI), where higher scores indicate a monocausal and lower scores reflect a multicausal view. No significant differences were found between the conditions. Although most users found the checklist clinically useful, this positive perception did not lead to a more balanced perspective on the causes of unwanted events. Although the UE-ATR checklist can support clinical reflection, additional training is necessary to maximize its effectiveness.

评估UE-ATR检查表:不成功治疗结果的细微归因
心理治疗中不希望发生的事件可能会阻碍治疗,但临床医生忽视了它们,并倾向于将治疗停滞主要归因于患者相关因素。不良治疗反应(UE-ATR)检查表是为了鼓励对治疗困难进行更平衡的反思而开发的,但其有效性尚不清楚。本研究调查了UE-ATR检查表是否能使临床医生以更细致入微的方式在各种因素之间分配治疗困难。临床医生和心理学专业学生(N = 104)被随机分配使用UE-ATR (N = 59)或不使用UE-ATR (N = 45),同时回顾一个患者在治疗期间经历了不想要的事件和治疗停滞的病例。他们将治疗效果欠佳的责任划分为五个因素:患者、治疗师、治疗方法、患者的病理或其他情况。归因分析使用赫芬达尔-赫希曼指数(HHI),其中较高的分数表明单原因,较低的分数反映多原因的观点。两种情况之间没有发现显著差异。虽然大多数用户发现检查表在临床上有用,但这种积极的看法并没有导致对不良事件原因的更平衡的看法。虽然UE-ATR检查表可以支持临床反映,但为了使其效果最大化,还需要额外的培训。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical psychology & psychotherapy
Clinical psychology & psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
106
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy aims to keep clinical psychologists and psychotherapists up to date with new developments in their fields. The Journal will provide an integrative impetus both between theory and practice and between different orientations within clinical psychology and psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy will be a forum in which practitioners can present their wealth of expertise and innovations in order to make these available to a wider audience. Equally, the Journal will contain reports from researchers who want to address a larger clinical audience with clinically relevant issues and clinically valid research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信