Therapeutic techniques and session impact: A practice-research network study in private practice.

IF 2.6 1区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Psychotherapy Research Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-09 DOI:10.1080/10503307.2023.2262099

Louis G Castonguay, Soo Jeong Youn, James F Boswell, J Ryan Kilcullen, Henry Xiao, Andrew A McAleavey, Mary A Boutselis, Melora Braver, Nancy R Chiswick, Neal A Hemmelstein, Jeffrey S Jackson, Richard A Lytle, Marolyn E Morford, Heather S Scott, Catherine S Spayd, Mary O'Leary Wiley

{"title":"Therapeutic techniques and session impact: A practice-research network study in private practice.","authors":"Louis G Castonguay, Soo Jeong Youn, James F Boswell, J Ryan Kilcullen, Henry Xiao, Andrew A McAleavey, Mary A Boutselis, Melora Braver, Nancy R Chiswick, Neal A Hemmelstein, Jeffrey S Jackson, Richard A Lytle, Marolyn E Morford, Heather S Scott, Catherine S Spayd, Mary O'Leary Wiley","doi":"10.1080/10503307.2023.2262099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: This study investigated the relationship between therapeutic techniques and session impact, by examining the replicability of findings observed in a university-based training clinic (Boswell et al., 2010) in another practice-oriented setting: private practice.Method: N = 8 therapists completed session-level assessments of their technique use for N = 38 clients. The same client sample completed session-level assessments of session outcome. Technique-outcome associations were examined with multilevel models.Results: As in Boswell et al., common factors were associated with positive session impact. For clients who received higher average common factor techniques (relative to their own therapist's caseload), session impact was the poorest in sessions with higher behavioral change techniques use (relative to the client's own average). Moreover, clients with the lowest average common factor techniques (relative to their therapist's caseload) reported better session impact in sessions that involved a higher degree of session-level behavioral change techniques (relative to their own average).Conclusion: In line with Boswell et al., therapists should be mindful of the consistency of their routine technique use between- and within-clients, and this can be aided through collection of their own practice-oriented data.","PeriodicalId":48159,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2023.2262099","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study investigated the relationship between therapeutic techniques and session impact, by examining the replicability of findings observed in a university-based training clinic (Boswell et al., 2010) in another practice-oriented setting: private practice.

Method: N = 8 therapists completed session-level assessments of their technique use for N = 38 clients. The same client sample completed session-level assessments of session outcome. Technique-outcome associations were examined with multilevel models.

Results: As in Boswell et al., common factors were associated with positive session impact. For clients who received higher average common factor techniques (relative to their own therapist's caseload), session impact was the poorest in sessions with higher behavioral change techniques use (relative to the client's own average). Moreover, clients with the lowest average common factor techniques (relative to their therapist's caseload) reported better session impact in sessions that involved a higher degree of session-level behavioral change techniques (relative to their own average).

Conclusion: In line with Boswell et al., therapists should be mindful of the consistency of their routine technique use between- and within-clients, and this can be aided through collection of their own practice-oriented data.

查看原文本刊更多论文

治疗技术和会话影响：私人实践中的实践研究网络研究。

目的：本研究通过检查在另一个以实践为导向的环境：私人实践中，在大学培训诊所（Boswell et al.，2010）观察到的结果的可复制性，调查了治疗技术与会话影响之间的关系。方法：N = 8名治疗师完成了对N的技术使用的会话水平评估 = 38位客户。同一客户样本完成了对会话结果的会话级别评估。采用多层次模型检验技术与结果的相关性。结果：与Boswell等人一样，常见因素与积极的会话影响有关。对于接受更高平均共因技术的客户（相对于他们自己治疗师的工作量），在使用更高行为改变技术的会话中（相对于客户自己的平均水平），会话影响最差。此外，平均共因技术（相对于治疗师的工作量）最低的客户在涉及更高程度的会话级别行为改变技术（相对于他们自己的平均水平）的会话中报告了更好的会话影响。结论：与Boswell等人一致。，治疗师应该注意他们在客户之间和客户内部日常技术使用的一致性，这可以通过收集他们自己的实践数据来帮助实现。

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

Psychotherapy Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

7.80

自引率

10.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Psychotherapy Research seeks to enhance the development, scientific quality, and social relevance of psychotherapy research and to foster the use of research findings in practice, education, and policy formulation. The Journal publishes reports of original research on all aspects of psychotherapy, including its outcomes, its processes, education of practitioners, and delivery of services. It also publishes methodological, theoretical, and review articles of direct relevance to psychotherapy research. The Journal is addressed to an international, interdisciplinary audience and welcomes submissions dealing with diverse theoretical orientations, treatment modalities.