The future of psychotherapy integration: Closing the gap between research and practice.

Over the past several decades, the field of psychotherapy has become more receptive to the idea of integration. For the most part, efforts have been made to find commonalities and complementarities across different theoretical orientations. When the Society for the Exploration of Psychotherapy Integration (SEPI) was formed in 1983, its stated goals were for the integration of different approaches to therapy, but also for the integration of research and practice. This article comments on the long-standing gap between practice and research, and offers ways in which this gap may be closed. Moreover, in light of increasing demands for accountability, it is maintained that empirical pragmatism needs to be the integrative theme of the 21st century. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Improved treatment outcome associated with the shift to empirically supported treatments in an outpatient clinic is maintained over a ten-year period.

Recent years have seen an increase in emphasis on the use of psychological treatments that are supported by empirical data, as advocates have argued these treatments lead to better patient outcomes. We have previously shown that a shift to use of empirically supported treatments in a training clinic led to significant improvement in patient outcomes over four years (Cukrowicz et al., 2005). In the current study, we examined whether average patient outcomes at termination continued to be favorable over the six-year period following the initial shift. We examined data from 549 patients (M age = 25.78, SD = 10.08; 322 females and 227 males) treated prior to and after the shift to empirically supported treatments, all of whom were rated after termination using the Clinical Global Impression rating scale to track their improvement during treatment. The current study found that improvements in patient outcomes continued over the six-year follow-up period. Patients treated during the follow-up period had superior outcomes when compared to those treated following the initial shift to empirically supported treatments (effect size = .28, p     

The power of multiple methods and evidence sources: Raising the profile of Canadian counselling psychology research.

In counselling psychology, research and practice are viewed as mutually informative, and Canadian counselling psychologists conduct research in a wide range of areas, utilizing a wide range of research methods. However, there are few Canadian publications that give prominence to counselling psychology scholarly work. Over the past decade, two trends have become more prominent in the practice of counselling psychology: evidence-based practice and outcome-focused intervention. Traditionally, empirical evidence for the efficacy of practice interventions has come from randomized controlled trials. This fails to reflect the diversity of methods and practice that Canadian counselling psychologists utilize. To address this discrepancy, in this article we provide some alternate ways for obtaining empirical support for the predictive efficacy of counselling interventions. We conclude by addressing some challenges currently facing counselling psychologists in Canada (i.e., publication venues, funding for research, the connection between research and practice, preparation of students) and describing some ways for raising the profile of counselling psychology research and practice in Canada. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of Group psychotherapy: Studies in methodology of research and therapy. Report of a group psychotherapy research project of the U. S. Veterans Administration.

Reviews the book, Group Psychotherapy: Studies in Methodology of Research and Therapy. Report of a group psychotherapy research project of the U. S. Veterans Administration by Jerome D. Frank and Florence B. Powdermaker (see record 1954-02756-000). According to the reviewer, the project described in this volume was probably the first large-scale formal research into the process of group psychotherapy. The two major objectives of the investigation were to develop methods for studying the process of therapy and the specific problems faced by therapists, and to develop methods which could provide solutions to the problems isolated by the analysis of the treatment process. The book, like the project, has two main divisions, the research with neurotic clinic patients and a controlled study of group therapy with hospitalized schizophrenics. According to the reviewer, whatever its failings as pure research, there can be no question that this is an important and useful book. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Treatment integrity in psychotherapy research: Analysis of the studies and examination of the associated factors.

Treatment integrity refers to the degree to which an intervention is delivered as intended. Two studies evaluated the adequacy of treatment integrity procedures (including establishing, assessing, evaluating, and reporting integrity; therapist treatment adherence; and therapist competence) implemented in psychotherapy research, as well as predictors of their implementation. Randomized controlled trials of psychosocial interventions published in 6 influential psychological and psychiatric journals were reviewed and coded for treatment integrity implementation. Results indicate that investigations that systematically addressed treatment integrity procedures are virtually absent in the literature. Treatment integrity was adequately addressed for only 3.50% of the evaluated psychosocial interventions. Journal of publication and treatment approach predicted integrity implementation. Skill-building treatments (e.g., cognitive-behavioral) as compared with non-skill-building interventions (e.g., psychodynamic, nondirective counseling) were implemented with higher attention to integrity procedures. Guidelines for implementation of treatment integrity procedures need to be reevaluated. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Comment: Integrating methodologies in the scientific study of interpersonal psychotherapy: A reaction to "Therapist immediacy in brief psychotherapy: Case study I and case study II".

In this reaction article, the author concentrates on selected methodological components characterizing both Kasper, Hill, and Kivlighan's (see record 2008-13167-001) and Hill, Sim, Spangler, Stahl, Sullivan, and Teyber's (see record 2008-13167-002) respective case studies of therapist immediacy in brief psychotherapy. In tandem, the foci and methodology of these investigations break new ground in the scientific study of interpersonal psychotherapy, and more generally they serve as paradigmatic illustrations of the form that psychotherapy research can take if it is to be truly more meaningful and useful for practitioners. Emphasis is placed on the investigators' integration of single-case research, elements of change process research, and quantitative and qualitative methods in a way that enables highly intensive examination of this core intervention in interpersonal psychotherapy. Specific elements and implications of each of these methodological components are briefly discussed, which also creates a context for addressing the issue of discovery versus verification as this pertains to the present studies. Some underlying philosophical considerations are also briefly touched on along the way. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)