IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE RETROALIMENTACIÓN SISTEMÁTICA DE ALIANZA Y RESULTADOS TERAPÉUTICOS EN UN CENTRO DE ENTRENAMIENTO: OPORTUNIDADES Y DESAFÍOS.

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (49) ◽  
pp. 91-108
Author(s):  
ivonne ramírez Claveriè ◽  
josé Domingo salvo rivera ◽  
lucas uribe Pesqueira ◽  
Paula uribe Pesqueira
Keyword(s):  
Therapeutic Alliance ◽  
Applied Research ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Psychotherapy Training ◽  
Training Center ◽  
Session Rating Scale ◽  
Outcome Rating Scale ◽  
Chilean Population ◽  
Systematic Feedback

The present work describes the experience of implementing feedback measures for outcome and therapeutic alliance in the context of a private psychotherapy training center. A descriptive summary of the results of the cases attended between 2011 and 2017 is presented, providing data for the Chilean population in the application of the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS) and Session Rating Scale (SRS). Finally, the facilitators and difficulties of the experience of implementing systematic feedback, recommendations when conducting this type of applied research, and opportunities for therapists training are discussed.

Monitoring Alliance and Outcome with Client Feedback Measures

2014 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sidney Shaw ◽  
Kirsten Murray
Keyword(s):  
Therapeutic Alliance ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Client Feedback ◽  
Two Measures ◽  
Session Rating Scale ◽  
Outcome Rating Scale ◽  
Counseling Outcomes ◽  
Empirical Means

The therapeutic alliance is foundational to counseling practice and has amassed strong empirical support as being essential for successful counseling. Counselors generally rely on their own perspective when assessing the quality of the alliance, though the client's perspective has been found to be a better predictor of outcome. Formal methods for eliciting client feedback about the alliance and counseling outcomes have been strongly supported in the literature, yet such limitations as time constraints hinder counselor efforts to gather formal client feedback. Two ultra-brief measures of alliance and outcome, the Session Rating Scale and the Outcome Rating Scale, are feasible methods for counselors to secure client feedback. This article reviews the two measures and makes a case for using empirical means to understand adult clients' views of the therapeutic alliance.

scholarly journals A retrospective analysis comparing clinical outcome measures pre- and post- the introduction of telehealth in a community-based psychiatry clinic in a tertiary medical centre

BJPsych Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (S1) ◽  
pp. S318-S319
Author(s):  
Arup Dhar ◽  
Liam Edwards ◽  
Moana Waerea
Keyword(s):  
Therapeutic Alliance ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Assessment And Treatment ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Session Rating Scale ◽  
Outcome Rating Scale

AimsThe aim of this retrospective analysis was to look at the effect that telehealth had on patient outcomes and the therapeutic alliance.MethodClinical outcomes measures were collected prospectively as part of routine clinical care. Outcome measures were administered at patients’ initial and final appointment. Information was merged into a single database and imported into IBM SPSS for retrospective analysis. The following measures were administered at the beginning and end of treatment and were used to evaluate patient progress; Health of the Nation Outcome Scale (HoNOS), Life Skills Profile (LSP), Session Rating Scale (SRS), Outcome Rating Scale (ORS).ResultTwo cohorts were derived from the clinic; the first cohort (n = 90; 53 females; 37 males; M = 35.72 years; SD = 12.12 years) comprised of those patients whose care occurred between 23/09/2019 and 22/03/2020 and did not receive telehealth appointments. The second cohort (n = 122; 68 females; 54 males; M = 36.2 years; SD = 12.78 years) were those patients who presented to the clinic and were discharged between 23/03/2020 and 21/09/2020 and received at least one telehealth appointment. In the pre-telehealth cohort, mean HoNOS scores at baseline were 17.87 compared to 13.53 at discharge, mean LSP scores at baseline were 10.76 compared to 9.01 at discharge, mean SRS scores at baseline were 34.17 compared to 36.04 at discharge, and mean ORS scores at baseline were 12.97 compared to 21.28 at discharge. In the post-telehealth cohort, mean HoNOS scores at baseline were 14.45 compared to 10.50 at discharge, mean LSP scores at baseline were 7.85 compared to 7.19 at discharge, mean SRS scores at baseline were 36.04 compared to 35.36 at discharge, and mean ORS scores at baseline were 18.83 compared to 15.85 at discharge.ConclusionResults show that telehealth did not impact negatively on the therapeutic effect of clinical sessions, highlighted by similar reductions in HoNOS and LSP scores. It was seen in the post-telehealth cohort that there was worsening in the subject-rated scales (SRS and ORS) which was not seen in the pre-telehealth face-to-face cohort. Thus, there seems to be a discernible negative difference from the patient's perspective in the clinical sessions. This may be due to the difficulties in therapeutic alliance using the telehealth platform. We appreciate that there are a number of confounding factors, especially the effect of COVID-19 isolation. Telehealth is a useful addition to our assessment and treatment paradigms and its use should continue; however, we should be aware of the potential negative effect on therapeutic alliance.

scholarly journals Validation of the French Versions of Two Brief,Clinician-friendly Outcome Monitoring Tools: The ORS and SRS.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christophe Cazauvieilh ◽  
Kamel Gana ◽  
Scott D Miller ◽  
Bruno Quintard
Keyword(s):  
Therapeutic Relationship ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Routine Outcome Monitoring ◽  
Factorial Structure ◽  
Monitoring Tools ◽  
Outcome Monitoring ◽  
Session Rating Scale ◽  
French Validation ◽  
Outcome Rating Scale

<b>French Validation of two brief Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM)</b> scales <b>from the PCOMS system</b> : the <b>ORS</b> (Outcome Rating Scale, Miller et al., 2005) <b>designed to assess </b>various dimensions of <b>well-being and progression during care</b>, and the <b>SRS</b> (Session Rating Scale 3.0; Miller et al., 2002) <b>designed to assess dimensions of the therapeutic relationship</b>. <b>The research implied clinical and non clinical populations</b> <b>and brings estimates</b> <b>regarding</b> factorial structure, validity, reliability, preliminary index and norms of <b>the two scales in French.</b>

De Child outcome rating scale (C-ORS) en deChild session rating scale (C-SRS)

2012 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert Boon ◽  
Sjouk De Boer ◽  
Emmeline Ravestijn
Keyword(s):  
Rating Scale ◽  
Child Outcome ◽  
Session Rating Scale ◽  
Outcome Rating Scale

scholarly journals Spanish Versions of the Outcome Rating Scale and the Session Rating Scale: Normative Data, Reliability, and Validity

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nelson Andrade-González ◽  
Irene Rodrigo-Holgado ◽  
Jesús Fernández-Rozas ◽  
Pablo F. Cáncer ◽  
Guillermo Lahera ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Discriminant Validity ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Clinical Sample ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Reliable Change Index ◽  
Outcome Monitoring ◽  
Session Rating Scale ◽  
Outcome Rating Scale

Routine outcome monitoring (ROM) uses standardized measures to both track and inform mental health service delivery. Use of ROM has been shown to improve the outcome of psychotherapy when applied to different types of patients. The present research was designed to determine the reliability and validity of the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS) and the Session Rating Scale (SRS) in a sample of Spanish patients. After a controlled process of translation into the Spanish that is spoken and written in Spain (i.e., in Europe, as distinct from, e.g., Latin American Spanish), both measures were completed by patients of an outpatient mental health unit during eight sessions of psychotherapy. Sixty mental health patients filled out the ORS and 59 the SRS. In addition, the ORS was completed by 33 people who constituted the non-clinical sample. The cut-off of the ORS was 24.52 points, and the Reliable Change Index (RCI) was 9.15 points. ORS and SRS scores exhibited excellent internal consistency. The temporal stability of the SRS was adequate. The convergent and discriminant validity of the two measures were adequate. Regarding the factorial validity of the ORS and the SRS, in the third psychotherapy session, confirmatory factor analyses evidenced the existence of a unifactorial model. The predictive validity of SRS was acceptable. The ORS was sensitive to changes in patients’ symptoms. In conclusion, compared to the original English versions of the ORS and SRS measures, the Spanish versions of the measures are also reliable and valid.

Client Feedback and Outcome in Individual Psychotherapy

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Partridge ◽  
Cass Dykeman
Keyword(s):  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Multiple Regression Model ◽  
Individual Psychotherapy ◽  
Individual Counseling ◽  
Client Feedback ◽  
Repeated Measures Analysis ◽  
Session Rating Scale ◽  
Outcome Rating Scale ◽  
The Relationship

Counseling practice and research seek to understand varied influences on clinical outcomes. Research has shown that feedback has an effect on clinician-rated measures and outcome. The present study assessed the relationship between feedback and outcome in individual psychotherapy, employing a repeated measures analysis of longitudinal archival data of 138 individuals receiving counseling services. A multiple regression model determined the relationship between client ratings of sessions and client ratings of overall outcomes. Although the sample was heterogeneous in nature and limited to one region, the results indicated a statistically significant relationship between feedback and outcome. These findings suggest that utilizing feedback from clients in individual counseling, in general, and consistently using the session rating scale and the outcome rating scale, in particular, can improve overall therapeutic outcome.

scholarly journals French Validation PCOMS Outcome and Session rating scales ORS SRS Cazauvieilh et al .pdf

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christophe Cazauvieilh ◽  
Kamel Gana ◽  
Scott D Miller ◽  
Bruno Quintard
Keyword(s):  
Therapeutic Relationship ◽  
Rating Scales ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Routine Outcome Monitoring ◽  
Factorial Structure ◽  
Outcome Monitoring ◽  
Session Rating Scale ◽  
French Validation ◽  
Outcome Rating Scale

<b>French Validation of two brief Routine Outcome Monitoring (ROM)</b> scales <b>from the PCOMS system</b> : the <b>ORS</b> (Outcome Rating Scale, Miller et al., 2005) <b>designed to assess </b>various dimensions of <b>well-being and progression during care</b>, and the <b>SRS</b> (Session Rating Scale 3.0; Miller et al., 2002) <b>designed to assess dimensions of the therapeutic relationship</b>. <b>The research implied clinical and non clinical populations</b> <b>and brings estimates</b> <b>regarding</b> factorial structure, validity, reliability, preliminary index and norms of <b>the two scales in French.</b>

Measuring Feedback From Clients

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 86-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pauline Janse ◽  
Liesbeth Boezen-Hilberdink ◽  
Maarten K. van Dijk ◽  
Marc J. P. M. Verbraak ◽  
Giel J. M. Hutschemaekers
Keyword(s):  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Mental Healthcare ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Treatment Results ◽  
Adequate Test ◽  
Session Rating Scale ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Outcome Rating Scale

Treatment results can be improved by obtaining feedback from clients concerning their progress during therapy and the quality of the therapeutic relationship. This feedback can be rated using short instruments such as the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS) and the Session Rating Scale (SRS), which are being increasingly used in many countries. This study investigates the validity and reliability of the Dutch ORS and SRS in a large sample of subjects (N = 587) drawn from the clients of an outpatient mental healthcare organization. The results are compared to those of previous Dutch and American studies. While both the ORS and the SRS exhibited adequate test-retest reliability and internal consistency, their concurrent validity was limited (more for the SRS than for the ORS). New standards are proposed for the Dutch ORS and SRS. The scores obtained with these standards are interpreted differently than those obtained using American standards. The clinical implications of the limited validity of the ORS and the SRS are discussed, as is the use of different standards in conjunction with these instruments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document