Personalization of Psychotherapy Based on Client Preferences vs. Routine Outcome Monitoring with PCOMs: A Naturalistic Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5944/rdp.v36i132.44869Keywords:
Routine outcome monitoring, Therapeutic preferences, Treatment personalization, PCOMs, FeedbackAbstract
Taking client preferences into account and conducting routine outcome monitoring are components of evidence-based practice. The objective of this study was to compare the effectiveness, on the one hand, of adjusting therapeutic processes to clients' role or activity preferences, and on the other, of routine outcome monitoring using PCOMS. Method: experimental design with three groups of therapists randomly assigned through random number tables. Sample: Therapists N9, Clients N101. Evaluations were conducted at intake, in the third, eighth, and final treatment session. Data analysis. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) models were used to analyze the effects of adherence to different therapeutic approaches on the dimensions of the CORE-OM scale. Results. Psychotherapy monitored with PCOMS achieved better results, with a significant difference, compared to standard treatment and treatment adjusted to client preferences. In the second evaluation (third treatment session), the results of the two experimental treatments were similar. Conclusions: Routine outcome monitoring is a strategy that yields better results than usual treatment in the Mar del Plata context. Adjusting treatments to client preferences is a promising area for good outcomes.
Downloads
References
Anker, M. G., Duncan, B. L., & Sparks, J. A. (2009). Using client feedback to improve couple therapy outcomes: a randomized clinical trial in a naturalistic setting. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 77(4), 693.
APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice. (2006). Evidence-based practice in psychology. American Psychologist, 61, 271–285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.271
Barber, J., & Resnick, S. G. (2022). Collect, share, act: A transtheoretical clinical model for doing measurement-based care 850 M. Barkham et al. in mental health treatment. Psychological Services, Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/ser0000629
Barkham, M., De Jong, K., Delgadillo, J., & Lutz, W. (2023). Routine outcome monitoring and feedback in psychological in therapies. Open University Press. Mackgraw Hill.
Bovendeerd, B., De Jong, K., De Groot, E., Moerbeek, M., & De Keijser, J. (2022). Enhancing the effect of psychotherapy through systematic client feedback in outpatient mental healthcare: A cluster randomized trial. Psychotherapy Research, 32(6), 710-722.
Brattland, H., Koksvik, J. M., Burkeland, O., Gråwe, R. W., Klöckner, C., Linaker, O. M., ... & Iversen, V. C. (2018). The effects of routine outcome monitoring (ROM) on therapy outcomes in the course of an implementation process: A randomized clinical trial. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 65(5), 641.
Calsyn, R. J., Winter, J. P. & Morse, G. A. (2000). Do consumers who have a choice of treatment have better outcomes? Community Mental Health Journal, 36(2), 149-160. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1001890210218
Castonguay, L. G., Barkham, M., Youn, S. J., & Page, A. C. (2021). Practice-based evidence: Findings from routine outcome monitoring. In M. Barkham, W. Lutz, & L. G. Castonguay (Eds.), Bergin and Garfield’s handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change (pp. 191–221). Wiley.
Clinton, D. & Sandell, R. (2014). Psychotherapy Preferences and Experiences Questionnaire (PEX) A short introduction.
Connors, E. H., Janse, P., de Jong, K., & Bickman, L. (2024). The Use of Feedback in Mental Health Services: Expanding Horizons on Reach and Implementation. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 1-10.
Cooper, M., Duncan, B., Golden, S., & Toth, K. (2021). Systematic client feedback in therapy for children with psychological difficulties: Pilot cluster randomised controlled trial. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 34(1), 21-36.
Cooper, M., Norcross, J. C., Raymond-Barker, B. & Hogan, T. P. (2019). Psychotherapy preferences of laypersons and mental health professionals: Whose therapy is it? Psychotherapy, 56(2), 205. https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000226
Cooper, M., Stewart, D., Sparks, J., & Bunting, L. (2013). School-based counseling using systematic feedback: A cohort study evaluating outcomes and predictors of change. Psychotherapy Research, 23(4), 474-488.
Cooper, M., van Rijn, B., Chryssafidou, E., & Stiles, W. B. (2022). Activity preferences in psychotherapy: What do patients want and how does this relate to outcomes and alliance? Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 35(3), 503–526. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070.2021.1877620
Delevry, D. & Le, Q. A. (2019). Effect of Treatment Preference in Randomized Controlled Trials: Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis. The Patient-Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40271-019-00379-6
Duncan, B. L., Miller, S. D., Sparks, J. A., Claud, D. A., Reynolds, L. R., Brown, J. y Johnson, L. D. (2003). The Session Rating Scale: Preliminary psychometric properties of a “working” alliance measure. Journal of brief Therapy, 3(1), 3-12.
Duncan, B. L., Reese, R. J., Lengerich, A. J., DeSantis, B., Comeau, C. V., & Johnson-Esparza, Y. (2021). Measurement-based care in integrated health care: A randomized clinical trial. Families, Systems & Health: the Journal of Collaborative Family Healthcare, 39(2), 259-268.
Duncan, B. & Sparks; J. (2019) The Partners for Change Outcome Management System. Sistema de Socios para la Gestión del Cambio. Manual de elearning integrado para PCOMS. Better Outcomes Now.
Eigenhuis, E., van Buuren, V. E., Boeschoten, R. E., Muntingh, A. D., Batelaan, N. M., & van Oppen, P. (2024). The Effects of Patient Preference on Clinical Outcome, Satisfaction and Adherence Within the Treatment of Anxiety and Depression: A Meta‐Analysis. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 31(3), e2985.
Faye Jacobsen, C., Karstoft, K. I., Falkenström, F., Nielsen, J., Lunn, S., & Poulsen, S. (2024). Client preferences, therapy activities and preference-activity match as predictors of therapy outcome. Psychotherapy Research, 1-16.
Fierro, C. (2020). Formación de grado en psicología en Argentina: período 2009-2015 [Tesis Doctoral, Universidad Nacional de San Luis, Argentina]. http://www.neu.unsl.edu.ar/?page_id=569
Hepner, K. A., Farmer, C. M., Brooks Holliday, S., Bharil, S., Kimerling, R. E., McGee-Vincent, P., McCaslin, S. E., & Rosen, C. (2019). Displaying behavioral health measurement based care data: Identifying key features from clinician and patient perspectives. RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR3078.htm
Hess, T. (2017). Client Preference: Does Simply Asking Make a Difference? (Doctoral dissertation). Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville.
Jonášová, K., Čevelíček, M., Doležal, P., & Řiháček, T. (2024). Psychotherapists’ experience with in-session use of routine outcome monitoring: A qualitative meta-analysis. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 1-17.
Kodet, J., Reese, R. J., Duncan, B. L., & Bohanske, R. T. (2019). Psychotherapy for depressed youth in poverty: Benchmarking outcomes in a public behavioral health setting. Psychotherapy, 56(2), 254.
Li, E., Kealy, D., Aafjes-van Doorn, K., McCollum, J., Curtis, J. T., Luo, X., & Silberschatz, G. (2024). “It Felt Like I Was Being Tailored to the Treatment Rather Than the Treatment Being Tailored to Me”: Patient Experiences of Helpful and Unhelpful Psychotherapy. Psychotherapy Research, 1-15.
Lindhiem, O., Bennett, C. B., Trentacosta, C. J. & McLear, C. (2014). Client preferences affect treatment satisfaction, completion, and clinical outcome: a meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 34(6), 506-517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2014.06.002
Lutz, W., Schwartz, B., & Delgadillo, J. (2022). Measurementbased and data-informed psychological therapy. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 18(1), 71–98. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-071720-014821
McLeod, J. (2015). Client preferences: building bridges between therapy and everyday life. Psychotherapy and Counselling Journal of Australia, 3(2).
Miller, S. D., Duncan, B. L., Brown, J., Sparks, J. A. y Claud, D. A. (2003). The outcome rating scale: A preliminary study of the reliability, validity, and feasibility of a brief visual analog measure. Journal of brief Therapy, 2(2), 91-100.
Østergård, O. K., Randa, H., & Hougaard, E. (2020). The effect of using the Partners for Change Outcome Management System as feedback tool in psychotherapy—A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychotherapy Research, 30(2), 195-212.
Reese, R. J., Norsworthy, L. A., & Rowlands, S. R. (2009). Does a continuous feedback system improve psychotherapy outcome?. Psychotherapy: Theory, research, practice, training, 46(4), 418.
Reese, R. J., Toland, M. D., Slone, N. C., & Norsworthy, L. A. (2010). Effect of client feedback on couple psychotherapy outcomes. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 47(4), 616.
Santangelo, P. R. (2020). Programa de formación y entrenamiento en psicoterapia: Fundamentos teóricos e implementación. Revista de psicoterapia, 31(117), 331-346.
Santangelo, P. R., & Conde, K. (2023). Preferencias psicoterapéuticas: versión argentina de las escalas PEX-1 y C-NIP-v1. 1. Revista de Psicología (PUCP), 41(1), 401-420.
Santangelo, P. R., Conde, K., Schupp, H. y Paoloni, N. (2021). Evaluación en psicoterapia: Propieda¬des psicométricas de la versión Argentina de la Escala de Calificación de Resultados y la Escala de Calificación de Sesiones. Revista de Psicoterapia, 32(119), 165-180. https://doi.org/10.33898/rdp. v32i119.503
Santangelo, P.R, Grave, L., Lao, G., Mattiello, M. y Millaman Rickert, G.E. (2022, 2 de diciembre). Escala de Calificación de Resultados. IX Congreso Internacional Marplatense de Psicología. Facultad de Psicología, Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata, Argentina. https://www.mdp.edu.ar/index.php/noticias-de-la-universidad/780-ix-congreso-marplatense-internacional-de-psicologia
Schuman, D., Slone, N., Reese, R.J., & Duncan, B. (2014). Using client feedback to improve outcomes in group psychotherapy with soldiers referred for substance abuse treatment. Psychotherapy Research, 25(4), 396-407.
She, Z., Duncan, B. L., Reese, R. J., Sun, Q., Shi, Y., Jiang, G., ... & Clements, A. L. (2018). Client feedback in China: A randomized clinical trial in a college counseling center. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 65(6), 727.
Slone, N. C., Reese, R. J., Mathews-Duvall, S., & Kodet, J. (2015). Evaluating the efficacy of client feedback in group psychotherapy. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 19(2), 122.
Solstad, S. M., Castonguay, L. G., & Moltu, C. (2019). Patients’ experiences with routine outcome monitoring and clinical feedback systems: A systematic review and synthesis of qualitative empirical literature. Psychotherapy Research, 29(2), 157–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2017.1326645
Swift, J. K. & Callahan, J. L. (2009). The impact of client treatment preferences on outcome: a meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65(4), 368-381. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.20553
Swift, J. K., Callahan, J. L., Cooper, M. & Parkin, S. R. (2018). The impact of accommodating client preference in psychotherapy: A meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 74(11), 1924-1937. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22680
Swift, J. K., Callahan, J. L., Cooper, M. & Parkin, S. R. (2019). Preferences. In J. C. Norcross y B. Wampold (Eds.), Psychotherapy relationships that work: Volume II: Evidence-based therapist contributions. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med-psych/9780190843960.003.0006
Swift, J. K., Callahan, J. L. & Vollmer, B. M. (2011). Preferences. In J. C. Norcross (Ed.), Psychotherapy relationships that work (2nd ed., pp. 301-315). Oxford University. https://doi.org/10.1093/acpr of:oso/9780199737208.003.0015
Thew, G., Fountain, L., & Salkovskis, P. (2015). Service user and clinician perspectives on the use of outcome measures in psychological therapy. The Cognitive Behaviour Therapist, 8, E23. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1754470X15000598
Tompkins, K. A., Swift, J. K. & Callahan, J. L. (2013). Working with clients by incorporating their preferences. Psychotherapy, 50(3), 279-283. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032031
Urbaniak, G. C., & Plous, S. (2013). Research randomizer (Version 4.0) [Computer software]. Retrieved on February 26, 2021, from http://www.randomizer.org/
Wampold, B. E., & Imel, Z. E. (2015). The great psychotherapy debate: The research evidence for what works in psychotherapy (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Windle, E., Tee, H., Sabitova, A., Jovanovic, N., Priebe, S. & Carr, C. (2020). Association of patient treatment preference with dropout and clinical outcomes in adult psychosocial mental health interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry, 77(3), 294-302. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.3750
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Pablo Rafael Santangelo, Karina Conde, Gabriela E. Millaman Rickert, Marcos Emanuel Mattiello, Germán Lao, Victoria Pocorena
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in this journal accept the following conditions:
-
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work registered under the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC 4.0 International license. This license allows third parties to cite the text and use it without alteration and for non-commercial purposes, provided they credit the authorship of the work and its first publication in this journal.
-
Authors may enter into other independent and additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published in this journal (e.g., including it in an institutional repository or publishing it in a book), provided they clearly indicate that the work was first published in this journal.
-
The views expressed in the articles are solely the responsibility of the authors and in no case do they reflect the opinions or scientific policies of the journal.
