Dissertation/Thesis Abstract

Psychotherapists' use of outcome measures in psychotherapy practice: Differences related to academic background
by Scheepers, Elisabeth M., Ph.D., Capella University, 2014, 122; 3624843
Abstract (Summary)

This study investigates (a) the use of outcome measures among psychotherapists working at family and community service agencies in Canada and (b) whether there are differences in the reasons to use or not to use outcome measures among therapists of different academic backgrounds. One hundred thirty agencies offering family and community service to the English speaking population in Canada were invited to participate in the study. Forty-four agencies (33.8%) provided site permission and 165 participants contributed to the survey. One hundred thirty six respondents reported to use outcome measures while 29 stated not to use outcome measures. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine whether academic background had an effect on two separate factors of reasons to use outcome measures (i.e., treatment factors and business reasons). No significant difference was found in the reasons to use outcome measures among users of different academic backgrounds. Both psychologists and social workers rated treatment factors as most important, followed by business reasons. Treatment factors include the tracking of client progress, determining the strengths and weaknesses of the therapists, providing information on whether a different treatment plan is warranted and the belief of therapists that measuring outcomes is an ethical practice. Business reasons are the agency's requirement to track client progress and the gathering of data for research and publication. The differences in the reasons not to use outcome measures could not be determined through a comparative statistical analysis as the assumptions of ANOVA were violated and the sample size was too small for a valid Kruskal Wallis test. The majority of users (47.3%) indicated that they use outcome measures at intake and at discharge, while 27.9% of users indicated that they use them after every session. Only two formal outcome management systems (the Outcome Questionnaire Measures and the Partners for Change Outcome Measurement System) were commonly used, by a total of 56 of the users, with only one participant using the Clinical Outcome in Routine Evaluation.

Indexing (document details)
Advisor: Caffaro, John V.
Commitee: Piotrowski, Nancy A., Reddout, Jeffrey
School: Capella University
Department: Social and Behavioral Sciences
School Location: United States -- Minnesota
Source: DAI-B 75/10(E), Dissertation Abstracts International
Source Type: DISSERTATION
Subjects: Counseling Psychology, Quantitative psychology
Keywords: Canada, Clinical practice, Outcome measures, Psychotherapy
Publication Number: 3624843
ISBN: 978-1-303-98998-8
Copyright © 2019 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions Privacy Policy Cookie Policy
ProQuest