Beyond brand names of psychotherapy: Identifying empirically supported change processes.

Abstract

There is considerable debate about which empirical research methods best advance clinical outcomes in psychotherapy. The prevailing tendency has been to test treatment packages using randomized, controlled clinical trials. Recently, focus has shifted to considering how studying the process of change in naturalistic treatments can be a useful complement to controlled trials. Clinicians self-identifying as psychodynamic treated 17 panic disorder patients in naturalistic psychotherapy for an average of 21 sessions. Patients achieved statistically significant reductions in symptoms across all domains. Rates of remission and clinically significant change as well as effect sizes were commensurate with those of empirically supported therapies for panic disorder. Treatment gains were maintained at 6-month follow-up. Intensive analysis of the process of the treatments revealed that integrative elements characterized the treatments: Adherence to cognitive-behavioral process was most characteristic, adherence to interpersonal and psychodynamic process, however, was most predictive of positive outcome. Specific process predictors of outcome were identified using the Psychotherapy Process Q-Set. These findings demonstrate how process research can be used to empirically validate change processes in naturalistic treatments as opposed to treatment packages in controlled trials. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).

• Authors: J Stuart Ablon, Raymond A Levy, Tai Katzenstein
• Journal: Psychotherapy (Chicago, Ill.) (Psychotherapy (Chic)) Vol. 43 Issue 2 Pg. 216-31 ( 2006) ISSN: 0033-3204 [Print] United States
• PMID: 22122039 (Publication Type: Journal Article)