ABSTRACT
The authors describe a collaborative outcomes resource network (ACORN) and the suite of measurement and decision support tools (ACORN Toolkit) that have emerged from this collaboration for the purpose of providing clinical feedback to therapists. The ACORN Toolkit is most accurately described as a comprehensive clinical information system designed to increase the value of mental health services across large systems of care. It was built to integrate large datasets from multiple sources including outcome data, client demographics and diagnostic data, therapist credentialing information, pharmacy data, and service claims data. For the limited purposes of this article, the authors focus on the ACORN Toolkit for measuring and how it has contributed to improving outcomes in psychotherapy. Implications to current practice and future training are provided.
Subject(s)
Cooperative Behavior , Decision Support Systems, Clinical/standards , Interdisciplinary Communication , Mental Disorders/therapy , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/standards , Psychotherapy/standards , Databases, Factual , Feedback , Humans , Internet , Medical Informatics/standards , Mental Disorders/diagnosis , Mental Disorders/psychology , Patient Dropouts , Psychometrics/statistics & numerical data , Psychotherapy/statistics & numerical data , Software , Surveys and Questionnaires , Treatment Failure , User-Computer InterfaceABSTRACT
This preliminary study evaluated the effectiveness of psychotherapy treatment for adult clinical depression provided in a natural setting by benchmarking the clinical outcomes in a managed care environment against effect size estimates observed in published clinical trials. Overall results suggest that effect size estimates of effectiveness in a managed care context were comparable to effect size estimates of efficacy observed in clinical trials. Relative to the 1-tailed 95th-percentile critical effect size estimates, effectiveness of treatment provided in this setting was observed to be between 80% (patients with comorbidity and without antidepressants) and 112% (patients without comorbidity concurrently on antidepressants) as compared to the benchmarks. Because the nature of the treatments delivered in the managed care environment were unknown, it was not possible to make conclusions about treatments. However, while replications are warranted, concerns that psychotherapy delivered in a naturalistic setting is inferior to treatments delivered in clinical trials appear unjustified.
Subject(s)
Benchmarking , Depressive Disorder, Major/therapy , Managed Care Programs/standards , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , Psychotherapy/standards , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antidepressive Agents/therapeutic use , Clinical Trials as Topic , Combined Modality Therapy , Comorbidity , Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Depressive Disorder, Major/psychology , Female , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
This study estimates pretreatment-posttreatment effect size benchmarks for the treatment of major depression in adults that may be useful in evaluating psychotherapy effectiveness in clinical practice. Treatment efficacy benchmarks for major depression were derived for 3 different types of outcome measures: the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (M. A. Hamilton, 1960, 1967), the Beck Depression Inventory (A. T. Beck, 1978; A. T. Beck & R. A. Steer, 1987), and an aggregation of low reactivity-low specificity measures. These benchmarks were further refined for 3 conditions: treatment completers, intent-to-treat samples, and natural history (wait-list) conditions. The study confirmed significant effects of outcome measure reactivity and specificity on the pretreatment-posttreatment effect sizes. The authors provide practical guidance in using these benchmarks to assess treatment effectiveness in clinical settings.
Subject(s)
Benchmarking/methods , Depressive Disorder, Major/therapy , Psychotherapy/methods , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
To estimate the variability in outcomes attributable to therapists in clinical practice, the authors analyzed the outcomes of 6,146 patients seen by approximately 581 therapists in the context of managed care. For this analysis, the authors used multilevel statistical procedures, in which therapists were treated as a random factor. When the initial level of severity was taken into account, about 5% of the variation in outcomes was due to therapists. Patient age, gender, and diagnosis as well as therapist age, gender, experience, and professional degree accounted for little of the variability in outcomes among therapists. Whether or not patients were receiving psychotropic medication concurrently with psychotherapy did affect therapist variability. However, the patients of the more effective therapists received more benefit from medication than did the patients of less effective therapists.
