Fredrik Falkenström

Therapeutic Alliance Predicts Symptomatic Improvement Session by Session

The therapeutic alliance has been found to predict psychotherapy outcome in numerous studies. However, critics maintain that the therapeutic alliance is a by-product of prior symptomatic improvements. Moreover, almost all alliance research to date has used differences between patients in alliance as predictor of outcome, and results of such analyses do not necessarily mean that improving the alliance with a given patient will improve outcome (i.e., a within-patient effect). In a sample of 646 patients (76% women, 24% men) in primary care psychotherapy, the effect of working alliance on next session symptom level was analyzed using multilevel models. The Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation-Outcome Measure was used to measure symptom level, and the patient version of the Working Alliance Inventory-Short form revised (Hatcher & Gillaspy, 2006) was used to measure alliance. There was evidence for a reciprocal causal model, in which the alliance predicted subsequent change in symptoms while prior symptom change also affected the alliance. The alliance effect varied considerably between patients. This variation was partially explained by patients with personality problems showing stronger alliance effect. These results indicate that the alliance is not just a by-product of prior symptomatic improvements, even though improvement in symptoms is likely to enhance the alliance. Results also point to the importance of therapists paying attention to ruptures and repair of the therapy alliance. Generalization of results may be limited to relatively brief primary care psychotherapy.

Working alliance predicts psychotherapy outcome even while controlling for prior symptom improvement

Abstract Objective: Although the working alliance as been found to be a robust predictor of psychotherapy outcome, critics have questioned the causal status of this effect. Specifically, the effect of the alliance may be confounded with the effect of prior symptom improvement. The objective of the present study was to test this possibility. Method: A large dataset from primary care psychotherapy was used to study relationships between alliance and outcome using piecewise multilevel path analysis. Results: Initial symptom level and symptom change up to session three predicted the alliance at session three. Working alliance significantly predicted symptom change rate from session three to termination, even while controlling for several possible confounds. Conclusions: The alliance predicts outcome over and above the effect of prior symptom improvement, supporting a reciprocal influence model of the relationship between alliance and symptom change.

Can psychotherapists function as their own controls? Meta-analysis of the crossed therapist design in comparative psychotherapy trials.

OBJECTIVEnClinical trials sometimes have the same therapists deliver more than 1 psychotherapy, ostensibly to control for therapist effects. This crossed therapist design makes controlling for therapist allegiance imperative, as therapists may prefer one treatment they deliver to the other(s). Research has established a strong relationship between principal investigators allegiances and treatment outcome. Study therapists allegiances probably also influence outcome, yet this moderating factor on outcome has never been studied.nnnDATA SOURCESnEnglish language abstracts in PsycINFO and MEDLINE from January 1985 to December 2011 were searched for keywords psychotherapy and randomized trial.nnnSTUDY SELECTIONnThe search yielded 990 abstracts that were searched manually. Trials using the same therapists in more than 1 condition were included.nnnDATA EXTRACTIONnThirty-nine studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. Meta-regression analyses assessed the influence of researchers allegiance on treatment outcome, testing the hypothesis that studies poorly controlling for therapist allegiance would show stronger influence of researcher allegiance on outcome. A single-item measure assessed researchers reported attempts to control for therapist allegiance.nnnRESULTSnOnly 1 of 39 studies (3%) measured therapist treatment allegiance. Another 5 (13%) mentioned controlling for, without formally assessing, therapist allegiance. Most publications (67%) did not even mention therapist allegiance. In studies not controlling for therapist allegiance, researcher allegiance strongly influenced outcome, whereas studies reporting control for therapist allegiance showed no differential researcher allegiance. Researchers with cognitive-behavioral therapy allegiance described controlling for therapist allegiance less frequently than other researchers.nnnCONCLUSIONSnThe crossed therapist design is subject to bias due to differential psychotherapist allegiance. Worrisome results suggest that researchers strongly allied to a treatment may ignore therapist allegiance, potentially skewing outcomes. All clinical trials, and especially crossed therapist designs, should measure psychotherapist allegiance to evaluate this possible bias.

Self-analysis and post-termination improvement after psychoanalysis and long-term psychotherapy

Long-term follow-up studies of long-term psychoanalytically oriented psychotherapy or psychoanalysis are extremely rare, and few have focused on the post-treatment process itself. In the Stockholm Outcome of Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy project, one of the results was that patients in psychoanalysis continued to improve after termination to a higher degree than patients in long-term psychotherapy. In this study 20 patients selected from the project were interviewed on two occasions, one and two years after termination, in order to explore how they described their post-treatment processes. The interviews were studied qualitatively using a multiple case study design, and categories of different types of post-treatment development were created from these case studies. Results indicate that the variation within treatment groups is large, and that development may continue in several ways after termination. The most striking difference between psychoanalysis and psychotherapy was not, as hypothesized, in the self-analytic function, but in various self-supporting strategies described by former analysands but not by former psychotherapy patients. However, only self-analysis was significantly correlated with post-termination improvement across both treatments. Three patients improving after termination and three deteriorating are described in detail as illustrations. Some methodological constraints of the design limit the generalizeability of results.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Patient Version of the Working Alliance Inventory–Short Form Revised

The working alliance concerns the quality of collaboration between patient and therapist in psychotherapy. One of the most widely used scales for measuring the working alliance is the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI). For the patient-rated version, the short form developed by Hatcher and Gillaspy (WAI-SR) has shown the best psychometric properties. In two confirmatory factor analyses of the WAI-SR, approximate fit indices were within commonly accepted norms, but the likelihood ratio chi-square test showed significant ill-fit. The present study used Bayesian structural equations modeling with zero mean and small variance priors to test the factor structure of the WAI-SR in three different samples (one American and two Swedish; N = 235, 634, and 234). Results indicated that maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis showed poor model fit because of the assumption of exactly zero residual correlations. When residual correlations were estimated using small variance priors, model fit was excellent. A two-factor model had the best psychometric properties. Strong measurement invariance was shown between the two Swedish samples and weak factorial invariance between the Swedish and American samples. The most important limitation concerns the limited knowledge on when the assumption of residual correlations being small enough to be considered trivial is violated.

Improvement of the Working Alliance in One Treatment Session Predicts Improvement of Depressive Symptoms by the Next Session

OBJECTIVEnDevelopments in working alliance theory posit that the therapists attention to fluctuations in the alliance throughout treatment is crucial. Accordingly, researchers have begun studying the alliance as a time-varying mechanism of change rather than as a static moderator. However, most studies to date suffer from bias owing to the nonindependence of error term and predictors (endogeneity).nnnMETHODnPatients with major depressive disorder (N = 84) from a randomized trial comparing cognitive-behavioral therapy with interpersonal psychotherapy filled out the Beck Depression Inventory-II before each session. After each session, patients and therapists filled out the Working Alliance Inventory short forms. Data were analyzed using the generalized method of moments for dynamic panel data, a method commonly applied in econometrics to eliminate endogeneity bias.nnnRESULTSnImprovement of the alliance predicted significant reduction of depressive symptoms by the next session (patient rating: b = -4.35, SE = 1.96, p = .026, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-8.19, -0.51]; therapist rating: b = -4.92, SE = 1.84, p = .008, 95% CI [-8.53, -1.31]). In addition, there was a significant delayed effect on the session after the next (patient rating: b = -3.25, SE = 1.20, p = .007, 95% CI [-5.61, -0.89]; therapist rating: b = -5.44, SE = 1.92, p = .005, 95% CI [-9.20, -1.68]).nnnCONCLUSIONnIf the quality of patient-therapist alliance is improved in a given treatment session, depressive symptoms will likely decrease by the next session. The most important limitation of this study is its relatively small sample size. (PsycINFO Database Record

Does psychotherapy for young adults in routine practice show similar results as therapy in randomized clinical trials

Abstract Previous research indicates that patients treated with psychotherapy in the community do not stay in treatment long enough to achieve clinically significant change. Because the average patient seeking treatment at a community center may not be as informed and motivated for change as the average patient participating in a research trial, the authors compared outcome among all patients presenting to a mental health clinic (n=416) and a subgroup of patients who started psychotherapy at the same clinic (n=101). Outcome was assessing using the Symptom Checklist-90, Inventory of Interpersonal Problems, and Global Assessment of Functioning. Results confirmed that outcome among all patients seeking the centre was worse than in an average clinical trial. However, patients who started psychotherapy after assessment achieved results comparable to those in RCT studies.

Treatment of depression with antidepressants is primarily a psychological treatment.

Depression treatment with antidepressants is generally described as evidence-based. However, generalizations to practice recommendations seem to us to rest on the tacit assumption that treatment outcome in research trials is the sum of three factors: specific effects of the drug, expectancy effects (placebo), and spontaneous recovery. Because randomization isolates the specific effects of the drug, trials showing significant drug effects are used as evidence for prescribing the drug regardless of context. Drawing on Wampolds (2001) description of two metamodels of psychotherapy, the authors argue that available empirical evidence indicates that depression treatment with antidepressants is primarily a psychological treatment. This conclusion has far-reaching consequences for the scientific status of contemporary treatments for depression. It also affects what the doctor should focus on in a treatment with antidepressants and how to act when the patient is treatment resistant. In order to achieve the results obtained in clinical trials, the quantity and quality of support from the doctor is more important than pharmacological concerns, such as adequate doses of medicine. When faced with a treatment resistant patient, relationship factors rather than pharmacological factors should be in focus. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved).

Mentalization-based therapy adherence and competence stimulates in-session mentalization in psychotherapy for borderline personality disorder with co-morbid substance dependence

Abstract Objective: To test whether adherence to mentalization-based treatment (MBT) principles predict better patient in-session mentalizing. Methods: Two sessions for each of 15 patients with borderline personality disorder and comorbid substance abuse disorder were rated for MBT adherence and competence. Individual patient statements were rated for Reflective Functioning (RF), therapist statements were rated as demanding RF or not. Data were analysed using multilevel modelling. Results: MBT adherence and competence predicted higher session RF (βu2009=u2009.58–.75), even while controlling for pre-treatment RF. In addition, therapist interventions directed toward exploring mental states predicted higher RF of subsequent patient responses (βu2009=u2009.11–.12). Conclusions: MBT adherence and competence were significantly related to patient in-session mentalizing, supporting the validity of MBT principles. Results point to the importance of supervision for therapists to become adherent to MBT principles. The small number of patients and sessions limits generalizability of results.

Dynamic models of individual change in psychotherapy process research.

Objective: There is a need for rigorous methods to study the mechanisms that lead to individual-level change (i.e., process-outcome research). We argue that panel data (i.e., longitudinal study of a number of individuals) methods have 3 major advantages for psychotherapy researchers: (1) enabling microanalytic study of psychotherapeutic processes in a clinically intuitive way, (2) modeling lagged associations over time to ensure direction of causality, and (3) isolating within-patient changes over time from between-patient differences, thereby protecting against confounding influences because of the effects of unobserved stable attributes of individuals. However, dynamic panel data methods present a complex set of analytical challenges. We focus on 2 particular issues: (1) how long-term trajectories in the variables of interest over the study period should be handled, and (2) how the use of a lagged dependent variable as a predictor in regression-based dynamic panel models induces endogeneity (i.e., violation of independence between predictor and model error term) that must be taken into account in order to appropriately isolate within- and between-person effects. Method: An example from a study of working alliance in psychotherapy in primary care in Sweden is used to illustrate some of these analytic decisions and their impact on parameter estimates. Results: Estimates were strongly influenced by the way linear trajectories were handled; that is, whether variables were “detrended” or not. Conclusions: The issue of when detrending should be done is discussed, and recommendations for research are provided.