OBJECTIVES: This paper analyzes the relationship between ongoing change and final outcome in therapies carried out in natural settings with 39 clients. METHOD: Ongoing change was assessed through generic change indicators (GCIs), an observational method designed to label the content of change moments by selecting one specific GCI from the sequence of 19 that covers from more rudimentary and low complexity to more elaborated and complex changes. These GCIs can also be grouped into three broad stages of change, according to their level of complexity. Productivity indicators were generated to account for the number of GCIs (total and grouped by stage) adjusted by the length of therapy and the respective individual production of GCIs. Outcome, in turn, is understood as the final result of therapy and was measured by Lambert's Outcome Questionnaire (OQ 45.2). RESULTS: Using the Reliable Change Index of this measure, which qualifies the difference between initial and final scores, therapies were grouped into "good outcome" and "poor outcome" cases. Findings indicate that therapies with good final outcome show a greater presence of Stage III GCIs during the process. Furthermore, in these therapies there is a significant association between Stage I GCI productivity and the productivity of Stages II and III GCIs. This is not the case for poor outcome cases, where results show a greater productivity of initial stage GCIs, mostly in the second half of therapy and no relation of this productivity with Stage II and Stage III GCIs. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the relation of ongoing change and final outcome. Possibilities for the clinical use of GCIs, specifically for monitoring ongoing therapies, are discussed.
OBJECTIVES: This paper analyzes the relationship between ongoing change and final outcome in therapies carried out in natural settings with 39 clients. METHOD: Ongoing change was assessed through generic change indicators (GCIs), an observational method designed to label the content of change moments by selecting one specific GCI from the sequence of 19 that covers from more rudimentary and low complexity to more elaborated and complex changes. These GCIs can also be grouped into three broad stages of change, according to their level of complexity. Productivity indicators were generated to account for the number of GCIs (total and grouped by stage) adjusted by the length of therapy and the respective individual production of GCIs. Outcome, in turn, is understood as the final result of therapy and was measured by Lambert's Outcome Questionnaire (OQ 45.2). RESULTS: Using the Reliable Change Index of this measure, which qualifies the difference between initial and final scores, therapies were grouped into "good outcome" and "poor outcome" cases. Findings indicate that therapies with good final outcome show a greater presence of Stage III GCIs during the process. Furthermore, in these therapies there is a significant association between Stage I GCI productivity and the productivity of Stages II and III GCIs. This is not the case for poor outcome cases, where results show a greater productivity of initial stage GCIs, mostly in the second half of therapy and no relation of this productivity with Stage II and Stage III GCIs. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the relation of ongoing change and final outcome. Possibilities for the clinical use of GCIs, specifically for monitoring ongoing therapies, are discussed.
Entities:
Keywords:
brief psychotherapy; generic change indicators; outcome; process research