Search results

The use of data in the twenty-first century to improve expert decision-making has radically transformed what it means to be an expert in multiple fields, including behavioural healthcare. This chapter summarises the impact on information technology on the field, including use of digital platforms to enable video therapy and online cognitive behavioural therapy programmes. The chapter is intended for practitioners seeking information on how to be a twenty-first century expert, where years of education and experience matter less compared to evidence of performance in the form of solid outcome data. Key to the use of outcome data is expertise in how to use questionnaires in therapy and how to interpret results, both at the individual client level as well as overall results across multiple clients. A twenty-first century expert measures are not simply to measure outcomes but to improve results over time. Failure to incorporate the use of data into routine practice ignores an evidence based practice with decades of evidence as to its effectiveness, potentially resulting in suboptimal care.

To replicate the Luton pilot study (Andrews et al., 2011), both by investigating treatment changes using the Human Givens (HG) approach via a practice research network (PRN) and by assessing the viability of replacing the 34-item Clinical Outcome in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure (CORE-OM) with the ten-item version (CORE-10).

Clients were included if they were offered the HG approach to manage psychological distress and attended at least one measured treatment session following their initial assessment. Pre-post treatment effect size (Cohen's d) was benchmarked against data from Clark et al. (2009). Potential differences in treatment effects based on type of termination (planned vs unplanned) and medication use were examined.

High correlation between the CORE-10 and CORE-OM and near-identical calculated effect sizes support the utilisation of CORE-10 as a routine outcome measure. Pre-post treatment effect size suggests that clients treated using the HG approach experienced relief from psychological distress.

There was no experimental control nor evidence about the precise components of the HG treatment. Data on problem description and duration may not be reliable.

This larger study, involving thousands of cases in a wide variety of settings, reinforces the findings from the pilot study as to the plausibility of the HG approach in the relief of emotional distress.

The viability of using a ten-item scale to reliably measure treatment effectiveness will allow organisations to assess the quality of their treatment with minimal disruption to their service delivery allowing for true evidence-based practice. A PRN provides a suitable mechanism to assess psychotherapy treatment effectiveness in real-world settings.