Challenges of using progress monitoring measures: Insights from practicing clinicians.

Abstract

Although integrating progress monitoring (PM) measures into psychotherapy practice can provide numerous benefits, including improved client outcomes, relatively few clinicians use these measures (e.g., Ionita & Fitzpatrick, 2014). To better understand the reasons for clinicians' reluctance, consensual qualitative research methodology was used to examine the challenges faced by clinicians currently using PM measures. Open-ended, semistructured interviews, with 25 clinicians who chose to use PM measures, revealed that clinicians tended to face challenges involving technical concerns, negative responses from others, and personal barriers such as anxiety. The majority of participants discussed ways to overcome the challenges they experienced, including ensuring the fit of the PM measure, explaining measures to others to help engender a positive response, adapting their own perspective, and increasing their own and others' knowledge of the measures. Implications for practicing psychologists and for knowledge translation efforts are discussed.

Factors affecting the implementation of an outcome measurement feedback system in youth mental health settings

“…Providing quick and accessible outcome measurement data to clinicians is very important; however, clinicians have not always been shown to use the information when provided (De Jong et al, 2012). Several reasons have been identified for this disparity, including clinicians' negative attitudes, anxiousness and discomfort, and lack of knowledge towards MFS (Ionita et al, 2016). The implementation of all MFS processes used together are most strongly associated with improved outcomes (Krägeloh et al, 2015).…”

“…Importantly, clinicians have raised concerns around the clinical usefulness and practicality of measures used in MFS. They report that some measures can take too long to administer, lack timely feedback, or it is challenging to access results (Ionita et al, 2016;Ross et al, 2016). Other concerns are lack of relevance of measurement items for clinicians and clients, and lack of sensitivity to change (Bickman, 2008;Happell, 2008;Kelley & Bickman, 2009).…”

Exploratory study of automated linguistic analysis for progress monitoring and outcome assessment

“…Additionally, this variable, past focus words , changed in the opposite direction hypothesised based on the research literature—increasing from T1 to T2. Sensitivity to change is an important characteristic for all PMOA instruments (Ionita et al., ), and if language use patterns are stable over time, the utility of linguistic analysis for PMOA is questionable.…”

Introducing client feedback into marriage and family therapy supervision: a qualitative study examining the transition to empirically informed supervision

“…The findings from this study highlight the need to address practical issues that result in the perception of STIC usage as burdensome and time consuming by trainees and supervisors. This is not unique to the STIC; other studies found that clinicians experience similar constraints with the use of other outcome measures (Boswell, Kraus, Miller and Lambert, ; Hatfield and Ogles, ; Ionita et al ., ; Overington, Fitzpatrick, Hunsley and Drapeau, ). As is the case when employing multisystemic principles, a multisystemic and multidimensional feedback measure provides more complex data to increase one's understanding of clients' presentation; however, the data also takes more time to review, interpret, and integrate into supervision.…”