Assessment of adherence and competence in cognitive therapy: Comparing session segments with entire sessions

• Published in: Psychotherapy research Vol. 21; no. 6; pp. 658 - 669
• Main Authors: Weck, Florian, Bohn, Christiane, Ginzburg, Denise M., Stangier, Ulrich
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Taylor & Francis Group 01.11.2011; Taylor & Francis Ltd
• Subjects: adherence; Adult; assessment; Clinical Competence - standards; Cognitive therapy; Cognitive Therapy - standards; competence; Depressive Disorder - therapy; Female; Guideline Adherence - standards; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Observer Variation; Phobic Disorders - therapy; Reproducibility of Results; segments; treatment integrity; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult
• ISSN: 1050-3307; 1468-4381
• DOI: 10.1080/10503307.2011.602751

The aim of the study was to compare the reliability and validity of adherence and competence judgments of four raters, based on session segments on the one hand and on entire sessions on the other. The global adherence/competence judgments based on the middle section of 34 therapy sessions demonstrated satisfactory interrater reliability (ICC=.81/.71) and the highest correlations with therapy outcome (r=.55/.45). These results were comparable with judgments based on entire therapy sessions. However, the reliability of specific aspects of adherence and competence was higher when judgments were based on the entire session. The implications of these results are important in terms of reducing time and costs associated with the judgment process.