1 / 19

Comparing Empirically Supported Treatments and Evidence-Based Practice

Comparing Empirically Supported Treatments and Evidence-Based Practice. Brian C. Chu, Ph.D. Rutgers University, GSAPP Email: BrianChu@rci.Rutgers.edu. What is Evidence-Based Treatment? How do you define EB?. Guidelines: Often endorsements of an official govt agency Consensus Statements

garren
Download Presentation

Comparing Empirically Supported Treatments and Evidence-Based Practice

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Comparing Empirically Supported Treatments and Evidence-Based Practice Brian C. Chu, Ph.D. Rutgers University, GSAPP Email: BrianChu@rci.Rutgers.edu

  2. What is Evidence-Based Treatment? How do you define EB? • Guidelines: • Often endorsements of an official govt agency • Consensus Statements • Consensus summaries of the evidence by experts in the field. • Merit Behavioral Care Corp (1997): “Consistent with national standards, the Medical Affairs Committee of MBC endorses clinical practice guidelines.” • Consumer/practitioner preferences • Research-based conclusions

  3. Empirically-supported Treatments • APA Task Force on Psychological Intervention Guidelines • 1995 Task Force on the Promotion and Dissemination of Psychological Procedures (Div 12; Clinical Psychology) • Goals: • Charged with identifyingstate of the science regarding clinical interventions. • Consider issues in dissemination of psychological treatments of known efficacy. • Background: • Evidence-based medicine (Sackett et al., 1997) • (a) patient care can be enhanced by acquisition and use of up-to-date empirical knowledge • (b) it is difficult for clinicians to keep up with newly emerging information relevant to practice • (c) But if they do not, knowledge and clinical performance will deteriorate • (e) So, clinicians need summaries of evidence and ability to access information.

  4. 1995 Task Force Products • Task Force (1995); Chambless, 1996; 1998 • 1995: Established Criteria • 1995: Identified a preliminary list of 25 ESTs • 1998: List had grown to 71 treatments • 1999: Div 12 took full ownership of maintaining list (APA declined) • Maintain an ongoing list and information center: http://www.apa.org/divisions/div12/cppi.html • Additional Task Forces • Life Span perspective: Spirito (1999; J Pediatric Psych) • Youth: Lonigan (1998; J Clinical Child Psych) • Div 12: Nathan & Gorman (1998; A Guide to Treatments that Work) • Adult, child, marital, family therapy: Kendall & Chambless (1998, JCCP): • Elderly: Gatz (1998; J. Mental Health & Aging)

  5. Criteria for Empirically-Supported Treatments (Div 12 Task Force; see Chambless & Ollendick, 2001) • Well-established Treatments • At least two good between-group design experiments must demonstrate efficacy: • Tx superior to pill or psychological placebo • Tx equivalent to an already established treatment. OR: • A large series of single-case design experiments with: • Use of good experimental design and • Comparison of intervention to another treatment • Other criteria: • Tx manual must’ve been used. • Characteristics of the sample must’ve been clearly delineated. • Effects must be demonstrated by at least 2 different investigators or teams

  6. Criteria for Empirically-Supported Treatments (Cont.) • Probably Efficacious Treatments • 2 experiments show Tx is superior to WL OR: • Meet all criteria of “Well-established” but only by 1 research team OR: • A small series of single-case design experiments • Experimental Treatments: • Treatments not yet tested • Treatments not yet meeting criteria

  7. Concerns with Results from 1995 Task Force • Sample (patient) definition relies on DSM? • Emphasis on Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) • Treatments on EST list are mostly behavioral • Emphasis on Treatment Manuals • Insufficient evidence of how ESTs transport to traditional clinical settings: • Efficacy vs. Effectiveness

  8. Efficacy vs. Effectiveness • Efficacy • Assessment of outcomes in more controlled settings • Weisz et al (1995; “Bridging the Gap;” JCCP) • Research • Clients recruited, homogenous, narrow problem focus • Lab or school settings • Therapists specialized and intensive training • Clinic • Clients are natural referred (more severe, complicated), heterogeneous • Clinic or hospital settings • Therapists have large case loads with rare specialized training. • Effectiveness: • Do research findings generalize… • To ordinary clinical settings? • To ordinary clients?

  9. Punctuated Continuum between Efficacy and Effectiveness:(Chorpita, 2003)

  10. Evidence-Based “Practice” • 2005 APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice • Goals: • To integrate science and practice, but consider full rangeof evidence that policy-makers must consider. • Background: • Also aligned with evidence-based medicine (Sackett et al., 1997) • “the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about care of individual patients.” • Advocates for improved patient outcomes by informing clinical practice with relevant research • Efficacy vs. Effectiveness vs. Clinical Utility: • Efficacy: the systematic and scientific evaluation of whether a treatment works. • Effectiveness: the extent to which treatment effects extend to natural clinic settings with natural client populations. • Clinical utility: the applicability, feasibility, and usefulness of the intervention in the local or specific setting where it is offered.

  11. 2005 Task Force Products • Position statements: • APA Task Force (2005; American Psychologist) • Report of the 2005 Presidential Task Force on EBP • Definitions: Evidence-based Practice in Psychology (EBPP) • Integration of the best available research with clinical expertise in the context of patient characteristics, culture, and preferences • To promote effective psychological practice and enhance public health by applying empirically supported principles of psychological assessment, case formulation, therapeutic relationship, and intervention. • Relation b/t EST and EBPP • EBPP is more comprehensive • EST starts with treatment and asks whether it works for certain dx or problem. • EBPP starts with patient and asks what research evidence applies. • EBPP articulates a decision-making process for integrating multiple streams of research evidence • Pros and Cons of Each? • How do you define Clinical Expertise?

  12. Establishing Efficacy and Effectiveness • Hierarchical order for types of research evidence in their contribution to conclusions about efficacy • In ascending order of value: • Clinical opinion and observation is insufficient. • Case studies • Quasi-experimental studies • Controlled single case design studies • Uncontrolled effectiveness studies (with bench marking) • Quasi-experimental effectiveness studies • Randomized controlled efficacy studies • Randomized controlled effectiveness studies • RCT’s are the most stringent way to evaluate treatment efficacy because they most effectively rule out threats to internal validity in a single experiment.

  13. Best Research Evidence • Each research design is suited to different types of questions: • Clinical Observation & basic science • Sources of innovations and hypotheses • Qualitative Research • To describe subjective experiences • Systematic case studies • When aggregated, can compare individual pts with others. • Single-case Experimental Designs • To establish causal relationships in context of an individual. • Public Health and Ethnographic Research • To track availability, utilization, and acceptance of services

  14. Best Research Evidence (Cont) • Process-Outcomes studies • To identify mediators and mechanisms of change • Studies of interventions in naturalistic settings • To assess ecological validity of treatments • Randomized Clinical Trials (and logical equivalents) • To draw causal inferences about effects of interventions • Meta-Analysis • To synthesize results from multiple studies, test hypotheses, and estimate ES

  15. The Role of Clinical Expertise • Clinical Expertise: Definition? • 2005 TF: Competence attained by psychologists through education, training, and experience that results in effective practice. • Role of Clinical Expertise? • Necessary for identifying and integrating best research evidence with clinical data (e.g., info obtained from pt). • Components of Clinical Expertise: • Assessment, diagnostic judgment, case formulation, tx planning • Clinical decision making, treatment implementation, and monitoring of patient progress • Interpersonal expertise • Continual self-reflection and acquisition of skills • Appropriate evaluation and use of research evidence in both basic and applied psychological science • Understanding the influence of individual and cultural differences on treatment. • Seeking available resources (consultation, adjunctive services) as needed • Having a cogent rationale for clinical strategies

  16. Why is integrating evidence into practice important? • Individual client/patient level • Maximize clinical benefits • Individual Therapist/Clinician Level • Accountability: Use a treatment that’s effective and cost-effective • Makes your job as a clinician easier • Make use of research that’s been done • Narrows the choices you need to make • Ethics • Is it malpractice if you don’t use EBTs? • 1994: Hawaii settled a class action lawsuit, to ensure the MH needs of students receiving public education (Felix Consent Decree)

  17. Why would you use EBTs (Cont)? • Why, if you were in charge of a clinic (clinic level)? • Keeps them competitive • Reimbursable • Why if you are making recommendations to your colleagues (Psychological Field level)? • Establishes as part of health care field • Justification for funding • Local or National Policy Level • Ensures better health care for population

  18. How could you as an individual therapist integrate Science and Practice? • Stay up on the EST literature • Implement treatments with empirical support • APA Div 12 maintains an ongoing list and information center: http://www.apa.org/divisions/div12/cppi.html • Adopt scientist-practitioner approach • Hypothesis-testing approach • Monitor outcomes throughout treatment

More Related