SCOTT D Miller - For the latest and greatest information on Feedback Informed Treatment

  • About
    • About Scott
    • Publications
  • Training and Consultation
  • Workshop Calendar
  • FIT Measures Licensing
  • FIT Software Tools
  • Online Store
  • Top Performance Blog
  • Contact Scott
scottdmiller@ talkingcure.com +1.773.454.8511

How “effortlessness” impedes professional development

July 12, 2023 By scottdm 3 Comments

I remember her. My very first, real client. Cynthia — not her real name, her real name was Susan, but I’m not supposed to tell you that! (Just kidding, that wasn’t her name either)

Early thirties. Married. Couple of kids. Depressed.

I was still a student, a therapist-in-training — and I desparately wanted to be helpful. This wasn’t a fellow student role playing a client or presenting a minor concern of their own (“I can’t decide whether to take job X or Y”). Cynthia was in pain and looking to me for help.

I didn’t know much at this point in my professional career. I certainly could reflect feelings (“so you’re feeling very [insert feeling word here] and “what I hear you saying is [insert brief summary of client’s concern]”). Beyond that, not so much — at least anything I felt even the least bit confident about pulling off. More, I was acutely aware of myself — the words I used, how long I spoke, the number of hems-and-haws, the movement and position of my arms and legs, and how long I held eye contact.

Nowadays, my experience doing therapy is entirely different. I glide into the room without the faintest hint of self-consciousness. I sit, move, and interact naturally. The session unfolds in what would strike a casual observer as, seamless. Even the pauses — those earlier, worrisome “hem’s-and-haws” — seem purposeful.

The tendency to equate effortlessness with the development of expertise is not all that surprising. After all, it feels better in almost evevery way — smoother, easier, more polished. And yet, research from the field of expert performance suggests it likely means we’ve stopped growing!

Consider empathy — one of, if not the most important therapeutic skill. As my colleagues and I report in a soon-to-be published study (1), neither years of experience or therapist self assessment are correlated with actual empathic ability.

How, you might reasonably ask, could this be? What stands in the way of our future growth and development? As paradoxical as it may sound, the answer is, our current ability –or what researchers call, automaticity. In short, actions which once required a tremendous amount of mental energy, in time, are executed with barely a thought. While this means we can devote our limited cognitive resources to other pursuits, it also results in the loss of conscious control over our behavior.

The possibility of growth begins with the disruption of automaticity — literally regaining consciousness. A warning, however. While talk of “professional humility” and assuming a “not-knowing” stance is trendy, its also hard on the ego. Professional confidence usually suffers. The good news, as our study of empathy documents, is actual measured ability simultaneously improves!

More detailed information about finding your “sweet spot of discomfort” can be found in our two latest books Better Results and The Field Guide to Better Results. According to Professor Kim de Jong, these volumes offer “a wonderful combination of state-of-the-art scientific evidence … and hands on exercises for clinicians to improve their effectiveness.”

Want to connect with others pushing at their performance edge? Join the ICCE discussion forum. It costs nothing and you’ll meet like-minded practitioners from around the world.

By the way, a few years after leaving university, I received a letter from Cynthia. Don’t ask me how she found me! I suppose, “where there is a will, there is a way.”

Anyway, in the letter, she shared what had happened in her life after we stopped meeting. Her depression had lifted. She went back to school and was in a new relationship. Near the end, she expressed gratitude for our meetings, the support she received. “I know I wasn’t an easy client,” she offered, continuing “when I could tell you, too, were struggling, when it seemed like you weren’t sure what to say, those were some of the best moments.” I kept her letter all these years.

OK, that’s it for now.

Scott

Scott D. Miller, Ph.D.
Director, International Center for Clinical Excellence

Filed Under: Feedback Informed Treatment - FIT

Be careful what you wish for, or …

June 22, 2023 By scottdm 3 Comments

Despite happening decades ago, I remember it as though it were yesterday.

My oldest, Kirk, was fiddling with a cassette tape recorder. He was four at the time and wanted to listen to “his music.” You know, the kind all parents regret having given to their kids at some point? “Wheels on the bus,” “B.I.N.G.O.,” “Itsy bitsy spider.”

Unfortunately, neither the tape or machine were cooperating. Seated at the kitchen table watching, I marveled at his patience and persistence — over and over, inserting the cassette one way, then another.

Eventually, he set the tape down, folded his arms and closed his eyes. That’s when I decided to intervene. I stood and went to sit beside him.

“Hey bud,” I said, gently placing a hand on his knee, “What’s going on?”

“I … AM … MAD!” he responded slowly and deliberately.

His tone took me by surprise. Kirk was such an even-tempered kid. Rarely upset. Stoic, even when provoked. And I’ll let you in on a little secret. As his father, it was a trait I was proud of, told people about and privately believed he’d learned from me!

Anyway, last week, Kirk and I were on the phone together. I was telling him about an article I’d just published (1). Somewhere along the way, I expressed my frustration with the field of mental health. In particular, our habit of apeing our much-envied and more successful cousins in medicine. So, like them, we insisted on calling our work, “treatment,” likened our methods to taking a pill containing ingredients specifically remedial to a client’s problem. We even adopted a manual developed by physicians defining both the nature and scope of concerns falling within our purview!

Kirk didn’t miss a beat. Teasingly, he asked, “You mean, you … are … MAD?!”

We laughed for several minutes after that, reliving the events from so long ago. Truth is though, I was mad. As my colleague and mentor, Bruce Wampold and I had written in the article (1), our field was at it again, not only adopting the language and terms of medicine, but also implying that field was responsible for the clinical innovation developed by therapists and documented to improve retention and outcome of mental health services (2).

You know what I’m talking about, right?

Regardless of the name it is known by (e.g., feedback-informed treatment, routine outcome monitoring, patient focused research, progress feedback, or practice based evidence) research on the subject originated with non-medical mental health researchers and has been going on for a quarter century (3)! And yet, in proposing “practice guidelines” for the American Psychological Assocation, Boswell and colleagues (3), opted for a term developed by a physician in 2006, “measurement-based care” (MBC) (4), claiming it was “closely related, though not necessarily identical to, commonly used terms/practices” noted above (p. 3).

Judge for yourself. Here’s how the authors defined MBC: “(a) routinely collecting patient-generated data throughout the course of treatment; (b) sharing timely feedback with the patient about these data (e.g., patient-reported outcome measure scores) and observed or predicted trends over time to engage patients in their treatment; and (c) acting on these data in the context of the provider’s clinical judgment and the patient’s experiences” (p. 3). Now, compare that to the definition of feedback-informed treatment offered in the FIT Treatment and Training Manuals published years earlier. “FIT is a pantheoretical approach for evaluating and improving the quality and effectiveness of behavior health services. It involves routinely and formally soliciting feedback from consumers regarding the therapeutic alliance and outcome of care and using the resulting information to inform and tailor service delivery” (p. 2).

If the two definitions seem similar, its because they are!

Beyond once again emulating medicine, the problem with the term, “measurement-based care,” is that it doesn’t capture what the authors claim it represents. Indeed, wouldn’t the average practitioner on first hearing be most inclined to conclude the point of MBC is, well, measurement? That is precisely the confusion I encounter weekly in emails, phone calls and consultations with mental health professionals, agency managers, and payers.

“Please don’t use my scales,” I generally advise. Their response? Always a but …

“We’ve been told by [our payer, funder, the government, some regulatory body] that we have to use an outcome scale?”

“How will I know if the therapists who work at my agency are effective?”

“We need a way to identify clients we aren’t helping so we can terminate services with them and free up scarce clinical resources.”

Returning to my son, Kirk. On closer examination, it turned out a small part in the compartment of the recorder designed to hold the tape had broken off. Nothing we could do at that point would make it work.

“It’s OK, Dad,” I recall him saying, then quickly adding, “we can sing the songs ourselves.”

What could I say? We did.

It’s time, I think, our field does the same.

All the best,

Scott

Scott D. Miller, Ph.D.
Director, International Center for Clinical Excellence

Filed Under: Feedback Informed Treatment - FIT

Incentivising the use of FIT

June 14, 2023 By scottdm Leave a Comment

The evidence shows that using standardized measures to solicit feedback from clients regarding progress and their experience of the working relationship improves retention and outcome.

How much? By 25% (1)

And now, major news out of California.

Psychologists — who are required to earn 36 hours of continuing education credits every other year — can now earn credit towards renewal of their license by implementing feedback-informed treatment (FIT) in their daily clinical work (2)!

Here’s the challenge. The same body of research documenting that FIT works, shows clinicians struggle when it comes to putting it into practice. Private practitioners express concerns about the time it takes. Those working in agencies talk about the challenges of finding alternatives when FIT data indicate the present course of treatment is not working. Finally, many who start, stop after a short while, noting that FIT didn’t add much beyond their “clinical knowledge and experience.”

All such concerns are real. Indeed, as reported a few years back on this blog (3), implemention takes time and skill — in agency settings, up to three years of effort, support and training before the benefits of being feedback-informed begin to materialize. When they do, however, clients are 2.5 times more likely to benefit from care.

So, don’t give-up. Instead, upskill!

In September, the International Center for Clinical Excellence is sponsoring the FIT “Training of Trainers.” Held only once every-other-year, the TOT focuses exclusively on the process of training and supporting others in their use of feedback informed treatment. As with all ICCE events, space is limited to 40 participants. Click on the link above or icon below for more information or to register!

Until next time,

Scott

Scott D. Miller, Ph.D.
Director, ICCE

Filed Under: Feedback Informed Treatment - FIT

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • …
  • 108
  • Next Page »

SEARCH

Subscribe for updates from my blog.

[sibwp_form id=1]

Upcoming Training

There are no upcoming Events at this time.

FIT Software tools

FIT Software tools

LinkedIn

Topics of Interest:

  • behavioral health (5)
  • Behavioral Health (109)
  • Brain-based Research (2)
  • CDOI (12)
  • Conferences and Training (62)
  • deliberate practice (29)
  • Dodo Verdict (9)
  • Drug and Alcohol (3)
  • evidence-based practice (64)
  • excellence (61)
  • Feedback (36)
  • Feedback Informed Treatment – FIT (230)
  • FIT (27)
  • FIT Software Tools (10)
  • ICCE (23)
  • Implementation (6)
  • medication adherence (3)
  • obesity (1)
  • PCOMS (9)
  • Practice Based Evidence (38)
  • PTSD (4)
  • Suicide (1)
  • supervision (1)
  • Termination (1)
  • Therapeutic Relationship (9)
  • Top Performance (37)

Recent Posts

  • Agape
  • Snippets
  • Results from the first bona fide study of deliberate practice
  • Fasten your seatbelt
  • A not so helpful, helping hand

Recent Comments

  • Typical Duration of Outpatient Therapy Sessions | The Hope Institute on Is the “50-minute hour” done for?
  • Dr Martin Russell on Agape
  • hima on Simple, not Easy: Using the ORS and SRS Effectively
  • hima on The Cryptonite of Behavioral Health: Making Mistakes
  • himalaya on Alas, it seems everyone comes from Lake Wobegon

Tags

addiction Alliance behavioral health brief therapy Carl Rogers CBT cdoi common factors continuing education denmark evidence based medicine evidence based practice Evolution of Psychotherapy excellence feedback feedback informed treatment healthcare holland Hypertension icce international center for cliniclal excellence medicine mental health meta-analysis Norway NREPP ors outcome measurement outcome rating scale post traumatic stress practice-based evidence psychology psychometrics psychotherapy psychotherapy networker public behavioral health randomized clinical trial SAMHSA session rating scale srs supershrinks sweden Therapist Effects therapy Training