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
info@scottdmiller.com 773.404.5130

Please, don’t use my scales…

December 12, 2019 By scottdm 3 Comments

stopOr, at least that’s what I said in response to his question.  The look on his face made clear my words caused more confusion than clarity.

“But then, how will I found out which of the therapists at my agency are effective?” he asked.

“The purpose of FIT,” I replied, “is not to profile, but rather help clinicians respond more effectively to their clients.”

And I’ve found myself giving similar advise of late —  in particular, actively counseling practitioners and clinic directors against using the ORS and SRS.

Here’s another:

“We need a way to meet the new Joint Comission/SAMHSA requirement to use a standardized outcome measure in all therapeutic work.”

My reply?

FIT is purposefully designed — and a significant body of evidence indicates it does — help those in treatment achieve the best results possible.  Thus, while integrating measures into care has, in some countries, because a standard of care, using them merely to meet regulatory requirements is de facto unethical.  Please don’t use my scales.

One more?

“I don’t (or won’t) use the scales with all my clients, just those I decide it will be clinically useful with.”

What do I think?

The evidence clearly shows stop 2clinicians often believe they are effective or aligned with clients when they are not.  The whole purpose of routinely using outcome and alliance measures is to fill in these gaps in clinical judgement.  Please don’t use my scales. 

Last, as I recently blogged about, “The scales are really very simple and self-explanatory so I don’t think we really need much in the way of training or support materials.”

My response?

We have substantial evidence to the contrary.  In sharp contrast to the mere minutes involved in downloading and learning to administer measures, actual implemention of FIT takes considerable time and support —  more than most seem aware of or willing to invest.

PLEASE DON’T USE MY SCALES!

While I could cite many more examples of when not to use routine outcome measures (e.g., “we need a way to identify clients we aren’t helping so we can terminate services with them and free up scarce clinical resources” or “I want to have data to provide evidence of effectiveness to funding sources”) — I will refrain.

As one dedicated FIT practitioner recently wrote, “Using FIT is brutal. Without it, it’s the patients’ fault. With fit, it’s mine. Grit your way through . . . because it’s good and right.”

I could not have said it any better.

Until next time,

Scott

Scott D. Miller, Ph.D.
Director, International Center for Clinical Excellence
ICCE Advanced FIT Intensive 2020 Scott D MillerICCE Fit Supervision Intensive 2020 Scott D Miller

Filed Under: Feedback, Feedback Informed Treatment - FIT, FIT

Comments

  1. Christopher Lange says

    December 12, 2019 at 3:03 pm

    Sir –

    Your words are always so much more deliberate than my brain sometimes thinks. I think you are saying that if you are using these reasons as your SOLE reason for the scales, then this is wrong. We are using them to help the patient.

    I think that all of these things are benefits of using the scale, but I might be mistaken.

    For instance:
    The ORS is a great metric for JC. I don’t need to use complicated OQ45 or PHQs for progress anymore.
    It does identify those who are flailing in therapy and if we are helpful. Transfer of these patients to another service should our changes not lead to improvement would save expenditures.

    Now…I think using them to identify which therapists are more effective than others is a ridiculous use of these things. Though it does do this, the goal then for that supervisor is to figure out how to get those less effective therapists to improve.

    Those are my thoughts on this post (I don’t tend to post on blogs), but I want to make sure I am understanding properly.

    I cannot imagine anymore not using this scale in my day-to-day practice anymore.

    Reply
  2. Bert Munger says

    December 12, 2019 at 4:33 pm

    This is a great example of learning from experience. I hate to admit it, but you come painfully close to some of the mistakes I’ve made with the measures over the past 15 years. I know I over simplified the process at first and that there is still much I have to learn. The more I learn about FIT, the more aware I become of what I don’t know.

    Reply
  3. Alastair Wilson says

    December 13, 2019 at 9:13 pm

    “…the goal then for that supervisor is to figure out how to get those less effective therapists to improve…”
    So true. Sometimes it is the factors surrounding the therapist and client that need addressing for improvent to occur.
    In working through this process recently, it was clear that there were enviromental factors that were impacting on the client-therapist relationship.
    We changed our clients access to our service to a “soft entry”. Client comes to our multidisciplinary service, for an appointment without the whole world knowing they are there to see a therapist because of problems.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 

SEARCH

Subscribe for updates from my blog.

  

Upcoming Training

Aug
02

FIT Implementation Intensive 2021


Aug
04

Training of Trainers 2021

FIT Software tools

FIT Software tools

NREPP Certified

HTML tutorial

LinkedIn

Topics of Interest:

  • Behavioral Health (111)
  • behavioral health (4)
  • Brain-based Research (2)
  • CDOI (14)
  • Conferences and Training (67)
  • deliberate practice (28)
  • Dodo Verdict (9)
  • Drug and Alcohol (3)
  • evidence-based practice (66)
  • excellence (61)
  • Feedback (38)
  • Feedback Informed Treatment – FIT (207)
  • FIT (26)
  • FIT Software Tools (12)
  • ICCE (26)
  • Implementation (7)
  • medication adherence (3)
  • obesity (1)
  • PCOMS (11)
  • Practice Based Evidence (38)
  • PTSD (4)
  • Suicide (1)
  • supervision (1)
  • Termination (1)
  • Therapeutic Relationship (8)
  • Top Performance (39)

Recent Posts

  • Three Common Misunderstandings about Deliberate Practice for Therapists
  • Feedback Informed Treatment in Statutory Services (Child Protection, Court Mandated)
  • Do We Learn from Our Clients? Yes, No, Maybe So …
  • Developing a Sustainable Deliberate Practice Plan
  • Making Sense of Client Feedback

Recent Comments

  • Asta on The Expert on Expertise: An Interview with K. Anders Ericsson
  • Michael McCarthy on Culture and Psychotherapy: What Does the Research Say?
  • Jim Reynolds on Culture and Psychotherapy: What Does the Research Say?
  • gloria sayler on Culture and Psychotherapy: What Does the Research Say?
  • Joseph Maizlish on Culture and Psychotherapy: What Does the Research Say?

Tags

addiction Alliance behavioral health brief therapy Carl Rogers CBT cdoi common factors conferences continuing education denmark evidence based medicine evidence based practice Evolution of Psychotherapy excellence feedback feedback informed treatment healthcare holland 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