Defining the Assessment and Treatment Competencies to Deliver Low-Intensity Cognitive Behavior Therapy: A Multi-Center Validation Study

KELLETT, S., SIMMONDS-BUCKLEY, M., LIMON, E., HAGUE, J., HUGHES, L., STRIDE, C. and MILLINGS, Abigail (2020). Defining the Assessment and Treatment Competencies to Deliver Low-Intensity Cognitive Behavior Therapy: A Multi-Center Validation Study. Behavior Therapy.

[img] PDF
Millings_DefiningAssessmentTreatment(AM).pdf - Accepted Version
Restricted to Repository staff only until 20 November 2021.
Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

Download (406kB)
Official URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/...
Link to published version:: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2020.01.006
Related URLs:

    Abstract

    © 2020 Despite the vastly increased dissemination of the low-intensity (LI) version of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) for the treatment of anxiety and depression, no valid and reliable indices of the LI-CBT clinical competencies currently exist. This research therefore sought to develop and evaluate two measures: the low-intensity assessment competency scale (LIAC) and the low-intensity treatment competency scale (LITC). Inductive and deductive methods were used to construct the competency scales and detailed rating manuals were prepared. Two studies were then completed. The first study used a quantitative, fully-crossed design and the second a multi-center, quantitative longitudinal design. In study one, novice, qualified, and expert LI-CBT practitioners rated an LI-CBT assessment session (using the LIAC) and an LI-CBT treatment session (using the LITC). Study two used the LIAC and LITC across four training sites to analyze the competencies of LI-CBT practitioners over time, across raters, and in relation to the actor/patients’ feedback concerning helpfulness, the alliance, and willingness to return. Both the LIAC and LITC were found to be single factor scales with good internal, test-retest reliability and reasonable inter-rater reliability. Both measures were sensitive to measuring change in clinical competence. The LIAC had good concurrent, criterion, discriminant, and predictive validity, while the LITC had good concurrent, criterion, and predictive validity, but limited discriminant validity. A score of 18 accurately delineated a minimum level of competence in LI-CBT assessment and treatment practice, with incompetent practice associated with patient disengagement. These observational ratings scales can contribute to the clinical governance of the burgeoning use of LI-CBT interventions for anxiety and depression in routine services and also in the methods of controlled studies.

    Item Type: Article
    Uncontrolled Keywords: 1701 Psychology; Clinical Psychology
    Identification Number: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2020.01.006
    SWORD Depositor: Symplectic Elements
    Depositing User: Symplectic Elements
    Date Deposited: 02 Oct 2020 15:08
    Last Modified: 02 Oct 2020 15:15
    URI: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/id/eprint/27340

    Actions (login required)

    View Item View Item

    Downloads

    Downloads per month over past year

    View more statistics