Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39164697›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2024

Patient perspectives on systematic client feedback in Dutch outpatient mental healthcare, a qualitative case reports study.

Bram Bovendeerd, Kim de Jong, Erik de Groot, Jos de Keijser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Bram BovendeerdDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Experimental Psychopathology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. A.M.Bovendeerd@rug.nl.
Kim de JongInstitute of Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Erik de GrootGGZ center for mental health care, Dimence, PO Box 390, Deventer, 7400 AJ, The Netherlands.
Jos de KeijserDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Experimental Psychopathology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Funding

Dimence Groep, The Netherlands CWOBB112014Postmaster Psychologie Opleidingen Groningen Netherlands PPO-RF-18CM
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe added value of systematic client feedback (SCF) to psychotherapy can be affected by patient perspectives, both in a positive and negative way, and is influenced by cultural factors as well. Current study explores patients' perspectives on use and optimization of SCF in Dutch outpatient mental healthcare. Primary aim of present study is to generate implications for daily practice and optimize SCF implementation, particularly for the Netherlands.

methodFour patients suffering from mild to moderate psychological disorders were in-depth interviewed on their perspective on the use of SCF, when the Partners for Change Outcome Management System (PCOMS, high frequent), the Outcome Questionnaire (OQ-45, low frequent) and the Mental Health Continuum Short Form (MHC-SF, low frequent) was added to treatment as usual in two Dutch outpatient mental healthcare centers offering brief psychological treatment. Interview topics were (a) SCF in general; (b) type of questionnaires; (c) frequency of use; (d) effect of SCF on therapy; and (e) perceived added value of SCF. A SCF expert team analyzed the data through reflexive Thematic Analysis.

resultsWe identified three themes, all of which have two sub-themes: (a) Requirements to use SCF, with sub-themes (a1) Balance between effort to complete SCF and perceived validity, and (a2) Balance between used frequency and perceived validity; (b) Modifiers for test-taking attitude, with subthemes (b1) SCF as an embedded part of therapy, and (b2) Quality of Therapist-Client alignment; and (c) Effects on therapeutic process, with subthemes (c1) Focus on task and goals, and shared responsibility, and (c2) Effects on outcome and satisfaction.

conclusionsAdding SCF to therapy can be perceived as helpful by patients in psychotherapy if two conditions are met: (1) Creating a right balance between effort and yield for SCF to be used at all; and (2) embedding SCF as an integral part of therapy, through therapist-client alignment. Throughout the progression of therapy, it might be useful to perceive SCF and therapy as communicating vessels; according to patients it is not only necessary to adjust therapy based on SCF, but also to adjust SCF based on the course of therapy.

trial registrationThis trial was registered on September 30, 2015 in the Dutch Trial Register NTR5466. The Medical Ethics Committee of the University of Twente (Enschede) approved this study (registration number: K15-11, METC Twente).

Indexed as

Ambulatory CareFeedbackMental DisordersQualitative ResearchAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMental Health ServicesMiddle AgedNetherlandsPatient SatisfactionPsychotherapySurveys and QuestionnairesImplementationPatients’ perspectiveSystematic client feedback

Identifiers

PMID39164697
PMCPMC11337768

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.