Wie lässt sich die psychotherapeutische Ausbildung optimieren?

Cognitive behavior therapy's (CBT) demonstrated efficacy has prompted calls for its increased dissemination to routine clinical practice settings. For the widespread dissemination of CBT to be successful in achieving effects similar to the original efficacy trials, there must also be effective dissemination of CBT training practices. However, as yet, CBT training is not evidence-based. This review examines what can be learned from existing research into the efficacy and effectiveness of CBT training. Due to the paucity of research specifically investigating CBT training, CBT effectiveness and dissemination studies are also examined to glean information about potentially effective training practices. In order to draw conclusions about effective training practices, comparisons are drawn between studies according to the clinical outcomes that they achieved. Training approaches are compared according to dose and active training elements, and theoretical models of learning are applied to interpret the findings. The limitations of the existing literature are discussed, as well as recommendations for improving training research to meet the standards evident in treatment trials (e.g., random allocation, control conditions, self-report and blind assessment, and adherence monitoring). Finally, the process of developing efficacious CBT treatment protocols is offered as a template for developing evidence-based CBT training protocols. 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Show more

The development and improvement of therapeutic competencies are central aims in psychotherapy training; however, little is known about which training interventions are suitable for the improvement of competencies.

Little is known about how exclusion criteria applied in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) affect the transfer of psychotherapy outcome research to naturalistic settings. This study evaluated the effects of naturalistic depression therapies and benchmarked them with published RCTs. Commonly used exclusion criteria were applied to n=338 depressive patients receiving cognitive-behavioral therapy. Outcomes of the resulting subsample eligible for RCTs were compared to those reported in RCTs. Treatment outcomes of the total sample (d=1.16) and the subsample eligible for RCTs (d=1.15) were highly similar. Therapy outcome was worse than in high-quality RCTs (d=1.39). No systematic bias was demonstrated due to patient selection criteria that are typically applied in RCTs. The comparability of psychotherapies conducted in RCTs and in real-world settings might be underestimated. Conclusions concerning the improvement of therapies in naturalistic settings are discussed. Show more