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

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.     

Estimated Intelligence Moderates Cognitive Processing Therapy Outcome for Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms

Although patient intelligence may be an important determinant of the degree to which individuals may comprehend, comply with, and ultimately benefit from trauma-focused treatment, no prior studies have examined the impact of patient intelligence on benefit from psychotherapies for PTSD. We investigated the degree to which educational achievement, often used as a proxy for intelligence, and estimated full scale intelligence quotient (FSIQ) scores themselves moderated treatment outcomes for two effective psychotherapies for PTSD: Cognitive Processing Therapy (CPT) and Written Exposure Therapy (WET). Participants, 126 treatment-seeking adults with PTSD (52% male; mean age = 43.9, SD = 14.6), were equally randomized to CPT and WET; PTSD symptom severity was measured at baseline and 6-, 12-, 24-, 36-, and 60-weeks following the first treatment session. Multilevel models revealed that participants with higher FSIQ scores experienced significantly greater PTSD symptom reduction through the 24-week assessment in CPT but not WET; this effect did not persist through the 60-week assessment. Educational achievement did not moderate symptom change through either 24- or 60-weeks. Individuals with higher FSIQ who are treated with CPT may experience greater symptom improvement in the early stages of recovery.