CBT: Teaching and Measuring

Competency

The 6th Annual CIBHS Evidence Based

Practices Symposium
April 21, 2016

Leslie Sokol, Ph.D.

Troy Thompson
Academy of Cognitive Therapy
Case Conceptualized
CBT
Case Conceptualization
– Situation specific thoughts, feelings, and
behaviors
– History, pervasive negative beliefs,
assumptions, and behavioral strategies
Problem Conceptualization
– Problem in thinking associated with specific
psychological problems
 Structure of the Therapeutic Interview

1. Brief Update (rating of mood, med check)

2. Bridge from last session
3. Setting the agenda
4. Discussion of today’s agenda items and
review of homework
5. Capsule summaries plus summarization
of session
6. Setting new homework
7. Feedback from patient
 Structure
 Beginning
– Establish the problem(s)
 Middle
– Work on the problem, goal-directed, key
cognitions/behaviors, strategy, application of
skills, capsule summary, homework
– Repeat for each problem
 End
– Feedback, overall summary, homework
 Check In
 Provides opportunity for therapist to build
and maintain a solid therapeutic alliance
 May lead to relevant agenda items
 Provides opportunity to observe mental
status that may be worth commenting on
and may lead to an agenda item.
 Set the Agenda

 Agenda is a short list of topics which the

client and therapist agree will be the focus
of the session
– The agenda comes from the goal list which
comes from the problem list

PROBLEM-GOAL-AGENDA
 Example
PROBLEM LIST GOALS
1. Feel less sad Improve mood
2. Isolating self Engage with others
3. Avoid work Stop avoiding
4. Over eating Improve eating
5. Insecure Raise Confidence
 Guidelines for Successful Agenda Setting

 Be collaborative
 Prioritize Agenda Items
 Always review homework
 Be realistic (Try to keep it to 1-2 items)
 Keep treatment goals in mind Common problem:
Failing to complete a thorough assessment before
jumping into the agenda.
 Just because something comes up in the check-in
doesn’t mean it is the most pressing/distressing
issue
 Use therapeutic judgment :suicide/homicide ideation
 Cognitive Therapy Rating Scale
 Agenda
 Feedback
 Understanding
 Interpersonal Effectiveness
 Collaboration
 Cognitive Therapy Rating Scale
 Pacing and Efficient Use of Time
 Guided Discovery
 Focusing on Key Cognitions/Behaviors
 Strategy for Change
 Application of techniques
 Homework
 CTRS: References
Dobson, K.S. et al. (1985)
Shaw, B.F. et al. (1999)
Strunk, D.R. et al. (2002)
Vallis, T.M. et al. (1986)
Williams, R.M. et al. (1991)
Cognitive Therapy Rating Scale

Poor Barely Adequate Mediocre Satisfactory Good Very Good Excellent

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Part 1. General Therapeutic Skills

___1. AGENDA
0 Therapist did not set agenda

2 Therapist set agenda that was vague or incomplete

4 Therapist worked with patient to set a mutually satisfactory

agenda that included specific target problems (e.g., anxiety at
work, dissatisfaction with marriage.)

6 Therapist worked with patient to set an appropriate agenda with

target problems, suitable for the available time. Established
priorities and then followed agenda.
___2. FEEDBACK (SUMMARY)
0 Therapist did not ask for feedback to determine patient’s
understanding of, or response to, the session.

2 Therapist elicited some feedback from the patient, but did not ask
enough questions to be sure the patient understood the
therapist’s line of reasoning during the session or to ascertain
whether the patient was satisfied with the session.

4 Therapist asked enough questions to be sure that the patient

understood the therapist’s line of reasoning throughout the
session and to determine the patient’s reactions to the session.
The therapist adjusted his/her behavior in response to the
feedback, when appropriate.

6 Therapist was especially adept at eliciting and responding to

verbal and non-verbal feedback throughout the session (e.g.,
elicited reactions to session, regularly checked for understanding,
helped summarize main points at end of session.
___3. UNDERSTANDING

0 Therapist repeatedly failed to understand what the patient

explicitly said and this consistently missed the point.
Poor empathetic skills.

2 Therapist was usually able to reflect or rephrase what the patient

explicitly said, but repeatedly failed to respond to more subtle
communication. Limited ability to listen and empathize.

4 Therapist generally seemed to grasp the patient’s “internal

reality” as reflected by both what the patient explicitly said and
what the patient communicated in more subtle ways. Good
ability to listen and empathize.

6 Therapist seemed to understand the patient’s “internal reality”

thoroughly and was adept at communication this understanding
through appropriate verbal and non-verbal responses to the
patient (e.g., the tone of the therapist’s response conveyed a
sympathetic understanding of the patient’s “message”.
Excellent listening and empathic skills
___4. INTERPERSONAL EFFECTIVENESS

0 Therapist had poor interpersonal skills. Seemed hostile,

demeaning, or in some other way destructive to the
patient.

2 Therapist did not seen destructive, but had significant

interpersonal problems. At times, therapist appeared
unnecessarily inpatient, aloof, insincere or had difficulty
conveying confidence and competence.
4 Therapist displayed a satisfactory degree of warmth,
concern, confidence, genuineness, and
professionalism. No significant interpersonal
problems.

6 Therapist displayed optimal levels of warmth, concern,

confidence, genuineness, and professionalism,
appropriate for this particular patient in this session.
___5. COLLABORATION

0 Therapist did not attempt to set up a collaboration with

patient

2 Therapist attempted to collaborate with patient, but had

difficulty either defining a problem that the patient
considered important, or establishing rapport.

4 Therapist was able to collaborate with patient, focus on

a problem that both patient and therapist considered
important, and establish rapport.

6 Collaboration seemed excellent; therapist encouraged

patient as much as possible to take an active role
during the session (e.g. by offering choices) so
they could function as a “team”.
___6. PACING AND EFFICIENT USE OF TIME

0 Therapist made no effort to structure therapy time. Session

seemed aimless.

2 Session had some direction, but the therapist had significant

problems with structuring or pacing (e.g., too little structure,
inflexible about structure, too slowly paced, too rapidly
paced).

4 Therapist was reasonably successful at using time

efficiently. Therapist maintained appropriate control over
flow of discussion and pacing.

6 Therapist used time efficiently by tactfully limiting peripheral

and unproductive discussion and by pacing the session as
rapidly as was appropriate for the patient.
Part II CONCEPTUALIZATION, STRATEGY, AND TECHNIQUE

___7. GUIDED DISCOVERY

0 Therapist relied primarily on debate, persuasion, or “
lecturing”. Therapist seemed to be “cross-examining”
patient, putting the patient on the defensive, or forcing
his/her point of view on the patient.

2 Therapist relied too heavily on persuasion and debate, rather

than guided discovery. However, therapist’s style was
supportive that patient did not seem to feel attacked or
defensive.

4 Therapist, for the most part, helped patient see new

perspectives through guided discovery (e.g., examining
evidence, considering alternatives, weighing advantages and
disadvantages) rather than through debate. Used
questioning appropriately.

6 Therapist was especially adept at using guided discovery during

the session to explore problems and help patient draw his/her
own conclusions. Achieved an excellent balance between skillful
questioning and other modes of intervention.
___8. FOCUSING ON KEY COGNITIONS OR BEHAVIORS

0 Therapist did not attempt to elicit specific thoughts,

assumptions, images, meanings, or behaviors.

2 Therapist used appropriate techniques to elicit cognitions or

behaviors; however, therapist had difficulty finding a focus or
focused on cognitions/behaviors that were irrelevant to the
patients key problems.

4 Therapist focused on specific cognitions or behaviors

relevant to the target problem. However, therapist could
have focused on more central cognitions or behaviors that
offered greater promise for progress.

6 Therapist very skillfully focused on key thoughts,

assumptions, behaviors, etc. that were most relevant to the
problem area offered considerable promise for progress.
___9. STRATEGY FOR CHANGE (Note: For this item, focus on the quality
of the therapist’s strategy got change, not on how effectively the
strategy was implemented or whether change actually occurred.)

0 Therapist did not select cognitive-behavioral techniques.

2 Therapist selected cognitive-behavioral techniques; however,

either the overall strategy for bringing about change seemed
vague or did not seem promising in helping the patient.

4 Therapist seemed to have a generally coherent strategy for

change that showed reasonable promise and incorporated
cognitive-behavioral techniques.

6 Therapist followed a consistent strategy for change that

seemed very promising and incorporated the most
appropriate cognitive-behavioral techniques.
___10. APPLICATION OF COGNITIVE-BEHAVIORAL TECHNIQUES
(Note: For this item, focus on how skillfully the techniques were
applied, not on how appropriate they were for the target
problem or whether change actually occurred.)

0 Therapist did not apply any cognitive-behavioral

techniques.

2 Therapist used cognitive-behavioral techniques, but

there were significant flaws in the way they were
applied.

4 Therapist applied cognitive-behavioral techniques with

modern skill.

6 Therapist very skillfully and resourcefully employed

cognitive-behavioral techniques.
___11. HOMEWORK

0 Therapist did not attempt to incorporate homework relevant

to cognitive therapy.

2 Therapist had significant difficulties incorporating homework

(e.g., did not review previous homework in sufficient detail,
assigned inappropriate homework).

4 Therapist reviewed previous homework and assigned

“standard” cognitive therapy homework generally
relevant to issues dealt with in session. Homework was
explained in sufficient detail.

6 Therapist reviewed previous homework and carefully

assigned homework drawn from cognitive therapy for the
coming week. Assignment seemed “custom tailored” to
help patient incorporate new perspectives, test hypotheses,
experiment with new behaviors discussed during sessions,
etc.
 CTRS MANUAL
www.academyofct.org

Candidate handbook
Appendix CTRS Manual
 Training Model 1
Focus on competency Process:
(CTRS score of 40 or – Clinician pursues own training,
with state-subsidized options
higher)
– Clinician records an actual
Subsidized in-person therapy session and then
training, 3-day submits it to the Academy for
evaluation
introductory CBT course – Clinician must receive a CTRS
(offered twice a year in score of 40 or higher. Failure
varying locations, to do so results in required
additional training (hybrid
clinician pays reduced certification)
fee) – Clinician who has not verified
Free one-hour telephonic competency in CBT, cannot
bill DSHS for EPB services
training on CTRS
 Training Model 2
Focus on training and Process:
providing adequate – 3-day in-person training on
resources to clinicians CBT fundamentals.
Followed by 12 weeks of
More telephonic group
central/administrative supervision. Sustained
control of training—with with topic-specific 1 or 2-
clinician feedback day in-person training
– Employer pays for
Sustainability efforts
Academy certification (a
involve certification and component of sustainability
customized 1-day in- efforts)
person training
 Training Model 3
Focus on training, Process:
– 3-day in-person training on
competency, and CBT fundamentals. Followed
providing adequate by 16 weeks of telephonic
group supervision. During 16-
resources to clinicians week period, all trainees
submit 3 audio recordings and
More 3 case conceptualizations to
central/administrative supervisor for evaluation
– Trainees must demonstrate
control of training— competency before 1-day in-
with clinician person booster (competency a
criteria of training protocol)
feedback
 Training Model 4
Focus on training, Process:
providing adequate – In-person training for
resources to clinicians, administrators, clinical
and integration of CBT staff, and non-clinical
support staff
throughout entity (holistic
– One-on-one supervision (6
approach) to 9 months)
Systematic approach, – Optional certification
grant funded, and program made available to
developed within clinical staff
academia
 ACT Consultation Services
Training program Data analysis and
design. ROI reporting
Outcome measures Development of
and data collection promotional materials
Strategies to cultivate Assist in search for
employee buy in program funding
Guidance and (grant writing)
facilitation of remote Construct feasible
training and lasting
sustainability
initiatives
Why Choose to Work with ACT
Data driven, evidence-based
Only employ certified CBT trainer
consultants
Proven track record
Scalability
Intense focus on client satisfaction
Committed to lasting and sustainable
results
VIDEO DEMONSTRATION
Cognitive Therapy
Rating Scale Observed
Questions & Answers
Cognitive Therapy Organizations
Academy of Cognitive Therapy (ACT)
-Certifies Cognitive Therapists -Referrals -Listserve -Newsletter
www.academyofct.org
Email: [email protected]

Association of Behavioral Cognitive Therapies (ABCT)

-National Membership Organization -Annual Conference
www.abct.org
Email: [email protected]

International Association for Cognitive Psychotherapy

-International Membership Association -Triannual World
Congress
-Journal
http://iacp.asu.edu/