J Psychother Pract Res DSM-IV-TR Content Alerting
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ALL ISSUES SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by KADERA, S. W.
Right arrow Articles by ANDREWS, A. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by KADERA, S. W.
Right arrow Articles by ANDREWS, A. A.
Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research 5: 132-151, 1996
Copyright © 1996 American Psychiatric Association, Inc.

How Much Therapy Is Really Enough?

A Session-by-Session Analysis of the Psychotherapy Dose-Effect Relationship

SCOTT W. KADERA B. S.1, MICHAEL J. LAMBERT PH. D.1, and ALISON A. ANDREWS B. S.1

1 Department of Psychology and Clinical Psychology, Brigham Young University, 284 Taylor Building, P. O. Box 28626, Provo, Utah 84602-8626.

Dr. Lambert, Department of Psychology and Clinical Psychology, Brigham Young University, 284 Taylor Building, P. O. Box 28626, Provo, Utah 84602-8626.

Previous investigations of the dose-effect relationship in psychotherapy suggest that therapeutic benefits occur early in treatment.

Approximately 25% of patients have been estimated to improve after 1 session, and 50% improve by 8 sessions. The aim of this study was to compare such estimates with the actual performance of outpatients in therapy. Forty-five patients seen at an outpatient clinic were monitored session by session for evidence of clinically significant change. Results indicated only 22% of patients "recovered" (as defined in this study) after 8 sessions, with the earliest recovery occurring after 2 sessions. Possible reasons for the lower dose-effect relationship found here are discussed.

Submitted on March 17, 1995
Revised on July 11, 1995
Accepted on July 20, 1995




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Rehabil Couns BullHome page
E. K. Johnson, C. Dow, R. T. Lynch, and B. P. Hermann
Measuring Clinical Significance in Rehabilitation Research
Rehabil Couns Bull, October 1, 2006; 50(1): 35 - 45.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Psychoeducational AssessmentHome page
N. B. Hansen, V. Umphress, and M. J. Lambert
The Reliability and Validity of a Short Form of the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, September 1, 1998; 16(3): 201 - 214.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Psychoeducational AssessmentHome page
V. J. Umphress, M. J. Lambert, D. W. Smart, S. H. Barlow, and G. Clouse
Concurrent and Construct Validity of the Outcome Questionnaire
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, March 1, 1997; 15(1): 40 - 55.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ALL ISSUES SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1996 American Psychiatric Association