Clinical dilemmas of routine outcome monitoring and clinical feedback: A qualitative study of patient experiences

Abstract

ABSTRACTPurpose: Routine outcome monitoring (ROM) and clinical feedback systems (CFS) are becoming prevalent in mental health services, but there are several challenges to successful implementation. ROM/CFS seem to be helpful for some patients, but not for others. To investigate this, we explored patients' experiences with ROM/CFS as an interpersonal and psychotherapeutic process, in naturalistic settings. Method: We used video-assisted interpersonal process recall interviews to investigate the experiences of 12 patients using ROM/CFS in a Norwegian mental health outpatient clinic. Data were analyzed through systematic text condensation. Results: Our analysis resulted in three pairs of experiences with ROM/CFS: (1) Explicit vs. implicit use of information, (2) Directing focus towards or away from therapeutic topics, and (3) Giving and receiving feedback. These experiences could be helpful or hindering, depending on participants' needs and preferences. All participants needed to know that the CFS was used in a meaningful way. If not, it could be detrimental to the therapeutic process. Conclusion: In order to be helpful for patients, ROM/CFS should be used in a way that is flexible, meaningful to patients, and sensitive to individual needs and preferences. Future research should further explore this how-to aspect of ROM/CFS with different CFS and populations.

Keywords: IPR; ROM; clinical feedback; interpersonal process recall; outcome research; psychotherapy; qualitative research; routine outcome monitoring.