The use of Progress Monitoring (PM) measures has been shown to improve outcomes in therapy for clients who do not follow the normal trajectory of improvement. In addition to improved outcomes, there are several other documented benefits of PM that may motivate clinicians to use PM. Research has examined the broader field of selecting mental health care quality assessment tools and a review of the literature has pointed to the importance of considering motivation for assessment when selecting a measure. However, how motivation influences the selection or maintained usage of PM measures has not been studied. This study examined initial motivation as well as measure selection and continuing use of PM. Consensual Qualitative Research methodology was applied to characterize how clinicians (n = 25) started, selected, and maintained use of PM measures and how initial motivation related to measure selection and continued use. Regardless of initial motivation, convenience and effectiveness emerged as important when selecting and continuing to use a measure. Results are compared to current frameworks for selecting mental health- care quality indicators. Our results suggest that PM measures need to strike a balance, emphasizing convenience as well as efficacy in order to improve clinical uptake and adherence.
Although integrating progress monitoring (PM) measures into psychotherapy practice can provide numerous benefits, including improved client outcomes, relatively few clinicians use these measures (e.g., Ionita & Fitzpatrick, 2014). To better understand the reasons for clinicians’ reluctance, consensual qualitative research methodology was used to examine the challenges faced by clinicians currently using PM measures. Open-ended, semistructured interviews, with 25 clinicians who chose to use PM measures, revealed that clinicians tended to face challenges involving technical concerns, negative responses from others, and personal barriers such as anxiety. The majority of participants discussed ways to overcome the challenges they experienced, including ensuring the fit of the PM measure, explaining measures to others to help engender a positive response, adapting their own perspective, and increasing their own and others’ knowledge of the measures. Implications for practicing psychologists and for knowledge translation efforts are discussed.
