@misc{MaassKuehneHeinzeetal.2022, author = {Maaß, Ulrike and K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Heinze, Peter Eric and Ay-Bryson, Destina Sevde and Weck, Florian}, title = {The concise measurement of clinical communication skills}, series = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, journal = {Zweitver{\"o}ffentlichungen der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Humanwissenschaftliche Reihe}, number = {820}, issn = {1866-8364}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-58264}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-582642}, pages = {10}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Objective: There is a lack of brief rating scales for the reliable assessment of psychotherapeutic skills, which do not require intensive rater training and/or a high level of expertise. Thus, the objective is to validate a 14-item version of the Clinical Communication Skills Scale (CCSS-S). Methods: Using a sample of N = 690 video-based ratings of role-plays with simulated patients, we calculated a confirmatory factor analysis and an exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), assessed convergent validities, determined inter-rater reliabilities and compared these with those who were either psychology students, advanced psychotherapy trainees, or experts. Results: Correlations with other competence rating scales were high (rs > 0.86-0.89). The intraclass correlations ranged between moderate and good [ICC(2,2) = 0.65-0.80], with student raters yielding the lowest scores. The one-factor model only marginally replicated the data, but the internal consistencies were excellent (α = 0.91-95). The ESEM yielded a two-factor solution (Collaboration and Structuring and Exploration Skills). Conclusion: The CCSS-S is a brief and valid rating scale that reliably assesses basic communication skills, which is particularly useful for psychotherapy training using standardized role-plays. To ensure good inter-rater reliabilities, it is still advisable to employ raters with at least some clinical experience. Future studies should further investigate the one- or two-factor structure of the instrument.}, language = {en} } @article{MaassKuehneHeinzeetal.2022, author = {Maaß, Ulrike and K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Heinze, Peter Eric and Ay-Bryson, Destina Sevde and Weck, Florian}, title = {The concise measurement of clinical communication skills}, series = {Frontiers in Psychiatry}, volume = {13}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychiatry}, publisher = {Frontiers}, address = {Lausanne, Schweiz}, issn = {1664-0640}, doi = {10.3389/fpsyt.2022.977324}, pages = {10}, year = {2022}, abstract = {Objective: There is a lack of brief rating scales for the reliable assessment of psychotherapeutic skills, which do not require intensive rater training and/or a high level of expertise. Thus, the objective is to validate a 14-item version of the Clinical Communication Skills Scale (CCSS-S). Methods: Using a sample of N = 690 video-based ratings of role-plays with simulated patients, we calculated a confirmatory factor analysis and an exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM), assessed convergent validities, determined inter-rater reliabilities and compared these with those who were either psychology students, advanced psychotherapy trainees, or experts. Results: Correlations with other competence rating scales were high (rs > 0.86-0.89). The intraclass correlations ranged between moderate and good [ICC(2,2) = 0.65-0.80], with student raters yielding the lowest scores. The one-factor model only marginally replicated the data, but the internal consistencies were excellent (α = 0.91-95). The ESEM yielded a two-factor solution (Collaboration and Structuring and Exploration Skills). Conclusion: The CCSS-S is a brief and valid rating scale that reliably assesses basic communication skills, which is particularly useful for psychotherapy training using standardized role-plays. To ensure good inter-rater reliabilities, it is still advisable to employ raters with at least some clinical experience. Future studies should further investigate the one- or two-factor structure of the instrument.}, language = {en} } @article{MaassKuehnePoltzetal.2022, author = {Maaß, Ulrike and K{\"u}hne, Franziska and Poltz, Nadine and Lorenz, Anna and Ay-Bryson, Destina Sevde and Weck, Florian}, title = {Live supervision in psychotherapy training}, series = {Training and education in professional psychology}, volume = {16}, journal = {Training and education in professional psychology}, number = {2}, publisher = {American Psychological Association}, address = {Washington}, issn = {1931-3918}, doi = {10.1037/tep0000390}, pages = {130 -- 142}, year = {2022}, abstract = {There is increasing interest in improving psychotherapy training using evidence-based supervision. One approach is live supervision (LS), in which the supervisor offers immediate feedback to the trainee (e.g., via microphone, text messages) during the session. This review summarizes the research on LS and its main results. The databases Web of Science Core Collection, PsycArticles, PsycBooks, PsycInfo, PSYNDEX, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and PubMed were searched from inception to January 23, 2020 (including a backward search) and updated November 15, 2020. The inclusion criteria (i.e., main focus on LS, immediate feedback from a present supervisor, psychological setting) were met by k = 138 publications, including k = 8 randomized controlled trials (RCTs; N = 339). Two reviewers independently evaluated the RCTs' risk of bias using the revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool. Most publications had a family therapy background (59\%), were categorized as nonempirical (55\%), aimed primarily at describing or comparing specific LS methods (35\%), and displayed positive views on LS (87\%). Based on the RCTs, LS was superior to no-supervision in 78\% of all comparisons, but only in 13\% of the cases compared to a delayed supervision (DS) condition (i.e., regarding trainee skills, patient outcomes, or other variables). These results somewhat contradict the overall favorable views in the literature. However, the generalizability is limited due to a lack of high-quality studies and substantial heterogeneity in terms of LS methods, concepts, outcomes, and measurements. Ideas for more systematic research on LS regarding objectives and methods are proposed.
Public Significance Statement This review summarizes research on live supervision (LS). LS is a form of supervision in psychotherapy training in which the supervisor observes the trainee's therapy session and provides immediate feedback. The review concludes that LS is probably as effective as delayed supervision (DS), although more high-quality research is needed.}, language = {en} }