Published guidelines/standards on session frequency?

[deleted760483]

Hello All -

I'm just wondering if there are any published guidelines or general recommendations on the frequency of psychotherapy, either from the APA, insurance providers, or any other "official" source. In general the research I have read supports weekly psychotherapy and identified that every other week psychotherapy can still produce gains, though generally more slowly. However, the location where I currently work has a number of providers who see people very infrequently, like once a month or even less in some cases. I am hoping to address this but would like to have more than a few research studies in hand. Thanks in advance!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[pediatric_psydoc]

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/ccp/83/6/1097/

Frequency and change mechanisms of psychotherapy among depressed patients: study protocol for a multicenter randomized trial comparing twice-weekly versus once-weekly sessions of CBT and IPT


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Hello All -

I'm just wondering if there are any published guidelines or general recommendations on the frequency of psychotherapy, either from the APA, insurance providers, or any other "official" source. In general the research I have read supports weekly psychotherapy and identified that every other week psychotherapy can still produce gains, though generally more slowly. However, the location where I currently work has a number of providers who see people very infrequently, like once a month or even less in some cases. I am hoping to address this but would like to have more than a few research studies in hand. Thanks in advance!

I am not aware of any, either. One of the biggest beefs I have is that I, too, work for an organization that preaches 'evidence-based psychotherapy' loudly and proudly out of one side of its mouth while at the same time remaining silent (on the other side of its mouth) regarding the reality that the majority of the 'psychotherapists' provide and bill for professional 'psychotherapy' services that involve monthly sessions (from the inception of the initial presentation for services).

Other than really rare cases of highly motivated clients who can--with a little direction--essentially 'self-treat' via the use of self-help manuals (that are grounded in empirically supported principles of behavior change) with a little monthly therapeutic input/guidance or in cases where you've already completed a successful initial course of psychotherapy with someone (e.g., used CBT to help a patient significantly reduce their depressive symptoms) and are just doing 'maintenance,' I don't think that it's really valid to call monthly meetings 'psychotherapy' in the traditionally understood sense. I know of no mainstream school of psychotherapy within the field of clinical psychology that involves teaching its practitioners to see people for endless monthly 'psychotherapy.'

 

[deleted760483]

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/ccp/83/6/1097/

Frequency and change mechanisms of psychotherapy among depressed patients: study protocol for a multicenter randomized trial comparing twice-weekly versus once-weekly sessions of CBT and IPT


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

That's one of the articles I have but the lowest frequency they examine is weekly. I work with people who see patients monthly

 

[pediatric_psydoc]

That's one of the articles I have but the lowest frequency they examine is weekly. I work with people who see patients monthly

There are two links there. The first one looks at weekly vs every two weeks.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[deleted760483]

There are two links there. The first one looks at weekly vs every two weeks.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I would be thrilled if I could get my colleagues to see their clients every 2 weeks

 

[pediatric_psydoc]

I agree with OP and fan_of_meehl about how rare it is to find clients that will benefit from monthly therapy. What do you think of clients in inpatient settings who engage in therapy twice weekly? I have seen benefits in my limited experience, but I had a LCSW tell me that clients in inpatient settings shouldn't partake in twice weekly therapy because they "needed a week to process the session." I disagree with that. What are your thoughts? I think she has ulterior motives for saying this, since she wanted me to take on more clients and spend less time on the ones I had.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[smalltownpsych]

I have one long term high functioning patient who we have been tapering down and is at monthly sessions. Generally , i think the once a week seems about right for most cases, although I would rather do twice a week with patients who are actively suicidal or self harming. On inpatient unit sometimes I saw patients almost every day. In those case I am providing an emotional regulation function that patient is unable to do for themselves at that point. I don't worry about them becoming dependent on me because the problem with many of these patients is they were unable to utilize social support as a coping tool in the first place. I guess my point is that one should be able to have a good clinical rationale for session frequency just as any other aspect of the treatment and you might be reacting to their lack of a logical rationale. One of my all time hated rationales is "that's how we do it here" which occasionally has a rationalization tied to it with a because...

 

[Justanothergrad]

I would be thrilled if I could get my colleagues to see their clients every 2 weeks

I would be thrilled if all clients could afford to be seen weekly, either because of personal finances with copays or because of session limits set by insurance companies.

I don't disagree with what anyone is saying about the benefit to be gained from more frequent therapy, given clinical indication, but I don't think that's always possible. Setting a frequency because 'that's how it is done' or 'people need time..' is a cop-out and a poor treatment planning rationale because neither take into account individual needs of presentation. With inpatient, I've been totally unimpressed with the level of skills built up for them when they get out. They need intensive skills to avoid coming back in, and frequently those things are conducted in groups and seldom include sufficient 1to1 contact. Then there is the issue of who is conducting the group and the type of clinical training they have. The purpose of inpatient is to 'stabilize' and not 'stabilize and prepare for the real world'. That doesn't do our patients any favors. I put a chunk of the session limits, both inpatient and outpatient, on the way MH is viewed within medical billing.

 

[deleted760483]

Is anyone even aware of efficacy studies examining monthly psychotherapy? The lowest frequency I've found studied is every other week.

 

[erg923]

I would be thrilled if all clients could afford to be seen weekly, either because of personal finances with copays or because of session limits set by insurance companies.

I don't disagree with what anyone is saying about the benefit to be gained from more frequent therapy, given clinical indication, but I don't think that's always possible. Setting a frequency because 'that's how it is done' or 'people need time..' is a cop-out and a poor treatment planning rationale because neither take into account individual needs of presentation. With inpatient, I've been totally unimpressed with the level of skills built up for them when they get out. They need intensive skills to avoid coming back in, and frequently those things are conducted in groups and seldom include sufficient 1to1 contact. Then there is the issue of who is conducting the group and the type of clinical training they have. The purpose of inpatient is to 'stabilize' and not 'stabilize and prepare for the real world'. That doesn't do our patients any favors. I put a chunk of the session limits, both inpatient and outpatient, on the way MH is viewed within medical billing.

The general mental health clinic providers at my VA are simply unable to provide weekly therapy due to patient volume. The specialty programs such as SUDs, PTSD clinic, PCMHI generally can though.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Is anyone even aware of efficacy studies examining monthly psychotherapy? The lowest frequency I've found studied is every other week.

It would be extremely difficult to conduct a study like that. Try to justify to the IRB why you are seeing someone who is suffering from a debilitating condition and you are only going to see them every month. If they are not suffering in some way, then in my mind that is not really treatment, maybe life coaching? I do have quite a few patients who don't get here more than every two weeks or even once a month because of distance factors. Although I believe that I have been able to help with a few of those cases, most of the time it feels pretty ineffective, but there are a host of other negative factors besides frequency of sessions. One thing I know is that it can be pretty difficult to meet with a patient who has suicidal ideation and say see you next month.

 

[WisNeuro]

It would be extremely difficult to conduct a study like that. Try to justify to the IRB why you are seeing someone who is suffering from a debilitating condition and you are only going to see them every month.

Not really. We do this all of the time in RCT's. I've been an independent evaluator on a couple. There are always active treatments arms and something like a waitlist control of supportive therapy arm. Once they complete one of the non active treatment conditions, they can usually get the active treatment if they elect to do so. You probably wouldn't run this study with severe depression with actively suicidal patients, but it would be very easy to get IRB approval for proof of concept studies like this for many disorders and such.

 

[jmiah717]

The general mental health clinic providers at my VA are simply unable to provide weekly therapy due to patient volume. The specialty programs such as SUDs, PTSD clinic, PCMHI generally can though.

^^^ This all day. This is my life. We have a system that preaches evidenced based offerings to every Veteran and does not give its clinicians the ability to comply with that for most patients due to caseload. Every study I've ever read on the subject indicates that frequency is incredibly vital to outcome - more frequent sessions - better outcome. While I agree that there may be fiscal realities on the part of the patient that should be considered and in that case, perhaps phone check ins and other creative ideas could be helpful to augment the treatment, I'm no fan of the system getting in its own way and causing poorer outcomes than necessary. Combine that with a VA disability rating system that compensates based on how unwell a person is and you have a recipe for a lot of Vets who never get any better. But I digress.

In my opinion, this issue is, or at least should be, at the center of improving mental healthcare in our country. Great thread.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Not really. We do this all of the time in RCT's. I've been an independent evaluator on a couple. There are always active treatments arms and something like a waitlist control of supportive therapy arm. Once they complete one of the non active treatment conditions, they can usually get the active treatment if they elect to do so. You probably wouldn't run this study with severe depression with actively suicidal patients, but it would be very easy to get IRB approval for proof of concept studies like this for many disorders and such.

Key point being waitlist with supportive therapy. There typically has to be a mechanism to identify and mitigate potential harm.
Back to the OP, that is another way to look at this. I think that the VA is a good example because there are means to identify more severe cases and increase services and there are groups available, as well.

 

[WisNeuro]

Key point being waitlist with supportive therapy. There typically has to be a mechanism to identify and mitigate potential harm.
Back to the OP, that is another way to look at this. I think that the VA is a good example because there are means to identify more severe cases and increase services and there are groups available, as well.

Yes, every clinical study has to have precautions in place, even if they aren't providing therapy services. The point was, doing a study with varying time frames (e.g., weekly, every 2 weeks, once a month) would be relatively easy to pass by an IRB.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Yes, every clinical study has to have precautions in place, even if they aren't providing therapy services. The point was, doing a study with varying time frames (e.g., weekly, every 2 weeks, once a month) would be relatively easy to pass by an IRB.

Too bad every mental health clinic doesn't have to have the same level of precautions in place to protect patients. One reason that I advocate for psychologists to be in leadership roles is that we are trained to think about and address these issues.

 

[WisNeuro]

Too bad every mental health clinic doesn't have to have the same level of precautions in place to protect patients. One reason that I advocate for psychologists to be in leadership roles is that we are trained to think about and address these issues.

I'd say that it's more too bad every clinic doesn't have the resources available to provide the same level of precautions. In many places I have seen, it's not a lack of thinking about these issues as much as it is not having the adequate resources to do anything beyond the merely adequate.

 

[smalltownpsych]

I'd say that it's more too bad every clinic doesn't have the resources available to provide the same level of precautions. In many places I have seen, it's not a lack of thinking about these issues as much as it is not having the adequate resources to do anything beyond the merely adequate.

My experience has been the opposite. Well, not exactly opposite because available resources is always part of the equation. What I have seen occur too often is that lack of resources can be a justification, rationalization, or an excuse to not think strategically about potential changes. I worked with a guy that would refer to this as part of what he described derogatorily as an agency mentality. I imagine that could be part of what is in play in the OPs situation.

 

[calimich]

One reason that I advocate for psychologists to be in leadership roles is that we are trained to think about and address these issues.

Totally agree

smalltownpsych 2020!

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

I agree with OP and fan_of_meehl about how rare it is to find clients that will benefit from monthly therapy. What do you think of clients in inpatient settings who engage in therapy twice weekly? I have seen benefits in my limited experience, but I had a LCSW tell me that clients in inpatient settings shouldn't partake in twice weekly therapy because they "needed a week to process the session." I disagree with that. What are your thoughts? I think she has ulterior motives for saying this, since she wanted me to take on more clients and spend less time on the ones I had.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I trained in the mid-late 90's with the lead editor (Dr. Jesse Wright) and many of his colleagues at Norton Psychiatric Hospital in Louisville, KY where they did successfully implement a 'Cognitive Therapy Milieu' for inpatients at their facility. Of course, the psychiatrists there were somewhat unusual in their training/expertise (Dr. Wright was one of three psychiatrists trained back in the day under Aaron Beck to do his brand of cognitive therapy and was Medical Director at the hospital, so cognitive [-behavioral] therapy shared equal (perhaps greater) status in the milieu as compared to pharmacotherapy--a rarity for psychiatric inpatient settings, but it does exist at a few locations).

Cognitive Therapy With Inpatients: Developing a Cognitive Milieu
(Wright et al., 1993)

In that program, the emphasis was on daily cognitive therapy--generally, via multiple modalities including individual therapy with a psychologist/social worker, group cognitive therapy, and even a little cognitive therapy interwoven with psychiatrist visits and implemented within the ward environment itself by nursing and support staff. I say all this to say that I dunno where your SW colleague would get the idea that psychiatric inpatients 'need a week to process' a session of psychotherapy before being ready to benefit from another one. There are models of delivery of inpatient psychotherapy and I've never come across one that recommended waiting a week between psychotherapy sessions.

 

[smalltownpsych]

I trained in the mid-late 90's with the lead editor (Dr. Jesse Wright) and many of his colleagues at Norton Psychiatric Hospital in Louisville, KY where they did successfully implement a 'Cognitive Therapy Milieu' for inpatients at their facility. Of course, the psychiatrists there were somewhat unusual in their training/expertise (Dr. Wright was one of three psychiatrists trained back in the day under Aaron Beck to do his brand of cognitive therapy and was Medical Director at the hospital, so cognitive [-behavioral] therapy shared equal (perhaps greater) status in the milieu as compared to pharmacotherapy--a rarity for psychiatric inpatient settings, but it does exist at a few locations).

Cognitive Therapy With Inpatients: Developing a Cognitive Milieu
(Wright et al., 1993)

In that program, the emphasis was on daily cognitive therapy--generally, via multiple modalities including individual therapy with a psychologist/social worker, group cognitive therapy, and even a little cognitive therapy interwoven with psychiatrist visits and implemented within the ward environment itself by nursing and support staff. I say all this to say that I dunno where your SW colleague would get the idea that psychiatric inpatients 'need a week to process' a session of psychotherapy before being ready to benefit from another one. There are models of delivery of inpatient psychotherapy and I've never come across one that recommended waiting a week between psychotherapy sessions.

I think the week to process could also mean that the patient doesn't want to see them any more than that. If you try to force yourself on patients with your version of bad therapy in an inpatient setting, you learn pretty quick to avoid them. Patients will say things like, "if that @&$ comes near me and tries to tell me that @&$ again, I will try to kill them or myself. I don't care if I end up in restraints, it would be worth it." I would then tell the staff member, "you might want to stay away from that patient for a bit, they are doing some heavy duty processing."

 

[smalltownpsych]

Totally agree

smalltownpsych 2020!

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

I think the week to process could also mean that the patient doesn't want to see them any more than that. If you try to force yourself on patients with your version of bad therapy in an inpatient setting, you learn pretty quick to avoid them. Patients will say things like, "if that @&$ comes near me and tries to tell me that @&$ again, I will try to kill them or myself. I don't care if I end up in restraints, it would be worth it." I would then tell the staff member, "you might want to stay away from that patient for a bit, they are doing some heavy duty processing."

The stakes are definitely raised doing therapy in an inpatient context...it will hone your rapid rapport-building skills...quite rapidly.

 

[AppsAintNoThang]

The stakes are definitely raised doing therapy in an inpatient context...it will hone your rapid rapport-building skills...quite rapidly.

I work inpt and I'll say that's entirely true. I also think once a week with inpatients is, for lack of a better term, crazy. We often have them for only a week where I am. We see them as much as possible- minimum of twice a week, for very focused sessions. I'm really great at quick rapport building, too!

 

[deleted760483]

In my particular case we could have the capacity to increase frequency of sessions. We are considering becoming an APPIC predoctoral internship site, and one of the main questions administration has is whether we have adequate workload demands for 2 full-time interns. My argument is that we would if providers would see patients more frequently, which would also improve outcomes. We could serve more people, and do it better.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

In my particular case we could have the capacity to increase frequency of sessions. We are considering becoming an APPIC predoctoral internship site, and one of the main questions administration has is whether we have adequate workload demands for 2 full-time interns. My argument is that we would if providers would see patients more frequently, which would also improve outcomes. We could serve more people, and do it better.

What about employing the medication analogy? If every single study on antidepressant efficacy we have involved administering at least daily dosages of antidepressants to achieve clinically meaningful symptom reduction, who in their right mind would argue that it's somehow acceptable to administer depressed patients one pill every four days to 'treat more people' (using a 'lack of adequate resources' rationale)? Somehow, people don't seem to have any qualms about 'watering down' psychotherapy in this manner when they would never make this argument when it comes to meds.

 

[deleted760483]

What about employing the medication analogy? If every single study on antidepressant efficacy we have involved administering at least daily dosages of antidepressants to achieve clinically meaningful symptom reduction, who in their right mind would argue that it's somehow acceptable to administer depressed patients one pill every four days to 'treat more people' (using a 'lack of adequate resources' rationale)? Somehow, people don't seem to have any qualms about 'watering down' psychotherapy in this manner when they would never make this argument when it comes to meds.

Thanks, it is reassuring to hear that others find this concerning. I'm going to work on continuing to move forward with both the internship program and trying to establish regulations regarding minimum frequency of psychotherapy.

 

[pediatric_psydoc]

I trained in the mid-late 90's with the lead editor (Dr. Jesse Wright) and many of his colleagues at Norton Psychiatric Hospital in Louisville, KY where they did successfully implement a 'Cognitive Therapy Milieu' for inpatients at their facility. Of course, the psychiatrists there were somewhat unusual in their training/expertise (Dr. Wright was one of three psychiatrists trained back in the day under Aaron Beck to do his brand of cognitive therapy and was Medical Director at the hospital, so cognitive [-behavioral] therapy shared equal (perhaps greater) status in the milieu as compared to pharmacotherapy--a rarity for psychiatric inpatient settings, but it does exist at a few locations).

Cognitive Therapy With Inpatients: Developing a Cognitive Milieu
(Wright et al., 1993)

In that program, the emphasis was on daily cognitive therapy--generally, via multiple modalities including individual therapy with a psychologist/social worker, group cognitive therapy, and even a little cognitive therapy interwoven with psychiatrist visits and implemented within the ward environment itself by nursing and support staff. I say all this to say that I dunno where your SW colleague would get the idea that psychiatric inpatients 'need a week to process' a session of psychotherapy before being ready to benefit from another one. There are models of delivery of inpatient psychotherapy and I've never come across one that recommended waiting a week between psychotherapy sessions.

Thanks for the info. I'm going to see if I can find that study. I look forward to reading it.

Oddly enough, at another inpatient practicum site, the patients didn't even receive individual psychotherapy of any kind unless it was ordered by the psychiatrist. The patients were often there 3 to 10 days, and they would get medication and daily group therapy (it had to be led by a clinician with a master's degree or higher since the patients on that unit all had private insurance, and apparently the insurance wouldn't pay unless the clinician delivering group was master's level or higher). Meanwhile on the addictions unit, they had case managers doing DBT groups. Anyways, I'm not sure how ethical it is that these inpatients only got group therapy, and very few were "ordered" to have individual. What are your thoughts (others can chime in too, of course)?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[smalltownpsych]

Thanks for the info. I'm going to see if I can find that study. I look forward to reading it.

Oddly enough, at another inpatient practicum site, the patients didn't even receive individual psychotherapy of any kind unless it was ordered by the psychiatrist. The patients were often there 3 to 10 days, and they would get medication and daily group therapy (it had to be led by a clinician with a master's degree or higher since the patients on that unit all had private insurance, and apparently the insurance wouldn't pay unless the clinician delivering group was master's level or higher). Meanwhile on the addictions unit, they had case managers doing DBT groups. Anyways, I'm not sure how ethical it is that these inpatients only got group therapy, and very few were "ordered" to have individual. What are your thoughts (others can chime in too, of course)?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

In my mind, not having all patients have access to individual psychotherapy is substandard care and there is no reason for a psychiatrist to act as a gatekeeper. The actuality is that various psychotherapy groups need a gatekeeper or screening process to determine appropriateness or fit. When it comes to DBT, anyone can teach the skills and do that it in a group format. Skills training is not psychotherapy and these case mangers should have an appropriate level of supervision to ensure that the boundaries are clear. Unfortunately, most people that are "doing DBT" are not because they don't really understand the conceptual underpinnings of it.

 

[erg923]

In my mind, not having all patients have access to individual psychotherapy is substandard care and there is no reason for a psychiatrist to act as a gatekeeper. The actuality is that various psychotherapy groups need a gatekeeper or screening process to determine appropriateness or fit. When it comes to DBT, anyone can teach the skills and do that it in a group format. Skills training is not psychotherapy and these case mangers should have an appropriate level of supervision to ensure that the boundaries are clear. Unfortunately, most people that are "doing DBT" are not because they don't really understand the conceptual underpinnings of it.

I think many folks, if you can get "buy-in", can benefit from any number of structured therapy protocols (12-16 sessions). Again, if you can get the buy-in AND the motivation.

Most people are actually probably not able to meaningfully benefit or engage in more traditional, long-term (20 sessions plus?) psychotherapy (whatever the modality). Again, I'm working off of "averages" here.

I would be curious about people who work in the VAs general metal health service, if weekly therapy sessions are the norm? It certainly is not at my VA and its CBOCs unless they are doing a specific manualized protocol (PE, CPT, ACT, CBT-I, etc.)

 

[smalltownpsych]

I think many folks, if you can get "buy-in", can benefit from any number of structured therapy protocols (12-16 sessions). Again, if you can get buy in AND motivation.

Most people are actually probably not able to meaningfully benefit or engage in more traditional, long-term (20 sessions plus?) psychotherapy (whatever the modality). Again, I'm working off of "averages" here.

I would be curious about people who work in the VAs general metal health service, if weekly therapy sessions are the norm? It certainly is not at My VA and its CBOCs

I was referring to inpatients having access to psychotherapy even if it is brief due to the short stay. For involuntary patients, depending on the state, it is often a right that they have access to psychotherapy and not just medications. In our hospital, we see the patient daily while they are inpatient, but we only keep them for a few days typically. Although we are obviously not administering a structured treatment protocol during that brief time, I still conceptualize and bill my sessions as psychotherapy.

 

[jmiah717]

I think many folks, if you can get "buy-in", can benefit from any number of structured therapy protocols (12-16 sessions). Again, if you can get buy in AND motivation.

Most people are actually probably not able to meaningfully benefit or engage in more traditional, long-term (20 sessions plus?) psychotherapy (whatever the modality). Again, I'm working off of "averages" here.

I would be curious about people who work in the VAs general metal health service, if weekly therapy sessions are the norm? It certainly is not at my VA and its CBOCs unless they are doing a specific manualized protocol (PE, CPT, ACT, CBT-I, etc.)

Weekly is not possible at my CBOC except for PE or other evidence based practices that require adhering to the frequency. Even then I have to schedule ahead to stay in front of the wait time. In the long run, that only makes the problem worse though.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[deleted760483]

In my mind, not having all patients have access to individual psychotherapy is substandard care and there is no reason for a psychiatrist to act as a gatekeeper. The actuality is that various psychotherapy groups need a gatekeeper or screening process to determine appropriateness or fit. When it comes to DBT, anyone can teach the skills and do that it in a group format. Skills training is not psychotherapy and these case mangers should have an appropriate level of supervision to ensure that the boundaries are clear. Unfortunately, most people that are "doing DBT" are not because they don't really understand the conceptual underpinnings of it.

Can't like this enough especially the DBT part. Manualized treatment does not mean "literally reading the manual to your patients"

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Can't like this enough especially the DBT part. Manualized treatment does not mean "literally reading the manual to your patients"

One of the most hideous misinterpretations of 'evidence-based psychotherapy' involves the mischaracterization of the incredibly complex task of professional psychotherapy as a simple task of 'list-making' (of 'objectives' that are 'measurable') in which the therapist sits down with a client and simply rattles off a 'to do' list for them to accomplish within a predetermined time frame. Treatment manuals have utility in the practice of good therapy just as maps have utility on a cross-country trip. But the manual is not the treatment...the map is not the territory.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Can't like this enough especially the DBT part. Manualized treatment does not mean "literally reading the manual to your patients"

One of the most hideous misinterpretations of 'evidence-based psychotherapy' involves the mischaracterization of the incredibly complex task of professional psychotherapy as a simple task of 'list-making' (of 'objectives' that are 'measurable') in which the therapist sits down with a client and simply rattles off a 'to do' list for them to accomplish within a predetermined time frame. Treatment manuals have utility in the practice of good therapy just as maps have utility on a cross-country trip. But the manual is not the treatment...the map is not the territory.

Exactly. Most people don't even realize that Dr. Linehan herself provides fairly traditional psychotherapy (she doesn't do skills coaching herself) where she provides Rogerian type of empathic support and understanding as well as exploring resistance to change and uncovering the barriers to implementing the skills from the more structured skills-building aspect of DBT. She can just as readily talk about counter-transference and interpersonal relationship patterns as she can about patterns of behavioral reinforcement. In other words, what I see most competent psychologists doing, integrating various theories and sources of evidence about human behavior and implementing them to help their patients.