Clinical Decisions thAt Work
Navigating the Psychotherapy Integration Maze
SEPI is an international, interdisciplinary organization of practitioners and scholars exploring the limitations of a single-school perspective and promoting alternative ways of meeting the needs of our clients. SEPI also advances the integration of practice and research. SEPI's annual meeting is an opportunity for clinicians, researchers, faculty, and students to attend a stimulating international meeting. The goal is to promote sharing of clinical approaches and research, and to continue to reflect and explore themes of convergence and complementarity.
Continuing SEPI's goal to promote psychotherapy integration in new frontiers, the theme for our 2017 meeting is Clinical Decisions at Work. Clinical judgment is what all clinicians face and may well be the ultimate practice-relevant research.
Clinical judgments refer to decisions made by the therapist about the client and the case during the therapy process. Errors in clinical judgment are rarely shared or discussed. Research could thus focus on the processes through which judgments are made, the impact of these judgments on subsequent therapist behaviors, and ultimately client outcomes. Despite the centrality of clinical judgment, psychotherapists are less likely than other health care professionals to explicitly frame their work, training, and research in terms of decisions. Emphasizing clinical decision-making encourages a deliberate, reflective stance toward psychotherapy integration. SEPI will continue exploring different clinical approaches, how these are similar and different, and how can they be integrated.
This conference will focus on decision research in general, and clinical decisions in particular. We expect to have practitioners and researchers involved in critical dialogues, in addition to videotaped examples, case formulations, assessment instruments, research scales, and decision-making tools.
The goal of the conference is to help clinicians and researchers attend to and improve their clinical decisions. Clinical decision-making can be approached from many angles. Although we encourage submissions that speak especially to this theme, we will accept other submissions that will broaden our knowledge of psychotherapy integration.
The following theory, practice, training, and research questions that emerge from the interesting intersection of decisions and integration will be under discussion
- Navigation systems or frameworks for the practitioner are of tremendous importance in clinical decision-making. Which integrative metatheoretical frameworks blend key insights from the major paradigms?
- How do patients influence clinical decisions? Integrating different ways of using clientâ€™s voice and feedback in co-creating clinical decisions.
- What are the distinctive markers or patient characteristics of psychotherapy models? What are the distinctive tasks or interventions of an approach? How transdiagnostic or transtheoretical are these?
- What clinical support tools can aid the therapist or the supervisor in decision-making? Heuristic strategies, set of principles or rules or visual tools like maps, figures, tables, graphs, diagrams, flowcharts... where have all the tools gone?
- When facing difficult moments or several markers or choice-points, how does a therapist decide? What is similar and different in decision-making in different therapeutic approaches or career phases?
- What training enable trainees to build self-reflective awareness regarding their own clinical decisions? What biases and traps do they typically fall into?
- How do psychotherapy research methods apply to training and supervision research?
- How can integrative decision making be strengthened at another level of training of an integrative approach?
- How does technology (audio/video/web) influence decision-making in session and in training?
- What can decision science learn from clinicians and vice versa? What cognitive, emotional, contextual, and motivational conditions lead therapists to base their judgments?