Personal reformulation during the clinical associate psychologist apprenticeship: Exploratory mixed methods evaluation

OBJECTIVES

Clinical associate psychologists (CAPs) train under the auspices of the apprenticeship programme and are a new addition to the psychological workforce. This project sought to evaluate whether a "personal reformulation" (PR) was helpful in terms of personal and professional development during the apprenticeship.

METHODS

A mixed methods evaluation containing a longitudinal quantitative element and a "Big Q" qualitative element with a single cohort of N = 18 CAPs. A PR consists of a 2-hr one-to-one session and a follow-up session with a cognitive analytic psychotherapist. During a PR, a sequential diagrammatic reformulation is produced to aid recognition and revision of potentially problematic relationship patterns at work. Two outcome measures concerning reflective capacity and professional quality of life were completed at the start of the apprenticeship, pre-PR and at 3-month PR follow-up. The semi-structured interviews (n = 11) conducted at the follow-up were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Quantitative changes were limited to significant increases to general confidence and 8/12 apprentices had a reliable increase in confidence in communication. Qualitatively, five overarching themes were found: (1) gaining insight, (2) wellbeing, (3) nature of the space, (4) being an apprentice, and (5) moving forward.

CONCLUSIONS

PRs were generally found to be emotionally challenging, but relatively large amounts of insight are possible from a very brief intervention that can contribute to personal and professional development during clinical training. More controlled research needs to be conducted and wider applications and evaluations of PRs in different professions would be welcome.

Pain phenotype in patients with knee osteoarthritis: classification and measurement properties of painDETECT and self-report Leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs scale in a cross-sectional study

Objective

Multiple mechanisms are involved in pain associated with osteoarthritis (OA). The painDETECT and Self‐Report Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S‐LANSS) questionnaires screen for neuropathic pain and may also identify individuals with musculoskeletal pain who exhibit abnormal central pain processing. The aim of this cross‐sectional study was to evaluate painDETECT and S‐LANSS for classification agreement and fit to the Rasch model, and to explore their relationship to pain severity and pain mechanisms in OA.

Methods

A total of 192 patients with knee OA completed questionnaires covering different aspects of pain. Another group of 77 patients with knee OA completed questionnaires and underwent quantitative sensory testing for pressure–pain thresholds (PPTs). Agreement between painDETECT and S‐LANSS was evaluated using kappa coefficients and receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves. Rasch analysis of both questionnaires was conducted. Relationships between screening questionnaires and measures of pain severity or PPTs were calculated using correlations.

Results

PainDETECT and S‐LANSS shared a stronger correlation with each other than with measures of pain severity. ROC curves identified optimal cutoff scores for painDETECT and S‐LANSS to maximize agreement, but the kappa coefficient was low (κ = 0.33–0.46). Rasch analysis supported the measurement properties of painDETECT but not those of S‐LANSS. Higher painDETECT scores were associated with widespread reductions in PPTs.

Conclusion

The data suggest that painDETECT assesses pain quality associated with augmented central pain processing in patients with OA. Although developed as a screening questionnaire, painDETECT may also function as a measure of characteristics that indicate augmented central pain processing. Agreement between painDETECT and S‐LANSS for pain classification was low, and it is currently unknown which tool may best predict treatment outcome.