Advanced Search

Home > Journals > Minerva Psichiatrica > Past Issues > Minerva Psichiatrica 2004 December;45(4) > Minerva Psichiatrica 2004 December;45(4):155-66



A Journal on Psychiatry, Psychology and Psychopharmacology

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Social Psychiatry
Indexed/Abstracted in: EMBASE, e-psyche, PsycINFO, Scopus

Frequency: Quarterly

ISSN 0374-9320

Online ISSN 1827-1731


Minerva Psichiatrica 2004 December;45(4):155-66


Level of agreement recorded in a sample of health workers on the usefulness of multiaxial and multi-mode evaluations in adolescent psychotherapy

Finicelli C.

Aim. This study aimed at surveying the existing agreement, if any, on the usefulness‹for the purposes of planning adolescent psychotherapy in the public health service‹of the evaluation of variables which are multifarious, individual and linked to the family/institutional context, and on the usefulness of multi-mode evaluations of the psychotherapy process as well.
Methods. To this end, 61 health workers were given questionnaires with statements on variables grouped into different axes and respondents were asked to express their opinions through 4 different degrees of agreement (I very much agree, I rather agree, I scarcely agree, I don't agree at all). Then, the percentage distribution of the answers given to each single variable by the whole sample and by 3 sub-groups of 3 different age brackets was examined. Data were further submitted to statistical tests (t-test of Student, ANOVA).
Results. The highest degree of agreement was less common on variables like clinical diagnosis (49.2%) and organisation level of personality (59%), if compared to co-operation of adolescents (88.5%) and this confirmed the difference of opinions existing in literature. As for the family context, the usefulness in evaluating family relations (80.3%) appeared more largely shared than co-operation of parents to treatment (67.2%). With reference to the psychotherapy process, a more limited agreement was recorded on the usefulness of evaluations made by an external judge (24.6%) if compared to those made by the patient (65.5%) or the therapist (62.3%).
Conclusion. This study highlighted the need for further discussions about the variables to be considered when planning psychotherapy interventions and the need‹in process evaluations‹to foster the health workers' consent to the usefulness of a panel of observers external to the patient-therapist relationship.

language: Italian


top of page