There are hundreds of different counselling/psychotherapy models. The European Therapy Studies Institute (ETSI) was established to look into what makes counselling effective. The ideas that came from that have been condensed into the human givens postgraduate diploma course.
Counsellors/therapists may be trained by respectable schools and accredited by professional bodies, however, this unfortunately is not a guarantee that their work is effective.
We ask all of our clients to evaluate their progress at each session of therapy, by completing a short questionnaire. This gives an objective measure of their emotional health/distress over the previous week and so evidence of progress in the counselling.
Outcomes tell us whether each client actually felt any benefit after each session with us. Only a small percentage of therapists do this but we find that it is an incredibly valuable part of the therapeutic process. We measure outcomes as a matter of routine and this is why we claim to be an "outcome informed" practice.
The CORE system of measurement has been adopted as the research tool of choice as CORE is already well established within many UK primary care settings and is acceptable to the Department of Health as a validated reliable system. The CORE Net system is a paperless system to be utilized by the end user, with access provided over the internet. This is perfect for a diverse group of practitioners working in varieties of settings and, indeed, even in different countries.
Ongoing monitoring by the HGI Practice Research Network of these results indicates that where clients choose to remain in treatment to an agreed ending they typically stay in therapy with HG therapists for an average of only 3.6 sessions (with the most common number of sessions being 2) and that 90% of our clients see their HG therapist for 6 visits or fewer.
The Pragmatic Research Network (PRN) is an international collaboration of mental health professionals dedicated to the improvement in quality of mental health services through the organised systematic utilization of robust feedback measurement systems to inform progress in treatment. The central purpose of the Pragmatic Research Network is to provide a focus for research into the effectiveness of treatments in naturalistic settings across diverse populations.
What this means -
This can give you real confidence and hope if you are considering making contact
These results give me confidence and this transmits to my clients and helps the healing process
During therapy, we can together monitor progress - and so know when there is little or no improvement and then change tack if necessary
At the end of therapy, we can see the extent of progress and improvement - which may surprise you
In February 2011 The British Psychological Society's leading peer-reviewed journal, Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice published a 12-month evaluation of the Human Givens approach in primary care at a general medical practice showing that more than three out of four patients were either symptom-free or reliably changed as a result of HG therapy*. This was accomplished in an average of only 3.6 sessions, significantly better than the recover y rate published for the UK government's flagship IAPT (Improving Access to Psychological Therapies) programme, which uses therapists trained in cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT).
Andrews, W., Twigg, E., Minami, T. and Johnson, G. (11 February 2011) 'Piloting a practice research network: A 12-month evaluation of the Human Givens approach in primary care at a general medical practice. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice.
The Luton study above acted as the pilot project for a wider six-month study involving 30 HG therapists working in a wide variety of settings up and down the country (in either private practice or publicly funded practice), conducted between October 2007 and March 2008. Participating practitioners committed to monitor outcomes for all clients seen over the six month period. The results from this study were found to compare very favourably with the Luton study results and are in the process of being written up for publication.
The Mental Health Review, Vol: 17, issue: 2, 2012 has in press two peer reviewed academic papers showing the effectiveness of the human givens approach; one involving the treatment of mild to moderate depression and the other to the therapeutic value of the HG Emotional Needs Audit (ENA) tool.
Type : Research paper
Author(s) : Anna Tsaroucha, Paul Kingston, Tony Stewart, Ian Walton, Nadia Corp
Source : Mental Health Review Journal Volume: 17 Issue: 2 2012
Purpose – This paper aims to present the findings of research commissioned by a Primary Care Trust in the UK to assess the implementation of a new pilot Human Givens mental health service (HGS) within primary care.
Design/Methodology/Approach – Participating General Practitioners practices were designated as either “Human Givens” or “Control” practices. The study focused on service users with mild to moderate depressed mood measured using HADS. The well-being of these participants was examined at the point of referral, and after four, eight and 12 months using three well-being questionnaires.
Findings – The results revealed that emotional well-being significantly improved during the first four months following referral for both groups and this improvement was maintained up to and including one year post referral. Compared to the Control group Human Givens therapy was found to be of shorter duration, lasting one or two sessions compared to standard treatment which lasted on average four sessions.
Originality/Value – Apart from the psychological insight and emotional support, it is suggested that Human Givens therapy might help the client to better function in society and maintain a sense of social integration. This has benefits to other providers of social care.
Type : Research paper
Author(s) : Anna Tsaroucha, Paul Kingston, Nadia Corp, Tony Stewart, Ian Walton
Source :Mental Health Review Journal Volume: 17 Issue: 2 2012
Purpose – To broaden the range of well-being outcomes that can be measured for patients with depressed mood and/or other mental health issues the aim is to determine the reliability and validity of a self-reported instrument that was designed by the Human Givens Institute to evaluate emotional distress (emotional needs audit – ENA).
Design/Methodology/Approach – The ENA was administered to 176 patients, aged between 18-65 years (mean age: 39.2 years). The acceptability of the ENA was examined as well as its internal consistency (Cronbach's alphas). ENA was administered at four time points and test-retest reliability was conducted between times 1 and 2. The data from three scales also administered to these patients (SWLS, CORE-OM and HADS) were used to aid the conduct of the ENA construct validity (concurrent and discriminant). Analysis of the ENA sensitivity/specificity was also performed.
Findings –All the ENA items (except one) were shown to have good acceptability. The internal consistency was also very strong (Cronbach's alpha: 0.84); the construct validity also revealed positive results for the ENA: concurrent validity (r=0.51-0.62; p<0.001); discriminant validity (r=0.22-0.28; p<0.01). Test-retest reliability was r=0.46 (p<0.001). Finally, ENA demonstrated high sensitivity (80 per cent), and moderate specificity (35 per cent).
Originality/Value – ENA was shown to be a valid and reliable instrument for measuring wellbeing, quality of life and emotional distress. It also allows insight into the causes of symptoms, dissatisfaction and distress. It is suggested that this tool has complementarity to standardised tools when used in clinical practice.