Scholarlink

<p>In order to improve the quality of forensic practice and facilitate evaluations, the treatment documentation was systematized in the psychotherapeutic outpatient center of the prison system in Nuremberg/Regensburg. To this end, the documentation template was restructured and supplemented with keyword lists on methods, risk factors, and responsivity factors. The process evaluation of this measure, divided into 2 follow-up studies, included coding a&#xa0;total of 816 session documents with respect to the implementation of these changes as well as surveying 20&#xa0;therapists at 3 different points in time. The therapist feedback on the revised documentation template and keyword lists was positive in terms of both feasibility and improvement in the standardization and quality of the documentation. The coding of the individual therapy session documentation confirmed significant improvements in terms of the clear and searchable naming of the therapeutic intervention method, the topic of the session and the risk or responsivity factor addressed. Direct positive influences on everyday practice were indicated but should be examined in more detail in the future. Overall, documentation remained individual but the integration of standardized keywords led to an improved database for therapeutic practice and future (component-specific) efficacy evaluations.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Optimierung der Dokumentationsqualität in einer forensischen Fachambulanz: Ergebnisse eines Evaluationsprojekts

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月9日

查看全文
  • Silvia Kube,
  • Nico Ruhara,
  • Miriam Kolter,
  • Claudia Mehl,
  • Alexander Schubmann,
  • Lina Weber,
  • Maria Reinhold,
  • Rainer Banse

摘要

In order to improve the quality of forensic practice and facilitate evaluations, the treatment documentation was systematized in the psychotherapeutic outpatient center of the prison system in Nuremberg/Regensburg. To this end, the documentation template was restructured and supplemented with keyword lists on methods, risk factors, and responsivity factors. The process evaluation of this measure, divided into 2 follow-up studies, included coding a total of 816 session documents with respect to the implementation of these changes as well as surveying 20 therapists at 3 different points in time. The therapist feedback on the revised documentation template and keyword lists was positive in terms of both feasibility and improvement in the standardization and quality of the documentation. The coding of the individual therapy session documentation confirmed significant improvements in terms of the clear and searchable naming of the therapeutic intervention method, the topic of the session and the risk or responsivity factor addressed. Direct positive influences on everyday practice were indicated but should be examined in more detail in the future. Overall, documentation remained individual but the integration of standardized keywords led to an improved database for therapeutic practice and future (component-specific) efficacy evaluations.