A survey to obtain clinical results of clients listing Anxiety, Phobias,
Depression, and Panic Attacks as presenting problem.
84 clients from 1982 through 1987 who listed Anxiety, Phobia, Panic Attack,
or Depression as a presenting problem were surveyed. Each client was sent a
questionnaire. Of the 84 questionnaires sent, 49 were returned.
The goal of the survey was to obtain feedback on:
1. The staff and the facilities.
Communication, professional environment, and promptness.
3. The image conveyed to the client by the clinician.
The effectiveness of the facilities approach to the technique used with clients
listing anxiety, panic attack, phobia, or Depression on their intake forms as a
Credibility with clients (referral source for new clients).
Reasonableness of fees.
Value of home practice cassettes.
8. Convenience of location.
In looking through the literature, techniques for conducting a survey were
described. Several issues were important to consider in the collection of the
To ensure the information was given freely, that the information was as accurate as possible,
and that the highest percentage of surveys would be returned. To accomplish the highest percentage are returned, questionnaires were sent
A cover letter, exhibit number one.
A crisp one dollar bill as a token of appreciation for taking the time to
complete the questionnaire.
Questionnaire, exhibit #2
A self-addressed return postage-paid envelope.
To ensure freedom to express negative feedback as well as positive feedback and
to also avoid obtaining false information, i.e., some inventing anger via
extraordinary false claims the following was done:
The questionnaires left the name and address anonymous, e.g., they could fill it
in or leave it blank.
To maximize returns, the questionnaire was again sent each person failed to
return the questionnaire within 45 days. This again was repeated 60 days later.
Raw Data for the following categories:
Phobias (exhibit #3)
Anxiety/Panic Attacks (exhibit #4)
Anxiety (exhibit #5)
Anxiety/Depression (exhibit #6)
Various questions were asked concerning the facility, the ease of making
appointments, history of symptoms and value a treatment, the effectiveness of
treatment, value of home practice cassette tapes, and so on. The participants
were asked to rate each item on a scale of 1- to - 7. A score of 1 would
indicate high quality and strong acceptance whereas a score of 7 would indicate
low-quality and low acceptance.
Questions A, B, C, E, and F had to do with the staff courteousness, promptness,
ease of making or changing appointments, and professional environment. The
average for all four groups ranged from 1.1- to - 2.7 indicating that the
support staff and facility were found as very good.
Question D had to do with
the image they clinician conveyed to the client. The average for all four groups
ranged from 1.3 to1.7 indicating that the clinician was found to be very
knowledgeable and conveyed a sense of confidence.
Questions G, H, and I were concerned with the effectiveness of treatment. The
client was considered as having gained value from the treatment if the average
score for questions a G, H, and I were 3.5 or less. The results are tabulated
below with other pertinent information.
|Total number of
|% gained value
|Average # sessions
|Longest # sessions
for a client
Question K had to do with fees which ranged from $50/Hour in 1982 to $75/Hour
in 1987. The Average for All Four Groups Ranged from 2.5 - to - 3.2.
Question L asked about the value of home training cassette tapes. The average
for all four groups ranged from 2.4 - to - 2.8. Essentially from the individual
stores, 71% of those who answered this question found the tapes useful and
Question M had to do with a central location of the facility. The average for
the groups ranged from 1.8 - to - 2.7.
Of the 84 questionnaires sent, 32 were returned within 45 days, 11 were
returned after the first reminder, and six were returned after the third
reminder. Three were returned by the post office as undeliverable because of
forwarding time had expired. This represents a 60% return rate of 81
questionnaires that were actually delivered by the post office.
In regards to anonymity, of those returning the questionnaire, there seem to be
no correlation as to why some would identify themselves and others would not.
One client returned the dollar along with a note that he could never accept it
as he felt indebted to us.
60% of those surveyed returned the questionnaire. Unfortunately, we have been
unable to locate results of other surveys to compare this number with others.
However, it was found that most studies of this nature do not survey
participants who drop out of the study or treatment protocol before the fourth
week. They are considered as having gained no value simply because most
protocols require four or more sessions for reconditioning behavior. For all
groups in this survey the first four sessions were included in the results. In
fact many had reported significant value from as little as one or two sessions.
The survey indicates that the clients had been highly pleased with our support
staff and found that it was easy to make and change appointments. The staff was
found to be courteous, prompt, and the atmosphere professional.
The results indicate that the clinician was knowledgeable and conveyed
confidence. This, for the most part, was also true for those who reported little
or no improvement from the training.
The fees (ranging from $50/session to $75/session during this time), were
generally found to be acceptable.
Home training cassette programs were found to be useful by 71% of the clients.
Generally those who found them to be a less value were those who reported
gaining little or no value from the sessions. Generally this occurs when a
client has a preconceived idea as to how the treatment is supposed to work and
is totally disappointed when his preconceived ideas are way off base to the
point where he does not actively engage in the process.
Location of the facility was found to be very good.
For Phobia and Anxiety/Panic Attack groups, an average of 85% gained value as
opposed to the Anxiety and Anxiety/Depression groups which reported only 47%
having gained value. Discussion: I feel this is because the Phobia and
Anxiety/Panic Attack groups have very clear distinct clear cut symptoms as
opposed to the Anxiety and Anxiety/Depression groups who symptoms are far less
pronounced and no so clear cut. It appeared that the more chronic the anxiety
and panic symptoms, the better the results.
This web site
Waterloo Media Productions