[Prospects in psychotherapy research]

The point of departure for this discussion is a critical review of the philosophy of randomized controlled trials (RCT) and their specific errors when applied to psychotherapeutic methods. There is a gap between the highly artificial settings of psychotherapy RCT and naturalistic psychotherapy procedures, which are grounded more in personality than in technique, less regulated, and mostly eclectic. Although RCT are necessary for general assessments of efficacy, they should be complemented by efficiency studies and evaluation of whole health care systems which include psychotherapy. We argue against overstretching the analogy of good clinical practice (GCP) research for the purpose of admitting new psychotropic drugs to psychotherapy research. A rational approach to psychotherapy for indication, quality ascertainment, and allocation of resources needs research which is methodologically explicable, replicable, and relevant to practice. The Cochrane Collaboration is a means of distributing such knowledge and making it work for practitioners. However, Cochrane also sheds light on psychological and practical obstacles which must be overcome before public health care systems can utilize new scientific results. The discussion of disorder-specific psychotherapy versus general psychotherapy ends by emphasizing the importance of more detailed psychopathology and pathopsychology of dysfunctions that cannot be sufficiently explained in manuals. Such dysfunctions--not necessarily specific for diagnoses or abnormality at all--can then be matched to specific psychotherapy tools. Further innovations can be expected from neurosciences, and some of the most promising paradigms are discussed. Finally, the lasting importance of hermeneutics is stressed not only with regard to the generation of new hypotheses but also to guiding the psychotherapeutic process.