Mindfulness Training for Psychotherapeutic Care

Designed to assess self-perceived empathy by the therapist himself during therapy sessions. It consists of 16 items and respondents are asked to indicate on a scale of 1 (no, I strongly believe that it is not true) to 6 (yes, I strongly believe that it is true). From this questionnaire a total empathy score is obtained. Higher scores indicate improvements in empathy.

Used to measure empathy in therapists. EUS has proven effective (Andrade-González, 2009; Barrett-Lennard, 1978)

Designed to assess the empathy of therapists perceived by their patients during therapy sessions. It consists of 16 items and respondents are asked to indicate on a scale of 1 (no, I strongly believe that it is not true) to 6 (yes, I strongly believe that it is true). From this questionnaire a total empathy score is obtained. Higher scores indicate improvements in empathy.

Used to measure empathy in therapists. EUS has proven effective (Andrade-González, 2009; Barrett-Lennard, 1978)

Designed to evaluate self-reported empathy by the therapists themselves. It is made up of 33 items and respondents are asked to indicate on a scale of 1 (totally disagree) to 5 (totally agree). Four subscales are obtained from this questionnaire: perspective adoption, which refers to taking the patient's point of view; emotional understanding; empathic stress, referred to the contagion of the patient's negative emotions; and empathic joy, referring to the ability to feel joy for the positive emotions of others. You also get a total empathy score. Used to measure empathy in therapists.

TECA has proven effective (López-Pérez, Fernández-Pinto & Abad, 2008)

Designed to evaluate the therapeutic alliance, measured by the patient. It is divided into the subscales of tasks, link and joint goals in therapy and Theory of therapist change, with a general measure of therapeutic Alliance. Composed of 17 items with a Likert scale from 1 (Never) to 7 (Always).

Used to measure therapeutic alliance in patients. WATOCI has proven effective (Corbella & Botella, 2004; Duncan & Miller, 1999).

Designed to evaluate the flexibility, negotiation and expression of the therapist measured by the patient. Composed of 12 items with a Likert scale from 1 (Never) to 5 (Often).

Used to measure therapeutic alliance in patients. ANS has proven effective (Díaz-Oropeza & Peña-Leyva, 2016; Doran, Safran, Waizmann, Bolger & Muran, 2012)

Designed to evaluate somatization, depression and anxiety. Composed of 18 items with a Likert scale from 0 (Nothing) to 4 (A lot).

Used to measure psychological well-being in patients. BSI-18 has proven effective (Derogatis & Melisaratos, 1983; Ruipérez, Ibáñez, Lorente, Moro & Ortet, 2001)

Designed to evaluate mindfulness capabilities, through the sub-scales of observation, description, acting consciously, not judging one's own experience and not reacting to one's own experience. This short version is composed of 20 items, with a scale ranging from 1 (never or very rarely true) to 5 (very often or always true).

Used to measure mindfulness in therapists and patients. FFMQ has proven effective (Baer, Smith, Hopkins, Krietemeyer & Toney, 2006; Tran et al., 2014)

Designed to assess common humanity, mindfulness, self-judgment, excessive identification, isolation, personal goodness and general self-compassion. Composed of 12 items in its short version classified on a Likert scale from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always) with the total score obtained by adding the averages of each subscale.

Used to measure self-compassion in therapists and patients. SCS-SF has proven effective (García-Campayo et al., 2014; Raes, Pommier, Neff & Van Gucht, 2011)

Designed to evaluate mindfulness styles in the instruction of therapists and their ability to be present in session. (Obtained from: Mindfulness in Parenting Questionnaire). Composed of 28 items, with a Likert scale from 1 (never) to 5 (almost always).

Used to measure mindfulness instructional style in therapists. MIPQ has proven effective (McCaffrey, Reitman & Black, 2017)

Designed to evaluate the instructional function, the expressive function, the involvement function, the attentional function and the operative function of the therapist. Composed of 36 items with a Likert scale from 1 (Total disagreement) to 7 (Total agreement).

Used to measure the therapist's personal style in therapists PST-Q has proven effective (Fernández-Álvarez, García, LoBianco & Corbella, 2003)

Designed to assess levels of depression, anxiety and stress. Composed of 21 items with a Likert scale from 0 (It didn't happen to me) to 3 (It happened a lot, or most of the time) with an overall score obtained from the sum of all the items.

Used to measure negative symptomatology in therapists. DASS-21 has proven effective (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1993).

Designed to assess remembered well-being (divided into the subscales of hedonic well-being, eudaimonic well-being, social well-being and a total score) and experienced well-being (divided into the subscales of positive experiences and experiences negative) Composed of a scale of 12 items that score from 0 to 10 the degree of agreement with each item.

Used to measure subjective well-being in patients. PHI has proven effective (Hervás & Vázquez, 2013).

Designed to measure the psychotherapeutic process, it evaluates the state of the client or patient from a series of dimensions (subjective well-being, problems / symptoms and general functioning). It is a is a self-report questionnaire composed of 34 items. It also has short forms of 18 (forms A and B), 10 and 5 items to use in each session as a form of continuous monitoring of the therapeutic process. The short form with 5 items was used in this study.

It consists of a Likert-type scale that goes from 0 (never) to 4 (always or almost always).

Used to measure the therapeutic process in patients. CORE-OM has been shown to be effective (Evans et al., 2000; Feixas et al., 2012).

Designed to assess distraction, reassessment, self-criticism and acceptance. Composed of 16 items with a Likert scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 7 (Strongly agree).

Used to measure emotional regulation in therapists. SERI has proven effective (Katz, Lustig, Assis & Yovel, 2017).

Designed to assess the subject's state anxiety, understood as the subjective feelings of tension and apprehension and the hyperactivity of the Autonomous Nervous System. Composed of 20 items on a Likert scale from 0 (Nothing) to 3 (Very good).

Used to measure anxiety in therapists. STAI has proven effective (Spielberger, Gorsuch & Lushene, 1970).

Designed to assess negative affect and positive affect. Composed of 20 items with a Likert scale from 1 (Very little or nothing) to 5 (Extremely).

Used to measure affections in therapists. PANAS has proven effective (Sandín et al., 1999; Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988).

Has this training had any effect on your work in therapy? Do you think that the regular practice of mindfulness can provide specific qualities for the exercise of psychotherapy? Have you noticed changes in the way you perceive the feelings or attitudes of your patients? Have you noticed changes in the way you perceive your own feelings, attitudes, thoughts? Do you think that training has been able to affect your way of perceiving biases or interpretations both in yourself and in your patients during therapy? Have you practiced mindfulness, formally or informally, just before a difficult patient entered? Do you think it has helped you in more complex situations in therapy? Have you applied mindfulness with any of your patients? Formally, informally, psychoeducation, modeling? If you could, would you change some of this training?

Questions Yes / No about psychotherapist training

Order of mindfulness interest

Likert scale from 0 (Totally disagree) to 5 (Totally agree) of the MCBI improvements

Likert scale from 0 (Not very valuable) to 5 (Extremely valuable) Indicate how relevant the different sections of the training have been for you

Likert scale from 0 (Nothing) to 10 (Very much) Indicate to what degree you believe that the intervention based on mindfulness and compassion that has helped you control aspects that you would previously seek to change or improve.

Indicate to what degree you notice a global improvement as a result of the intervention you have received.

Indicate to what degree you have improved in your start-up objectives, as a result of the intervention you have received.

Questions about Practice and Materials

Did you contribute something to fill in the records? Have you noticed changes in the way you perceive your changes, reactions, distractions...? Have you detected something concrete with any of your patients thanks to having to fill in the records? At what time of the day did you fill in the records? Difficulties when taking records During these last 2 months, have you done any kind of work of introspection, self-knowledge, personal therapy, etc.?

Observations, something to comment:

Weekly record taken by the instructor attending each session.

Weekly registration outside the sessions recording: Day of the week, Audio / Type of meditation, minutes of practice, Difficulties / Observations.

It is proposed to carry out a diary or introspective self-registration of what you can happen in therapy sessions with their patients (patients who are participating in this study too). That is, make a weekly record of how it felt The therapist at different times of therapy, providing some examples of changes that can be detected:

• Distractions of the patient's speech to another topic
• Postural changes or discomforts (we always talk about you, the therapist)
• Thoughts and emotions that may arise
• And in general, anything that wakes you up what your patient says or does

This registration should be done, if possible, at the end of the session with the patient. If not Possible will be filled that same day at another time.

In no case will personal data of any of the patients be entered. it is requested to indicate who the patient will be A: your e-mail and B: your e-mail (if you have more than 1).