It is widely acknowledged that personal therapy positively contributes to the continued personal well-being and ongoing professional development of mental health professionals, including psychiatrists. As a result, most training bodies continue to recommend personal therapy to their trainees. Given its reported value and benefits, one might hypothesize that a high proportion of psychiatrists avail of personal therapy. This systematic review seeks to investigate whether this is the case.

To identify and evaluate the findings derived from all available survey-based studies reporting quantitative data regarding psychiatrists’ and psychiatry trainees’ engagement in personal therapy.

A systematic search for survey-based studies about the use of personal therapy by psychiatric practitioners was conducted in four databases and platforms (PubMed, Scopus, Embase and EbscoHost) from inception to May 2022 following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were assessed for quality using the quality assessment checklist for survey studies in psychology (Q-SSP) and findings summarized using narrative synthesis.

The proportion of trainees who engaged in personal therapy ranged from a low of 13.4% in a recent UK based study to a high of 65.3% among Israeli residents. The proportion of fully qualified psychiatrists who engaged in personal therapy varied from 32.1% in South Korea to 89% in New Zealand.

This review represents the first known attempt to collect and synthesize data aimed at providing insights into the past and current trends in psychiatrists’ use of personal therapy across different geographic regions and career stages.

Personal practice (PP) is often considered as a central component in psychotherapy training aiming to promote personal and therapeutic competences. However, its implementation varies considerably in practice.

The purpose of this exploratory study was to examine the current practice of PP regarding the frequency/occurrence and perceived usefulness/impairment of topics, techniques and effects, as well as its helpful characteristics in psychotherapy training.

407 German psychotherapy trainees (214 cognitive behavioural therapy; 178 psychodynamic therapy) were surveyed online as to their current practice of PP.

For trainees, personal and therapeutic related topics were discussed. Reflection techniques and self-experiential practice were among the most frequently reported strategies, while the fostering of personal and interpersonal competences was among the effects with the strongest occurrence. However, negative PP effects were recorded as well. Differences in PP practice emerged between therapeutic orientations.

As certain techniques which are central to PP (e.g. self-experience) were also rarely or not used, and negative effects reported, its potential might not be fully utilized.

Personal practice (PP) is an integral component of many psychotherapy training programmes. It aims to promote personal and professional growth and is often conducted in a group format (g-PP). Group cohesion is one of the most researched mechanisms in group psychotherapy, but has rarely been studied in the context of g-PP.

This exploratory study examines the associations between cohesion, satisfaction with g-PP, its impact on personal and professional development, and theoretical orientation in a sample of n = 329 German psychotherapy trainees. Cohesion was assessed with the group questionnaire (GQ-D; Positive Bonding, Positive Working, Negative Relationship).

Overall, participants reported high levels of all outcome variables. Positive Bonding was the strongest predictor of satisfaction with g-PP (β = 0.46, p<.001). While trainees in cognitive behaviour therapy reported significantly better cohesion scores (d≥0.31), trainees in psychodynamic therapy reported significantly higher satisfaction with g-PP and its impact on their developments (d≥0.30).

Group cohesion appears to be an important factor in g-PP that should be actively promoted by group leaders. However, longitudinal study designs are needed to better understand the emergence of cohesion in g-PP as well as potential moderating factors.