In the latest edition Jun 21, 2018, of Psychoanalytic Psychology (APA) published a remarkable article by Dries Dulsster et. al. (University Ghent);
Lacanian talking therapy considered closely: A qualitative study."
The researchers found that not therapeutic techniques nor the focus on the initial symptoms (that brought the patients to analysis) proved to be important to what the patients themselves reported as a significant and beneficial change in their life.
“Allowing patients speech to unfold” and the “attentive listening” of the analyst seemed the motor of the process of “a surprising reframing”.
“Because of this, they [the patients] also began to consider their speech and this helped them to see themselves in a new light. It helped them to reflect on what they really wanted.” (abstract, my underscore)
The “therapy ‘adapts’ itself to the patient” and not the other way around.
This seems an important advice towards the idea of what psychotherapy may (or should) offer. Patients did get over the crisis and most symptoms faded or were relinquished yet the result of the analysis goes beyond the initial demand for curation.
Further research is necessary yet these primary results already corroborate the efficacy of the practice of psychoanalysis (and probably most speech-oriented psychotherapy).