Objective Use of psychotherapeutic outcome measures improves patient outcomes and demonstrates patient improvement. However, practitioners infrequently use these measures because of concerns regarding their practicality and utility. We critically evaluate global self‐report measures of adult psychotherapeutic outcome on key practical and utilitarian criteria. Method The following measures were evaluated according to practical criteria (e.g., administration time and cost) and utilitarian criteria (e.g., psychometrics and sensitivity to change): Behavior and Symptom Identification Scale‐24; Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Outcome Measure; Depression Anxiety Stress Scales; Health Survey Short Form‐36; Outcome Questionnaire‐45; Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System; Symptom Checklist‐90‐Revised; and Brief Symptom Inventory. Results All of the reviewed outcome measures had a number of practical strengths, including short administration time. However, we also identified utilitarian concerns for each measure that are likely to affect their use and interpretation. Conclusion Each of the reviewed outcome measures mostly address practitioners’ concerns regarding practicality and utility. This critical review can aid practitioners in selecting an outcome measure based on their preferences.