No abstract
Sudden gains have been linked to improved outcomes in cognitive behaviour therapy for depression. The relationship between sudden gains and outcome is less clear in other treatment modalities, including interpersonal psychotherapy and supportive expressive therapy, which may indicate different mechanisms of change between treatment modalities. The current study examined sudden gains in adults meeting diagnostic criteria for depression (N = 40) offered up to 12 sessions of behavioural activation treatment. Sudden gains were found in 42.5% of the sample. Sudden gains occurred early (median pre-gain session 2) and were related to outcome: those who experienced a sudden gain had significantly lower post-treatment scores on the PHQ-9. Furthermore, the proportion meeting the reliable and clinically significant change criteria at end of treatment was higher in the sudden gain group. These findings highlight the importance of understanding the mechanisms by which sudden gains relate to therapy outcome in behavioural activation.
Case formulation is considered important in both the development of the therapeutic relationship and in starting the process of therapeutic change. Cognitive analytic therapy (CAT) describes the developmental origins and maintenance of a client's problems in both written (reformulation letter) and diagrammatic form (sequential diagrammatic reformulation). This study aimed to investigate the effects of these reformulation tools on insight and symptom change. A small‐N repeated measures design was employed with quantitative and qualitative measures collected from six therapist/client dyads. Participating therapists kept a record of their delivery of CAT reformulation tools. Participating clients completed the insight subscale of the Self‐Reflection and Insight Scale every fourth session and the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation‐10 every session. Qualitative data from client change interviews regarding their experiences of CAT and attributions of change was explored using template analysis. Participants demonstrated improvements (symptom reduction and insight increases) over the course of the intervention. Administration of reformulation tools did not consistently result in significant changes on insight and symptom measures. However, the tools were identified by participants as leading to insight and emotional change within the context of a good therapeutic relationship. These findings suggest that a genuine therapeutic relationship is an important change mechanism operating through, and strengthened by, CAT‐specific tools.
Published research shows small-to-medium effects of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Psychosis (CBTp) on reducing psychotic symptoms. Given the on-going development of CBTp interventions, the aim of this systematic review is to examine whether the effectiveness of CBTp has changed across time. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL were searched for randomized controlled trials examining CBTp interventions targeting positive and/or negative symptoms vs treatment as usual. Four meta-analyses were carried out to examine the effectiveness of CBTp for: positive symptoms; delusions; hallucinations; and negative symptoms. Four meta-regressions examined whether the effectiveness of CBTp changed across time for these groups of symptoms. A total of 28 studies (n = 2698) yielded a pooled g of −0.24 (95% confidence interval [CI] −0.32, −0.16, P < .001) favoring CBTp for positive symptoms, with nonsignificant heterogeneity (Q = 26.87, P = .47; I2 =0%); 13 studies (n = 890) yielded a pooled g of −0.36 (95% CI −0.59, −0.13, P = .002) for delusions, with substantial heterogeneity (Q = 31.99, P = .001; I2 =62%); 16 studies (n = 849) yielded a pooled g of −0.26 (95% CI −0.42, −0.11, P < .001) for hallucinations, with nonsignificant heterogeneity (Q = 18.10, P = .26; I2 =17%); 19 studies (n = 1761) yielded a pooled g of −0.22 (95% CI −0.33, −0.12, P < .001) for negative symptoms, with nonsignificant heterogeneity (Q = 20.32, P = .32, I2 =11%). Meta-regressions indicated a significant effect of year on the effectiveness of CBTp only for delusions (F[1, 11] = 5.99, P = .032; R2 = 0.594); methodological quality did not effect this finding. Findings indicate small-to-medium effects of CBTp for psychotic symptoms, with increasing effectiveness across time for delusions.
Smartphones have become the primary devices for accessing the online world. The potential for smartphone use to become problematic has come into increasing focus. Students and young adults have been shown to use their smartphones at high rates and may be at risk for problematic use. There is limited research evaluating interventions for problematic smartphone use. The present research aimed to develop and evaluate a digital intervention for problematic smartphone use in a student population. A mixed-method case series design was used. The participants were 10 students with mild–moderate dependency on the online world (measured via a self-report questionnaire). An intervention comprising goal setting, personalised feedback, mindfulness, and behavioural suggestions was delivered via a smartphone application. Time spent on smartphones was measured objectively through the same application. Changes in problematic technology use, wellbeing, mindfulness, and sleep were also evaluated. The findings indicate that the intervention resulted in a reduction in self-reported problematic smartphone use, but not screen time. The findings also indicate that over the course of participation, there was a positive influence on wellbeing, online dependency, mindfulness, and sleep. However, the mechanisms of change could not be determined. The study provides preliminary evidence that a light-touch, smartphone-delivered package is an acceptable and effective intervention for students wishing to better manage their problematic smartphone use.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.