<i>Background:</i> In 2008, Leichsenring and Rabung performed a meta-analysis of 8 studies of longer-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (LTPP). The work was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (vol. 300, pp 1551–1565), and they concluded that LTPP was more effective than shorter-term therapies. <i>Method:</i> Given that such claims have the potential to influence treatment decisions and policies, we re-examined the meta-analysis and the 8 studies. <i>Results:</i> We found a miscalculation of the effect sizes used to make key comparisons. Claims for the effectiveness of LTPP depended on a set of small, underpowered studies that were highly heterogeneous in terms of patients treated, interventions, comparison-control groups, and outcomes. LTPP was compared to 12 types of comparison-controls, including control groups that did not involve any psychotherapy, short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy, and unvalidated treatments. Additionally, the studies failed to protect against threats to bias, and had poor internal validity. <i>Conclusion:</i> Overall, we found no evidence to support claims of superiority of LTPP over shorter-term methods of psychotherapy.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Although opioids are central to acute pain management, numerous studies have shown that many physicians prescribe them incorrectly, resulting in inadequate pain management and side effects. We assessed whether a case-based palliative medicine curriculum could improve medical house staff opioid prescribing practices.

These interns, mostly U.S. medical school graduates (98.7%, n = 155) reported little training and low self-perceived comfort and skill with important elements of end-of-life communication that might contribute to a lack of preparedness to address these issues during their internship. Further research that confirms and explains the underlying reasons for these findings seems warranted.

The prevalence, predictors, and description of alternative treatment use among peo ple with multiple sclerosis (MS) have not been well studied despite interest and con cern about such use among health care professionals and people with MS. The goal of this study was to describe the prevalence of the use of specific alternative treatments by people with MS, the sociodemographic and disease characteristics of those most likely to use alternative treatments, perceived benefits and harms from use of these treatments, and the reasons for their use. Almost three-fifths of the study sample of 240 people diagnosed with MS from two chapters of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society had used alternative treatments. Most (90 percent) of those who had used al ternative treatments did so in combination with traditional treatments. Only 7.1 per cent used any treatments considered to be high risk or dangerous. The primary reason for using alternative treatments was to obtain relief from physical and psychological symptoms. Implications of these findings for health care professionals are discussed. Key Words: Multiple sclerosis—Alternative therapies—Complementary therapies— Alternative medical practices—Unconventional medicine.

The original process model of evidence-based practice (EBP) is described, and contrasted with the empirically supported treatments (EST) initiative which designated selected interventions as meeting some evidentiary benchmark (e.g., supported by two-well-designed randomized controlled trials). EBP does not utilize lists of ESTs, and designating a given psychotherapy as empirically supported is actually antithetical to the EBP decisionmaking process. Much of the resistance to EBP within social work may be attributable to confusion between EBP as it was originally conceived as a mutual decision-making process occurring between the clinician and the client, and the promulgation of lists of EST and the subsequent urging that social workers select their psychotherapies from such lists. The latter is not scientifically justifiable, nor does it taken into account other variables crucial to EBP, such as professional values, clinical expertise, client preferences and values, and available resources. EBP as it was originally conceived has much to add to the practice of clinical social work.

The need for empirical, objective, clear, and practical outcome measures for therapy has long been recognized by clinicians and researchers. Pragmatic tools for objective determination of the efficacy of therapy have been scarce in clinical practice settings. Heart rate variability (HRV) is increasing in popularity for use in clinical settings as a measure of treatment success. Since HRV is stable and placebo-free, it has the potential to meet this need. Thirty-nine cases are presented from the clinical practices of the authors and three other clinicians where HRV was used as an outcome measure for Thought Field Therapy (TFT). The cases included TFT treatments which addressed a wide variety of problems including phobias, anxiety, trauma, depression, fatigue, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, learning difficulties, compulsions, obsessions, eating disorders, anger, and physical pain. A lowering of subjective units of distress was in most cases related to an improvement in HRV.

No abstract