Family therapy.

Lebow, Jay L.; Stroud, Catherine B.

doi:10.1037/14861-017

Cited by 7 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 68 publications

(106 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, a fine-tuning of each individual change process according to the present state of the therapeutic relationship and adapting interventions accordingly might help to increase the willingness of patients and their ability to collaborate. Therapists’ activities in fostering the collaboration on goals is influenced bidirectional by a number of further relevant evidence-based technical adaptive features in the treatment of therapy in treatment of MPF: Handling RRPs (rupture repair processes) and thereby fostering the development of the therapeutic bond, emphasizing change by adaptive therapist activity (flexibility, availability and treatment intensity), setting rules and boundaries (consensus on task), processing maladaptive intrapsychic and interpersonal thoughts, behavior and parenting (Lebow, 2005; Bachler et al, 2014); and, as our data show, improving outcome expectations (hope) by encouraging patients and by supporting them in solving adversities within the family. In particular, differentiating “stable collaboration” (low, medium high stable) from improving and deteriorating collaboration helps explaining the therapeutic outcome and offers a valid approach to everyday practice.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Change in Collaboration Are Associated with Baseline Characteristics and Predict Outcome and Dropout Rates in Treatment of Multi-Problem Families. A Validation Study

Bachler¹,

Fruehmann²,

Bachler

et al. 2017

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The present study validates the Multi-Problem Family (MPF)-Collaboration Scale), which measures the progress of goal directed collaboration of patients in the treatment of families with MPF and its relation to drop-out rates and treatment outcome.Method: Naturalistic study of symptom and competence-related changes in children of ages 4–18 and their caregivers.Setting: Integrative, structural outreach family therapy.Measures: The data of five different groups of goal directed collaboration (deteriorating collaboration, stable low collaboration, stable medium collaboration, stable high collaboration, improving collaboration) were analyzed in their relation to treatment expectation, individual therapeutic goals (ITG), family adversity index, severity of problems and global assessment of a caregiver’s functioning, child, and relational aspects.Results: From N = 810 families, 20% displayed stable high collaboration (n = 162) and 21% had a pattern of improving collaboration. The families with stable high or improving collaboration rates achieved significantly more progress throughout therapy in terms of treatment outcome expectancy (d = 0.96; r = 0.43), reaching ITG (d = 1.17; r = 0.50), family adversities (d = 0.55; r = 0.26), and severity of psychiatric symptoms (d = 0.31; r = 0.15). Furthermore, families with stable high or improving collaboration maintained longer treatments and had a bigger chance of finishing the therapy as planned. The odds of having a stable low or deteriorating collaboration throughout treatment were significantly higher for subjects who started treatment with low treatment expectation or high family-related adversities.Conclusion: The positive outcomes of homebased interventions for multi-problem families are closely related to “stable high” and an “improving” collaboration as measured with the MPF-Collaboration Scale. Patients who fall into these groups have a high treatment outcome expectancy and reduce psychological stress. For therapeutic interventions with multi-problem families it seems beneficial to maintain a stable high collaboration or help the collaboration, e.g., by fostering treatment expectation.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patterns of Change in Collaboration Are Associated with Baseline Characteristics and Predict Outcome and Dropout Rates in Treatment of Multi-Problem Families. A Validation Study

Bachler¹,

Fruehmann²,

Bachler

et al. 2017

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This assumption follows logically from underlying tenets of family therapy that behavioral health problems are best conceptualized within a systemic framework (Lebow, 2005) – a perspective that emphasizes the multi-determined and reciprocal nature of human behavior (e.g., Bronfenbrenner, 1979). If child and adolescent psychosocial problems are closely linked with family relations and transactions within and between other social systems (e.g., peers, school, neighborhood), and decades of research have demonstrated such associations (e.g., Liberman, 2008), then strategically changing key aspects of family relations should lead to improved youth functioning.…”

Section: Collaboration In Family Therapymentioning

confidence: 99%

Collaboration in Family Therapy

Tuerk¹,

McCart²,

Henggeler

2012

J Clin Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article summarizes and illustrates the collaboration strategies used by several family therapies. The strategies used within multisystemic therapy (MST) are emphasized because it has demonstrated high rates of treatment completion and favorable outcomes in multiple clinical trials. Many of the collaboration strategies in family work are common to other forms of evidence-based psychotherapy (e.g., reflective listening, empathy, reframing, and displays of authenticity and flexibility); however, some strategies are unique to family systems treatments, such as the identification of strengths across multiple systems in the youth’s social ecology and the maintenance of a family (versus a child) focus during treatment. A case example illustrates collaboration and engagement in the context of MST.

show abstract

“…Couple and family therapy began as a rich mix of interrelated methods. However, with the emergence of training institutes and then evidence‐based treatments, couple and family therapy evolved into a number of competing methods, which on the surface accentuate very different aspects of relational life, theories of human problems, and methods of intervention (Gurman & Fraenkel, ; Lebow, , , ; Lebow & Stroud, ). In this evolution, the early common ground of treatments fractured as some, for example, accentuated the teaching of skills (Christensen, Dimidjian, & Martell, ; Roddy, Nowlan, Doss, & Christensen, ), others restructuring systems (Rohrbaugh & Shoham, ), and still others remaining nondirective (Dickerson, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%