A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the Feasibility and Acceptability of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Comorbid Social Anxiety Disorder in a Routine Practice Setting.

IF 0.6 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy Pub Date : 2023-06-27 DOI:10.1891/JCP-2022-0014
Kristy L Dalrymple, Katherine S Wahrer, Emily Walsh, Lia Rosenstein, Mark Zimmerman
{"title":"A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of the Feasibility and Acceptability of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Comorbid Social Anxiety Disorder in a Routine Practice Setting.","authors":"Kristy L Dalrymple,&nbsp;Katherine S Wahrer,&nbsp;Emily Walsh,&nbsp;Lia Rosenstein,&nbsp;Mark Zimmerman","doi":"10.1891/JCP-2022-0014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A prior open trial of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for comorbid social anxiety disorder (SAD) and depression showed clinically significant improvement over the course of 16 sessions. The aim of the current study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of ACT for this population in a pilot randomized trial within a routine practice setting. Patients (<i>n</i> = 26) were randomly assigned to 16 weeks of medication treatment as usual (mTAU) versus mTAU plus ACT (mTAU + ACT). Results showed that a significantly greater percentage of patients in mTAU not only dropped out of the study but also dropped out of treatment at the practice altogether, compared to patients in mTAU + ACT. Overall, results from this study suggest that having a comparison condition of mTAU alone in a randomized trial in a routine practice setting is not feasible and that patients with comorbid forms of SAD may require psychotherapy to remain engaged in treatment in standard clinical practice. Preliminary results for patients within the mTAU + ACT condition on treatment satisfaction and outcomes were comparable to results from the prior open trial, suggesting that ACT itself is worthy of further investigation. Further modifications to the study design may be needed to develop a feasible and acceptable comparison condition against which to test ACT for comorbid SAD in a routine practice setting.</p>","PeriodicalId":47207,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1891/JCP-2022-0014","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A prior open trial of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) for comorbid social anxiety disorder (SAD) and depression showed clinically significant improvement over the course of 16 sessions. The aim of the current study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of ACT for this population in a pilot randomized trial within a routine practice setting. Patients (n = 26) were randomly assigned to 16 weeks of medication treatment as usual (mTAU) versus mTAU plus ACT (mTAU + ACT). Results showed that a significantly greater percentage of patients in mTAU not only dropped out of the study but also dropped out of treatment at the practice altogether, compared to patients in mTAU + ACT. Overall, results from this study suggest that having a comparison condition of mTAU alone in a randomized trial in a routine practice setting is not feasible and that patients with comorbid forms of SAD may require psychotherapy to remain engaged in treatment in standard clinical practice. Preliminary results for patients within the mTAU + ACT condition on treatment satisfaction and outcomes were comparable to results from the prior open trial, suggesting that ACT itself is worthy of further investigation. Further modifications to the study design may be needed to develop a feasible and acceptable comparison condition against which to test ACT for comorbid SAD in a routine practice setting.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
接受和承诺治疗共病社交焦虑障碍的可行性和可接受性的随机对照试验。
先前的一项接受和承诺疗法(ACT)治疗共病社交焦虑障碍(SAD)和抑郁症的公开试验显示,在16个疗程的过程中,临床显著改善。当前研究的目的是在常规实践环境下的随机试验中测试ACT对这一人群的可行性和可接受性。患者(n = 26)被随机分配到16周的常规药物治疗(mTAU)和mTAU + ACT (mTAU + ACT)。结果显示,与mTAU + ACT患者相比,mTAU患者不仅退出研究,而且在实践中完全退出治疗的比例明显更高。总的来说,本研究的结果表明,在常规实践环境中单独进行随机试验的mTAU比较条件是不可行的,并且伴有SAD合并症的患者可能需要心理治疗才能在标准临床实践中继续进行治疗。mTAU + ACT患者治疗满意度和结局的初步结果与之前公开试验的结果相当,表明ACT本身值得进一步研究。可能需要对研究设计进行进一步修改,以制定一个可行且可接受的比较条件,以便在常规实践环境中检测ACT是否伴发SAD。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy
Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: The Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy is devoted to advancing the science and clinical practice of cognitive-behavior therapy. This includes a range of interventions including cognitive therapy, rational-emotive behavior therapy, dialectical behavior therapy, acceptance and commitment therapy, and mindfulness approaches. The journal publishes empirical papers, including case studies, along with review articles, papers that integrate cognitive-behavior therapy with other systems, and practical "how to" articles.
期刊最新文献
Comparing the Incremental Predictive Validity of Self-as-Context-Related Measures. Less Might Not Be More, but May Be Enough for Some. The Measurement of Reactions to Face Masks and the Relation to Social Anxiety. Further Examining Positive Affect in Relation to Worry: A Synergistic Effect Between Positive Affect Expressivity and Proneness to Positive Affect. The Role of Self-Compassion and Social Anxiety in the Relationship Between Cognitive Distortions and Emotional Eating.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1