Therapist factors associated with intent to use exposure therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.3 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Cognitive Behaviour Therapy Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1080/16506073.2023.2191824
Diane Langthorne, Jessica Beard, Glenn Waller
{"title":"Therapist factors associated with intent to use exposure therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Diane Langthorne,&nbsp;Jessica Beard,&nbsp;Glenn Waller","doi":"10.1080/16506073.2023.2191824","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Exposure therapy is effective but widely underused. Numerous studies indicate therapist factors that might explain this pattern of underuse. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesised those previous research findings, to identify which therapist factors are clearly associated with their intent to use exposure therapy. A systematic review and six random-effects meta-analyses synthesised studies identified in three databases (Scopus, PsychINFO, Web of Science) and through reference lists and citation searches. Most studies relied on a survey design, resulting in weak quality of research. Twenty-six eligible studies were included in the narrative synthesis, (including 5557 participants), while 21 studies yielded sufficient data to enter the meta-analysis. Medium to large pooled effect sizes indicated that therapists with more positive beliefs, a CBT orientation, and training in exposure therapy were significantly more likely to use exposure. Small pooled effect sizes indicated that older and more anxious therapists were less likely to use exposure. Therapist years of experience was not significantly associated with exposure use. There was no evidence of publication bias. Therapist characteristics clearly play a role in the use of exposure therapy, and future clinical and research work is required to address this limitation in the delivery of this effective therapy.</p>","PeriodicalId":10535,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Behaviour Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Behaviour Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/16506073.2023.2191824","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Exposure therapy is effective but widely underused. Numerous studies indicate therapist factors that might explain this pattern of underuse. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesised those previous research findings, to identify which therapist factors are clearly associated with their intent to use exposure therapy. A systematic review and six random-effects meta-analyses synthesised studies identified in three databases (Scopus, PsychINFO, Web of Science) and through reference lists and citation searches. Most studies relied on a survey design, resulting in weak quality of research. Twenty-six eligible studies were included in the narrative synthesis, (including 5557 participants), while 21 studies yielded sufficient data to enter the meta-analysis. Medium to large pooled effect sizes indicated that therapists with more positive beliefs, a CBT orientation, and training in exposure therapy were significantly more likely to use exposure. Small pooled effect sizes indicated that older and more anxious therapists were less likely to use exposure. Therapist years of experience was not significantly associated with exposure use. There was no evidence of publication bias. Therapist characteristics clearly play a role in the use of exposure therapy, and future clinical and research work is required to address this limitation in the delivery of this effective therapy.

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
与使用暴露疗法意图相关的治疗师因素:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
暴露疗法是有效的,但广泛使用不足。许多研究表明,治疗师的因素可能解释这种使用不足的模式。这项系统回顾和荟萃分析综合了之前的研究结果,以确定哪些治疗师因素与他们使用暴露疗法的意图明显相关。一项系统综述和六项随机效应荟萃分析综合了三个数据库(Scopus, PsychINFO, Web of Science)以及通过参考文献列表和引文搜索确定的研究。大多数研究依赖于调查设计,导致研究质量较差。叙事综合纳入了26项符合条件的研究(包括5557名参与者),其中21项研究获得了足够的数据进入meta分析。中到大的合并效应量表明,具有更积极信念、CBT取向和暴露疗法培训的治疗师更有可能使用暴露疗法。较小的综合效应量表明,年龄较大和更焦虑的治疗师不太可能使用暴露疗法。治疗师的经验年数与暴露的使用没有显著的关联。没有证据表明存在发表偏倚。治疗师的特点显然在暴露疗法的使用中起着重要作用,未来的临床和研究工作需要解决这种有效疗法的局限性。
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
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊介绍: Cognitive Behaviour Therapy is a peer reviewed, multidisciplinary journal devoted to the application of behavioural and cognitive sciences to clinical psychology and psychotherapy. The journal publishes state-of-the-art scientific articles within: - clinical and health psychology - psychopathology - behavioural medicine - assessment - treatment - theoretical issues pertinent to behavioural, cognitive and combined cognitive behavioural therapies With the number of high quality contributions increasing, the journal has been able to maintain a rapid publication schedule, providing readers with the latest research in the field.
期刊最新文献
Sub-groups of emotion dysregulation in youth with nonsuicidal self-injury: latent profile analysis of a randomized controlled trial Public safety personnel's perceptions of mental health training: an assessment of the Emotional Resilience Skills Training. Anger in social anxiety disorder. Evaluating the reliability and validity of the Questionnaire on Well-Being: a validation study for a clinically informed measurement of subjective well-being. A concentrated approach for treating OCD: a pilot study examining the feasibility and potential effectiveness of the Bergen Four Day Treatment in the U.S.
×
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