In the patient’s own words: a qualitative study of what patients find helpful in psychodynamic psychotherapy

Hannah Richardson, Julian Ernst, Rebecca Drill, Annabel Gill, Patrick Hunnicutt, Zoe Silver, Mikaela Coger, Jack Beinashowitz
{"title":"In the patient’s own words: a qualitative study of what patients find helpful in psychodynamic psychotherapy","authors":"Hannah Richardson, Julian Ernst, Rebecca Drill, Annabel Gill, Patrick Hunnicutt, Zoe Silver, Mikaela Coger, Jack Beinashowitz","doi":"10.1108/jmhtep-06-2022-0041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose This study aims to examine what patients say is helpful in psychodynamic psychotherapy by analyzing responses to an open-ended question at two time points: three months into treatment and termination. Design/methodology/approach Participants in this naturalistic study were a diverse group of patients seeking treatment at a psychodynamic psychotherapy training clinic (within a public hospital system). The authors used thematic analysis to categorize patient responses to an open-ended question about what is helpful in their treatment. Findings The authors found that a majority of patients found their psychotherapy helpful, and patient responses broke down into 16 categories. Themes that emerged from categories were what patients experience or feel, what therapists/therapy provides and what patients do in therapy. The most frequently endorsed category at both three months and termination was embedded within other categories, “mention of an other,” which captured when patients specifically mentioned another person (i.e. the therapist) in their response. The next most frequently endorsed categories were “talking/someone to talk with,” “feeling better/experiencing well-being/improved functioning” and “having regularity/structure” (at three months) and “having attention directed at experience,” “having regularity/structure” and “experiencing the professional role of the therapist” (at termination). Originality/value Findings shed light on factors contributing to helpful psychotherapy from patients’ perspectives in their own words. While previous research has shown that the therapy relationship is an important factor in effective therapy, the findings of this study highlight this ingredient in a personal, spontaneous way.","PeriodicalId":44868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mental Health Training Education and Practice","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mental Health Training Education and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jmhtep-06-2022-0041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to examine what patients say is helpful in psychodynamic psychotherapy by analyzing responses to an open-ended question at two time points: three months into treatment and termination. Design/methodology/approach Participants in this naturalistic study were a diverse group of patients seeking treatment at a psychodynamic psychotherapy training clinic (within a public hospital system). The authors used thematic analysis to categorize patient responses to an open-ended question about what is helpful in their treatment. Findings The authors found that a majority of patients found their psychotherapy helpful, and patient responses broke down into 16 categories. Themes that emerged from categories were what patients experience or feel, what therapists/therapy provides and what patients do in therapy. The most frequently endorsed category at both three months and termination was embedded within other categories, “mention of an other,” which captured when patients specifically mentioned another person (i.e. the therapist) in their response. The next most frequently endorsed categories were “talking/someone to talk with,” “feeling better/experiencing well-being/improved functioning” and “having regularity/structure” (at three months) and “having attention directed at experience,” “having regularity/structure” and “experiencing the professional role of the therapist” (at termination). Originality/value Findings shed light on factors contributing to helpful psychotherapy from patients’ perspectives in their own words. While previous research has shown that the therapy relationship is an important factor in effective therapy, the findings of this study highlight this ingredient in a personal, spontaneous way.
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
用病人自己的话说:一项定性研究,研究病人在心理动力疗法中发现的有用之处
目的本研究旨在通过分析在两个时间点(治疗开始三个月和结束三个月)对开放式问题的回答来检验患者在心理动力心理治疗中所说的有用性。设计/方法/方法本自然主义研究的参与者是在心理动力心理治疗培训诊所(公立医院系统内)寻求治疗的不同群体的患者。作者使用主题分析来分类患者对一个开放式问题的反应,这个问题是关于什么对他们的治疗有帮助。作者发现,大多数患者认为他们的心理治疗有帮助,患者的反应分为16类。从分类中出现的主题是患者的经历或感受,治疗师/治疗提供了什么以及患者在治疗中做了什么。在三个月和终止治疗期间,最常被认可的类别是嵌入在其他类别中,“提到另一个人”,当患者在回应中特别提到另一个人(即治疗师)时,就会出现这种情况。其次最常被认可的类别是“交谈/有人交谈”,“感觉更好/体验幸福/改善功能”和“有规律/结构”(三个月时),以及“专注于体验”,“有规律/结构”和“体验治疗师的专业角色”(终止时)。原创性/价值研究结果从患者自己的角度阐明了有助于心理治疗的因素。虽然之前的研究表明,治疗关系是有效治疗的一个重要因素,但这项研究的发现以一种个人的、自发的方式强调了这一因素。
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
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
期刊最新文献
Service users’ and staff’s experiences of ward rounds in an inpatient rehabilitation service: a service evaluation Borderline personality disorder, substance abuse and disordered eating: perceptions of treatment and recovery within community mental health Learning disability and autism: best practice tips The de-escalation skills you need to handle conflict situations How to preserve the dignity of inpatients during menstruation
×
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