A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Among People Recovering from Mental Illness: A Tailored Mindfulness-Based Intervention versus Relaxation Training.

Yi Ting Daphne Cheng, Kim Wan Daniel Young, Per Carlbring, Yat Nam Ng, Suet Lin Shirley Hung
{"title":"A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial Among People Recovering from Mental Illness: A Tailored Mindfulness-Based Intervention versus Relaxation Training.","authors":"Yi Ting Daphne Cheng, Kim Wan Daniel Young, Per Carlbring, Yat Nam Ng, Suet Lin Shirley Hung","doi":"10.1080/26408066.2023.2281418","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study assessed the potential effectiveness, acceptability and feasibility of a tailored mindfulness-based intervention (MBI, REMIND 2.0) for personal recovery among people with mental illness during the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this pilot mixed methods randomized controlled trial, participants were assigned to either the MBI (<i>n</i> = 14) or the relaxation training (RT) (<i>n</i> = 14). Quantitative measures were used to assess primary outcomes, including personal recovery, mindfulness, self-compassion, resilience, and secondary outcomes, including depression, stress, anxiety, positive and negative moods, quality of life and general health at baseline (T0), post-intervention (T1) and one-month follow-up (T2). Quantitative interviews were conducted to explore the experiences and perceptions toward the MBI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results indicated significant group and time interactions for all outcomes except anxiety and stress. MBI participants showed significant improvements in all outcomes at T1, which were maintained at T2, except for positive mood. RT participants showed a significant decline in resilience but significant improvements in all secondary outcomes at T1, but all outcomes significantly declined at T2, except for anxiety and stress. MBI participants were receptive toward the programme in all aspects of personal recovery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The tailored MBI is a potentially effective, feasible and acceptable approach to facilitate personal recovery among people with mental illness. Differences between MBI and RT are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":73742,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)","volume":" ","pages":"318-348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evidence-based social work (2019)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/26408066.2023.2281418","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This study assessed the potential effectiveness, acceptability and feasibility of a tailored mindfulness-based intervention (MBI, REMIND 2.0) for personal recovery among people with mental illness during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: In this pilot mixed methods randomized controlled trial, participants were assigned to either the MBI (n = 14) or the relaxation training (RT) (n = 14). Quantitative measures were used to assess primary outcomes, including personal recovery, mindfulness, self-compassion, resilience, and secondary outcomes, including depression, stress, anxiety, positive and negative moods, quality of life and general health at baseline (T0), post-intervention (T1) and one-month follow-up (T2). Quantitative interviews were conducted to explore the experiences and perceptions toward the MBI.

Results: Results indicated significant group and time interactions for all outcomes except anxiety and stress. MBI participants showed significant improvements in all outcomes at T1, which were maintained at T2, except for positive mood. RT participants showed a significant decline in resilience but significant improvements in all secondary outcomes at T1, but all outcomes significantly declined at T2, except for anxiety and stress. MBI participants were receptive toward the programme in all aspects of personal recovery.

Conclusions: The tailored MBI is a potentially effective, feasible and acceptable approach to facilitate personal recovery among people with mental illness. Differences between MBI and RT are discussed.

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
在精神疾病康复人群中进行的一项随机对照试验:量身定制的正念干预与放松训练。
背景:本研究评估了基于正念的量身定制干预(MBI, REMIND 2.0)在COVID-19大流行期间对精神疾病患者个人康复的潜在有效性、可接受性和可行性。方法:在这项混合方法随机对照试验中,参与者被分配到MBI (n = 14)或放松训练(n = 14)。采用定量测量来评估主要结局,包括个人恢复、正念、自我同情、恢复力和次要结局,包括抑郁、压力、焦虑、积极和消极情绪、生活质量和基线(T0)、干预后(T1)和1个月随访(T2)时的总体健康状况。通过定量访谈来探讨对MBI的经验和看法。结果:除焦虑和压力外,所有结果均有显著的组间和时间交互作用。除了积极情绪外,MBI参与者在T1时的所有结果都有显着改善,在T2时保持不变。RT参与者在T1时表现出弹性显著下降,但在所有次要结果上都有显著改善,但在T2时除焦虑和压力外,所有结果都显著下降。MBI参与者在个人康复的所有方面都接受该方案。结论:量身定制的MBI是一种潜在有效、可行和可接受的促进精神疾病患者个人康复的方法。讨论了MBI与RT的区别。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Mental Health Problems of Self-Employed Workers: A Systematic Review of Potential Moderators. Evaluating the Psychometric Properties of the Revised Attitudes Toward Research Scale for Use with MSW Students. Racial Discrimination and Mental Health: Analyzing the Impact of Discrimination, Stress, Depressive Symptoms and Self-Esteem on Anxiety Experiences. Implementing Evidence-Based Practices in Rural Areas: Development and Testing of a Researcher Practitioner Collaboration in Mental Health. The Role of Social Support in Enhancing Life Satisfaction Among Syrian Refugees in Türkiye During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
×
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