The Relationship of Rumination, Worry and OCD Symptoms During Technology Supported Mindfulness Therapy for OCD

IF 3.2 3区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Clinical psychology & psychotherapy Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1002/cpp.3018

Lance L. Hawley, Diana M. Lisi, Margaret A. Richter, Steven Selchen, Neil A. Rector

{"title":"The Relationship of Rumination, Worry and OCD Symptoms During Technology Supported Mindfulness Therapy for OCD","authors":"Lance L. Hawley, Diana M. Lisi, Margaret A. Richter, Steven Selchen, Neil A. Rector","doi":"10.1002/cpp.3018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>In this study, we re-examined data from a previous randomized controlled trial investigating ‘technology supported mindfulness’ (TSM)—an 8-week treatment intervention for individuals experiencing OCD. The current analysis involves an examination of the longitudinal relationships between rumination, worry and OCD symptom changes during mindfulness treatment, in comparison to a waitlist control.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Participants experiencing OCD (<i>n</i> = 71) were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of (1) TSM or (2) waitlist control. We tested the extent to which rumination (using the Ruminative Response Scale) and worry (using the Penn State Worry Questionnaire) are associated with OCD symptom changes during the acute phase of treatment, concurrently (i.e., within the same longitudinal model).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Generalized linear model (GLM) results indicated a significant time (week 1 vs. week 8) by condition interaction involving decreased rumination in the TSM condition: <i>F</i>(1, 61) = 13.37, <i>p</i> = 0.001, partial η<sup>2</sup> = 0.18 and observed power = 0.94. A second GLM demonstrated decreased worry in the TSM condition: <i>F</i>(1, 69) = 37.34, <i>p</i> = 0.001, partial η<sup>2</sup> = 0.35 and observed power = 0.83. Longitudinal ‘latent difference’ structural equation analyses demonstrated a cross-lagged association between worry (but not rumination) and OCD symptom changes.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Individuals in the TSM condition experienced greater reductions in rumination and worry during 8 weeks of TSM treatment compared to the waitlist control, and reduced worry predicted subsequent OCD symptom reduction.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":10460,"journal":{"name":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","volume":"31 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cpp.3018","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cpp.3018","RegionNum":3,"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

Background

In this study, we re-examined data from a previous randomized controlled trial investigating ‘technology supported mindfulness’ (TSM)—an 8-week treatment intervention for individuals experiencing OCD. The current analysis involves an examination of the longitudinal relationships between rumination, worry and OCD symptom changes during mindfulness treatment, in comparison to a waitlist control.

Methods

Participants experiencing OCD (n = 71) were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of (1) TSM or (2) waitlist control. We tested the extent to which rumination (using the Ruminative Response Scale) and worry (using the Penn State Worry Questionnaire) are associated with OCD symptom changes during the acute phase of treatment, concurrently (i.e., within the same longitudinal model).

Results

Generalized linear model (GLM) results indicated a significant time (week 1 vs. week 8) by condition interaction involving decreased rumination in the TSM condition: F(1, 61) = 13.37, p = 0.001, partial η² = 0.18 and observed power = 0.94. A second GLM demonstrated decreased worry in the TSM condition: F(1, 69) = 37.34, p = 0.001, partial η² = 0.35 and observed power = 0.83. Longitudinal ‘latent difference’ structural equation analyses demonstrated a cross-lagged association between worry (but not rumination) and OCD symptom changes.

Conclusions

Individuals in the TSM condition experienced greater reductions in rumination and worry during 8 weeks of TSM treatment compared to the waitlist control, and reduced worry predicted subsequent OCD symptom reduction.

Abstract Image

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

在针对强迫症的技术支持正念疗法中，反刍、担忧和强迫症症状之间的关系。

研究背景在本研究中，我们重新审查了之前一项随机对照试验的数据，该试验调查了 "技术支持正念"（TSM）--一种针对强迫症患者的为期8周的治疗干预。目前的分析包括对正念治疗期间反刍、担忧和强迫症症状变化之间的纵向关系进行研究，并与候补对照进行比较：方法：患有强迫症的参与者（n = 71）被随机分配到为期 8 周的（1）正念治疗或（2）候补对照组。我们测试了反刍（使用反刍反应量表）和担忧（使用宾夕法尼亚州立大学担忧问卷）与治疗急性期强迫症症状变化的相关程度，同时（即在同一纵向模型中）进行测试：结果：广义线性模型（GLM）结果表明，时间（第 1 周与第 8 周）与条件之间存在显著的交互作用，这涉及到 TSM 条件下反刍的减少：F(1, 61) = 13.37, p = 0.001, partial η2 = 0.18，观察功率 = 0.94。第二个 GLM 表明，TSM 条件下的担忧减少：F(1, 69) = 37.34, p = 0.001, partial η2 = 0.35，观察功率 = 0.83。纵向 "潜在差异 "结构方程分析表明，担忧（而非反刍）与强迫症症状变化之间存在交叉滞后关系：结论：与候补对照组相比，接受 TSM 治疗 8 周的个体在反刍和担忧方面的减少幅度更大，担忧的减少预示着随后强迫症症状的减轻。

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

Clinical psychology & psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

6.30

自引率

5.60%

发文量

106

期刊介绍： Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy aims to keep clinical psychologists and psychotherapists up to date with new developments in their fields. The Journal will provide an integrative impetus both between theory and practice and between different orientations within clinical psychology and psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy will be a forum in which practitioners can present their wealth of expertise and innovations in order to make these available to a wider audience. Equally, the Journal will contain reports from researchers who want to address a larger clinical audience with clinically relevant issues and clinically valid research.