A Tale of Two Treatments: A Randomised Controlled Trial of Mindfulness or Cognitive Behaviour Therapy Delivered Online for People with Rheumatoid Arthritis.

IF 16.3 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics Pub Date : 2025-01-17 DOI:10.1159/000542489
Louise Sharpe,Madelyne A Bisby,Rachel E Menzies,Jack Benjamin Boyse,Bethany Richmond,Jemma Todd,Amy-Lee Sesel,Blake F Dear
{"title":"A Tale of Two Treatments: A Randomised Controlled Trial of Mindfulness or Cognitive Behaviour Therapy Delivered Online for People with Rheumatoid Arthritis.","authors":"Louise Sharpe,Madelyne A Bisby,Rachel E Menzies,Jack Benjamin Boyse,Bethany Richmond,Jemma Todd,Amy-Lee Sesel,Blake F Dear","doi":"10.1159/000542489","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION\r\nThis study aimed to determine the relative efficacy of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) or cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) in comparison to a waitlist control (WLC) for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Participants completed assessments before and after treatment and at 6-month follow-up.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nTwo hundred and sixty-nine participants with RA were recruited and randomised in a 2:2:1 ratio to MBSR:CBT:WLC. Participants completed a semi-structured clinical interview for depression and were stratified for history of recurrent depression. We measured the primary outcome of pain interference, as well as pain severity, depression, anxiety, functional ability, and fear of progression. We predicted that MBSR and CBT would result in improvements compared to WLC. We also predicted that those with a history of recurrent depression would benefit more from MBSR than CBT for depression.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nMBSR and CBT were equally efficacious in reducing pain interference compared to WLC. Similar results were found for depression. MBSR demonstrated superior outcomes to CBT for fear of progression at post-treatment and functional ability at 6-month follow-up. CBT only was better than WLC for pain severity at 6-month follow-up. Depressive status did not moderate the efficacy of treatment.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nMBSR and CBT resulted in statistically and clinically significant changes in pain interference compared to WLC. MBSR was more efficacious than CBT for functional ability and fear of progression, while CBT showed superiority for pain severity. The effect sizes were comparable to those achieved with face-to-face interventions, confirming both online treatments are effective for people with RA.","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":"60 1","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":16.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000542489","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

INTRODUCTION This study aimed to determine the relative efficacy of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) or cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) in comparison to a waitlist control (WLC) for people with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Participants completed assessments before and after treatment and at 6-month follow-up. METHODS Two hundred and sixty-nine participants with RA were recruited and randomised in a 2:2:1 ratio to MBSR:CBT:WLC. Participants completed a semi-structured clinical interview for depression and were stratified for history of recurrent depression. We measured the primary outcome of pain interference, as well as pain severity, depression, anxiety, functional ability, and fear of progression. We predicted that MBSR and CBT would result in improvements compared to WLC. We also predicted that those with a history of recurrent depression would benefit more from MBSR than CBT for depression. RESULTS MBSR and CBT were equally efficacious in reducing pain interference compared to WLC. Similar results were found for depression. MBSR demonstrated superior outcomes to CBT for fear of progression at post-treatment and functional ability at 6-month follow-up. CBT only was better than WLC for pain severity at 6-month follow-up. Depressive status did not moderate the efficacy of treatment. CONCLUSIONS MBSR and CBT resulted in statistically and clinically significant changes in pain interference compared to WLC. MBSR was more efficacious than CBT for functional ability and fear of progression, while CBT showed superiority for pain severity. The effect sizes were comparable to those achieved with face-to-face interventions, confirming both online treatments are effective for people with RA.
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
两种治疗的故事:一项针对类风湿关节炎患者的正念或认知行为疗法的随机对照试验。
本研究旨在确定正念减压(MBSR)或认知行为疗法(CBT)与等候名单对照(WLC)对类风湿关节炎(RA)患者的相对疗效。参与者在治疗前后和6个月的随访中完成了评估。方法招募269名RA患者,按2:2:1的比例随机分配至MBSR:CBT:WLC。参与者完成了抑郁症的半结构化临床访谈,并根据复发性抑郁症的历史进行分层。我们测量了疼痛干扰的主要结局,以及疼痛严重程度、抑郁、焦虑、功能能力和对进展的恐惧。我们预测正念减压和认知行为疗法会比认知行为疗法带来改善。我们还预测,那些有复发性抑郁症病史的人从正念减压疗法中获益比CBT治疗抑郁症更多。结果与WLC相比,smbsr和CBT在减轻疼痛干扰方面同样有效。抑郁症也有类似的结果。在治疗后恐惧进展和6个月随访时的功能能力方面,正念减压疗法表现出优于CBT的结果。在6个月的随访中,CBT在疼痛严重程度上优于WLC。抑郁状态不影响治疗效果。结论与WLC相比,smbsr和CBT对疼痛干扰的影响具有统计学意义和临床意义。正念减压在功能能力和对进展的恐惧方面比CBT更有效,而CBT在疼痛严重程度方面表现出优势。效果大小与面对面干预的效果相当,证实两种在线治疗对类风湿关节炎患者都有效。
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
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
29.40
自引率
6.10%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics is a reputable journal that has been published since 1953. Over the years, it has gained recognition for its independence, originality, and methodological rigor. The journal has been at the forefront of research in psychosomatic medicine, psychotherapy research, and psychopharmacology, and has contributed to the development of new lines of research in these areas. It is now ranked among the world's most cited journals in the field. As the official journal of the International College of Psychosomatic Medicine and the World Federation for Psychotherapy, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics serves as a platform for discussing current and controversial issues and showcasing innovations in assessment and treatment. It offers a unique forum for cutting-edge thinking at the intersection of medical and behavioral sciences, catering to both practicing clinicians and researchers. The journal is indexed in various databases and platforms such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Previews, Google Scholar, Academic Search, and Health Research Premium Collection, among others.
期刊最新文献
A Tale of Two Treatments: A Randomised Controlled Trial of Mindfulness or Cognitive Behaviour Therapy Delivered Online for People with Rheumatoid Arthritis. Supported Mindfulness-Based Self-Help Intervention as an Adjunctive Treatment for Rapid Symptom Change in Emotional Disorders: A Practice-Oriented Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. Metacognitive Training for Subjects with Bipolar Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Active Components in Internet-Based Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Social Anxiety Disorder: A Randomized Full Factorial Trial. The Journal's Appreciation.
×
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