Objective: Positive and negative affect play critical roles in depression and anxiety treatment, but the dynamic processes of how affect changes over treatment in relation to changes in symptoms is unclear. The study goal was to examine relationships among changes in positive and negative affect with changes in depression and anxiety symptoms.
Method: This secondary analysis used a combined sample (N = 196) of two trials (Craske et al., 2019, 2023) comparing positive affect treatment (PAT) to negative affect treatment. Longitudinal cross-lag panel models explored whether changes in positive and negative affect (Positive and Negative Affect Schedule; Watson et al., 1988) predicted subsequent changes in depression and anxiety symptoms (Depression Anxiety Stress Scales; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995), whether symptoms predicted subsequent changes in affect, and whether treatment condition moderated these relationships.
Results: Increases in positive affect predicted subsequent decreases in depression and anxiety symptoms, regardless of treatment condition. Symptoms did not reciprocally predict changes in positive affect. For individuals in PAT, decreases in negative affect predicted subsequent decreases in symptoms. Moreover, decreases in symptoms predicted subsequent decreases in negative affect, regardless of treatment condition.
Conclusions: Results did not support a reciprocal relationship between positive affect and symptoms of depression and anxiety since positive affect predicted depression and anxiety symptoms but not vice versa. Results supported a reciprocal relationship between negative affect and symptoms of depression and anxiety since negative affect predicted depression and anxiety symptoms in PAT, and depression and anxiety symptoms predicted negative affect in both treatment conditions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
Objective: Digital stress interventions could be helpful as an "indirect" treatment for depression, but it remains unclear for whom this is a viable option. In this study, we developed models predicting individualized benefits of a digital stress intervention on depressive symptoms at 6-month follow-up.
Method: Data of N = 1,525 patients with depressive symptoms (Center for Epidemiological Studies' Depression Scale, CES-D ≥ 16) from k = 6 randomized trials (digital stress intervention vs. waitlist) were collected. Prognostic models were developed using multilevel least absolute shrinkage and selection operator and boosting algorithms, and were validated using bootstrap bias correction and internal-external cross-validation. Subsequently, expected effects among those with and without a treatment recommendation were estimated based on clinically derived treatment assignment cut points.
Results: Performances ranged from R² = 21.0%-23.4%, decreasing only slightly after model optimism correction (R² = 17.0%-19.6%). Predictions were greatly improved by including an interim assessment of depressive symptoms (optimism-corrected R2 = 32.6%-35.6%). Using a minimally important difference of d = -0.24 as assignment cut point, approximately 84.6%-93.3% of patients are helped by this type of intervention, while the remaining 6.7%-15.4% would experience clinically negligible benefits (δ^ = -0.02 to -0.19). Using reliable change as cut point, a smaller subset (39.3%-46.2%) with substantial expected benefits (δ^ = -0.68) receives a treatment recommendation.
Conclusions: Meta-analytic prognostic models applied to individual participant data can be used to predict differential benefits of a digital stress intervention as an indirect treatment for depression. While most patients seem to benefit, the developed models could be helpful as a screening tool to identify those for whom a more intensive depression treatment is needed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
Objective: This is a randomized controlled trial (NCT03056157) of an enhanced adaptive disclosure (AD) psychotherapy compared to present-centered therapy (PCT; each 12 sessions) in 174 veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related to traumatic loss (TL) and moral injury (MI). AD employs different strategies for different trauma types. AD-Enhanced (AD-E) uses letter writing (e.g., to the deceased), loving-kindness meditation, and bolstered homework to facilitate improved functioning to repair TL and MI-related trauma.
Method: The primary outcomes were the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), evaluated at baseline, throughout treatment, and at 3- and 6-month follow-ups (Brief Inventory of Psychosocial Functioning was also administered), the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS-5), the Dimensions of Anger Reactions, the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale, and the Quick Drinking Screen.
Results: There were statistically significant between-group differences on two outcomes: The intent-to-treat (ITT) mixed-model analysis of SDS scores indicated greater improvement from baseline to posttreatment in the AD-E group (d = 2.97) compared to the PCT group, d = 1.86; -2.36, 95% CI [-3.92, -0.77], t(1,510) = -2.92, p < .001, d = 0.15. Twenty-one percent more AD-E cases made clinically significant changes on the SDS than PCT cases. From baseline to posttreatment, AD-E was also more efficacious on the CAPS-5 (d = 0.39). These differential effects did not persist at follow-up intervals.
Conclusion: This was the first psychotherapy of veterans with TL/MI-related PTSD to show superiority relative to PCT with respect to functioning and PTSD, although the differential effect sizes were small to medium and not maintained at follow-up. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
Objective: Treatment guidelines on borderline personality disorder (BPD) recommend day-hospital or residential treatments for patients with BPD who cannot tolerate outpatient treatment (American Psychiatric Association, 2010; National Health & Medical Research Council, 2013). However, the current literature suggests that evidence-based treatment for BPD may be difficult to access (Lohman et al., 2017). The present study aims to characterize the accessibility of dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT) in day-treatment and residential programs in the United States in the last 7 years and examines whether day-treatment and residential programs that accept state benefits (i.e., Medicaid) are significantly less likely to offer DBT.
Method: Using mixed logistic regression, we examined trends in the National Mental Health Services Survey data from 2014 to 2021, a survey of U.S. mental health facilities which tracks whether facilities provide DBT.
Results: We found that the likelihood that a residential or day-hospital facility offers DBT has been growing over time at the national level (ORday-treatment = 1.07, SE = .03, z = 1.90, p = .05; ORresidential = 1.08, SE = .05, z = 1.77, p = .08). We also found significant variability in these trends at the state level. In addition, we found that facilities accepting state benefits were less likely to offer DBT (ORday-treatment = .66, SE = .021, z = -1.93, p = .05; ORresidential = .67, SE = .21, z = -1.91, p = .06).
Conclusion: Consistent with previous literature, our study suggests that these programs are very scarce across the United States and difficult to access for those with Medicaid.guidelines on borderline personality disorder (BPD) recommend day-hospital or residential treatments for patients with BPD who cannot tolerate outpatient treatment (American Psychiatric Association, 2010; National Health & Medical Research Council, 2013). However, the current literature suggests that evidence-based treatment for BPD may be difficult to access (Lohman et al., 2017). The present study aims to characterize the accessibility of dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT) in day-treatment and residential programs in the United States in the last 7 years and examines whether day-treatment and residential programs that accept state benefits (i.e., Medicaid) are significantly less likely to offer DBT.
Method: Using mixed logistic regression, we examined trends in the National Mental Health Services Survey data from 2014 to 2021, a survey of U.S. mental health facilities which tracks whether facilities provide DBT.
Results: We found that the likelihood that a residential or day-hospital facility offers DBT has been growing over time at the na
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：