首页 > 最新文献

Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics最新文献

英文 中文
The Power of a Good Word: Enhancing the Efficacy of Analgesics in Clinical Settings. 好话的力量:在临床环境中提高镇痛药的疗效。
IF 16.3 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2024-11-04 DOI: 10.1159/000541810
Roi Treister, Vered Cohen, Limor Issa, Karine Beiruti Wiegler, Alexander Izakson, Mariana Agostinho

Introduction: Communication between medical staff and patients about treatment efficacy elicits expectations of benefit and improves treatment outcomes. While demonstrated in multiple studies via different research methodologies, uniform communication protocols have not been adopted in clinical practice. Here, we summarize the results of two sister studies aimed at bridging this gap.

Methods: Women undergoing C-section (study 1, randomized controlled trial) and patients undergoing general or otolaryngologic surgeries (study 2, control group design) were recruited and assigned to the "regular communication" (RC) or "enhanced communication" (EC) arms. The EC arm received positive information about treatment, while the RC arm received no such information. In both studies, the primary outcome was change in pain intensity; in study 2, an additional outcome was morphine consumption.

Results: Eighty women successfully completed study 1, and 102 patients successfully completed study 2. In both studies, significant time*group interactions were observed (p < 0.001). The analgesic effect was virtually twice as large in the EC arm compared to the RC arm. In study 2, in the last two timepoints of assessment, participants in the EC arm also consumed fewer doses of opioids than participants in the RC arm (p < 0.001). No significant differences were found in vital signs.

Conclusions: We provide ecological evidence that positive information about treatment significantly decreases pain and opioid consumption during routine clinical care. This study and others could encourage healthcare providers to harness the powerful effects of patients' expectations of benefit to improve analgesics outcomes and, potentially, the outcomes of other symptoms.

导言:医务人员与患者就治疗效果进行沟通,可激发患者对治疗效果的期望,并改善治疗效果。虽然多项研究通过不同的研究方法证明了这一点,但临床实践中尚未采用统一的沟通协议。在此,我们总结了两项姐妹研究的结果,旨在缩小这一差距:方法:我们招募了接受剖腹产手术的妇女(研究 1,随机对照试验)和接受普通外科或耳鼻喉科手术的患者(研究 2,对照组设计),并将她们分配到 "常规沟通"(RC)或 "强化沟通"(EC)组。加强沟通 "组接受有关治疗的正面信息,而 "常规沟通 "组则不接受此类信息。两项研究的主要结果都是疼痛强度的变化;研究 2 的附加结果是吗啡消耗量:结果:80 名女性成功完成了研究 1,102 名患者成功完成了研究 2。在这两项研究中,都观察到了明显的时间*组间相互作用(p < 0.001)。EC组的镇痛效果几乎是RC组的两倍。在研究 2 中,在评估的最后两个时间点,EC 组参与者的阿片类药物用量也少于 RC 组参与者(p < 0.001)。生命体征方面没有发现明显差异:我们提供的生态学证据表明,在常规临床护理过程中,有关治疗的积极信息能显著减少疼痛和阿片类药物的消耗。这项研究和其他研究可以鼓励医疗服务提供者利用患者对获益预期的强大作用来改善镇痛效果,并有可能改善其他症状的治疗效果。
{"title":"The Power of a Good Word: Enhancing the Efficacy of Analgesics in Clinical Settings.","authors":"Roi Treister, Vered Cohen, Limor Issa, Karine Beiruti Wiegler, Alexander Izakson, Mariana Agostinho","doi":"10.1159/000541810","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541810","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Communication between medical staff and patients about treatment efficacy elicits expectations of benefit and improves treatment outcomes. While demonstrated in multiple studies via different research methodologies, uniform communication protocols have not been adopted in clinical practice. Here, we summarize the results of two sister studies aimed at bridging this gap.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Women undergoing C-section (study 1, randomized controlled trial) and patients undergoing general or otolaryngologic surgeries (study 2, control group design) were recruited and assigned to the \"regular communication\" (RC) or \"enhanced communication\" (EC) arms. The EC arm received positive information about treatment, while the RC arm received no such information. In both studies, the primary outcome was change in pain intensity; in study 2, an additional outcome was morphine consumption.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty women successfully completed study 1, and 102 patients successfully completed study 2. In both studies, significant time*group interactions were observed (p < 0.001). The analgesic effect was virtually twice as large in the EC arm compared to the RC arm. In study 2, in the last two timepoints of assessment, participants in the EC arm also consumed fewer doses of opioids than participants in the RC arm (p < 0.001). No significant differences were found in vital signs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We provide ecological evidence that positive information about treatment significantly decreases pain and opioid consumption during routine clinical care. This study and others could encourage healthcare providers to harness the powerful effects of patients' expectations of benefit to improve analgesics outcomes and, potentially, the outcomes of other symptoms.</p>","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.3,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142576769","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Reconsidering Persistent Somatic Symptoms: A Transdiagnostic and Transsymptomatic Approach. 重新考虑持续性躯体症状:跨诊断和跨症状方法。
IF 16.3 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2024-10-29 DOI: 10.1159/000541741
Bernd Löwe, Stephan Zipfel, Omer van den Bergh, Peter Henningsen
{"title":"Reconsidering Persistent Somatic Symptoms: A Transdiagnostic and Transsymptomatic Approach.","authors":"Bernd Löwe, Stephan Zipfel, Omer van den Bergh, Peter Henningsen","doi":"10.1159/000541741","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541741","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.3,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142547008","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Developing and Testing Complex Interventions in Psychosomatic Medicine. 开发和测试心身医学中的复杂干预措施。
IF 16.3 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2024-10-25 DOI: 10.1159/000541742
Christopher Burton
{"title":"Developing and Testing Complex Interventions in Psychosomatic Medicine.","authors":"Christopher Burton","doi":"10.1159/000541742","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541742","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.3,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142506629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Erratum. 勘误。
IF 16.3 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2024-10-24 DOI: 10.1159/000542083
{"title":"Erratum.","authors":"","doi":"10.1159/000542083","DOIUrl":"10.1159/000542083","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.3,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142506630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Efficacy of a Standalone Smartphone Application to Treat Postnatal Depression: A Randomized Controlled Trial. 独立智能手机应用程序治疗产后抑郁症的效果:随机对照试验
IF 22.8 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2024-10-23 DOI: 10.1159/000541311
Pedro F Zuccolo,André R Brunoni,Tatiane Borja,Alicia Matijasevich,Guilherme V Polanczyk,Daniel Fatori
INTRODUCTIONSmartphone app interventions based on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) are promising scalable alternatives for treating mental disorders, but the evidence of their efficacy for postpartum depression is limited. We assessed the efficacy of Motherly, a standalone CBT-based smartphone app, in reducing symptoms of postpartum depression.METHODSWomen aged 18-40 with symptoms of postpartum depression were randomized either to intervention (Motherly app) or active control (COMVC app). The primary outcome was symptoms of depression measured by the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) at post-treatment. Secondary outcomes were anxiety symptoms, parental stress, quality of sleep, behavioral activation, availability of response-contingent positive reinforcement, and clinical improvement at post-treatment and 1-month follow-up. Exploratory analyses were performed to investigate if app engagement was associated with treatment response.RESULTSFrom November 2021 to August 2022, 1,751 women volunteered, of which 264 were randomized, and 215 provided primary outcome data. No statistically significant differences were found between groups at post-treatment: intervention: mean (SD): 12.75 (5.52); active control: 13.28 (5.32); p = 0.604. There was a statistically significant effect of the intervention on some of the secondary outcomes. Exploratory analyses suggest a dose-response relationship between Motherly app engagement and outcomes.CONCLUSIONOur standalone app intervention did not significantly reduce postnatal depression symptoms when compared to active control. Exploratory findings suggest that negative findings might be associated with insufficient app engagement. Consistent with current literature, our findings suggest that standalone app interventions for postpartum depression are not ready to be implemented in clinical practice.
简介:基于认知行为疗法(CBT)的智能手机应用干预是治疗精神障碍的一种很有前景的可扩展替代方法,但其对产后抑郁症的疗效证据却很有限。我们评估了基于 CBT 的独立智能手机应用程序 Motherly 在减轻产后抑郁症状方面的疗效。方法:年龄在 18-40 岁、有产后抑郁症状的女性被随机分配到干预组(Motherly 应用程序)或积极对照组(COMVC 应用程序)。主要结果是治疗后通过爱丁堡产后抑郁量表(EPDS)测量的抑郁症状。次要结果包括焦虑症状、父母压力、睡眠质量、行为激活、反应定向正强化的可用性,以及治疗后和 1 个月随访时的临床改善情况。结果从 2021 年 11 月到 2022 年 8 月,共有 1751 名女性自愿参与,其中 264 人被随机分配,215 人提供了主要结果数据。治疗后各组间无统计学差异:干预组:平均(标清):12.75 (5.52);积极对照组:13.28 (5.32);P = 0.604。干预对一些次要结果的影响具有统计学意义。探索性分析表明,Motherly 应用程序参与度与结果之间存在剂量反应关系。探索性研究结果表明,负面结果可能与应用参与不足有关。与目前的文献一致,我们的研究结果表明,针对产后抑郁的独立应用程序干预还不能在临床实践中实施。
{"title":"Efficacy of a Standalone Smartphone Application to Treat Postnatal Depression: A Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Pedro F Zuccolo,André R Brunoni,Tatiane Borja,Alicia Matijasevich,Guilherme V Polanczyk,Daniel Fatori","doi":"10.1159/000541311","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541311","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTIONSmartphone app interventions based on cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) are promising scalable alternatives for treating mental disorders, but the evidence of their efficacy for postpartum depression is limited. We assessed the efficacy of Motherly, a standalone CBT-based smartphone app, in reducing symptoms of postpartum depression.METHODSWomen aged 18-40 with symptoms of postpartum depression were randomized either to intervention (Motherly app) or active control (COMVC app). The primary outcome was symptoms of depression measured by the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) at post-treatment. Secondary outcomes were anxiety symptoms, parental stress, quality of sleep, behavioral activation, availability of response-contingent positive reinforcement, and clinical improvement at post-treatment and 1-month follow-up. Exploratory analyses were performed to investigate if app engagement was associated with treatment response.RESULTSFrom November 2021 to August 2022, 1,751 women volunteered, of which 264 were randomized, and 215 provided primary outcome data. No statistically significant differences were found between groups at post-treatment: intervention: mean (SD): 12.75 (5.52); active control: 13.28 (5.32); p = 0.604. There was a statistically significant effect of the intervention on some of the secondary outcomes. Exploratory analyses suggest a dose-response relationship between Motherly app engagement and outcomes.CONCLUSIONOur standalone app intervention did not significantly reduce postnatal depression symptoms when compared to active control. Exploratory findings suggest that negative findings might be associated with insufficient app engagement. Consistent with current literature, our findings suggest that standalone app interventions for postpartum depression are not ready to be implemented in clinical practice.","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":22.8,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142489499","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Challenges for the Moral Injury Construct. 道德伤害结构面临的挑战。
IF 22.8 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2024-10-23 DOI: 10.1159/000541281
Richard A Bryant
{"title":"Challenges for the Moral Injury Construct.","authors":"Richard A Bryant","doi":"10.1159/000541281","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541281","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":22.8,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142489500","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Evolution of Psychotropic Medication Prescription in Young People: Reflection from the Quebec Experience. 青少年精神药物处方的演变:魁北克经验的反思。
IF 22.8 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2024-10-22 DOI: 10.1159/000541555
Joël Monzée
{"title":"Evolution of Psychotropic Medication Prescription in Young People: Reflection from the Quebec Experience.","authors":"Joël Monzée","doi":"10.1159/000541555","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541555","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":22.8,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142488321","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Inference-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Multisite Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial. 基于推理的认知行为疗法与认知行为疗法治疗强迫症:多点随机对照非劣效性试验》(Multisite Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial)。
IF 22.8 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI: 10.1159/000541508
Nadja Wolf,Patricia van Oppen,Adriaan W Hoogendoorn,Odile A van den Heuvel,Harold J G M van Megen,Aniek Broekhuizen,Mirjam Kampman,Daniëlle C Cath,Koen R J Schruers,Saskia M van Es,Tamara Opdam,Anton J L M van Balkom,Henny A D Visser
INTRODUCTIONAlthough cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) effectively treats obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), many patients refuse CBT or drop out prematurely, partly because of anxiety regarding exposure and response prevention (ERP) exercises. Inference-based cognitive behavioral therapy (I-CBT) focuses on correcting distorted inferential thinking patterns, enhancing reality-based reasoning, and addressing obsessional doubt by targeting underlying dysfunctional reasoning, without incorporating an ERP component. We hypothesized that I-CBT would be non-inferior to CBT. Additionally, we hypothesized that I-CBT would be more tolerable than CBT.METHODS197 participants were randomly assigned to 20 sessions CBT or I-CBT and assessed at baseline, posttreatment, and 6 and 12 months' follow-up. The primary outcome was OCD symptom severity measured using the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS; non-inferiority margin: 2 points). The secondary outcome, treatment tolerability, was assessed using the Treatment Acceptability/Adherence Scale (TAAS). A linear mixed-effects model was used to assess the non-inferiority of the primary outcome and superiority of secondary outcomes.RESULTSStatistically significant within-group improvements in the primary and secondary outcomes were observed in both treatments. No statistically significant between-group differences in Y-BOCS were found at any assessment point, but the confidence intervals exceeded the non-inferiority threshold, making the results inconclusive. The estimated mean posttreatment TAAS score was significantly higher in the I-CBT group than in the CBT group.CONCLUSIONWhile both CBT and I-CBT are effective for OCD, whether I-CBT is non-inferior to CBT in terms of OCD symptom severity remains inconclusive. Nevertheless, I-CBT offers better tolerability and warrants consideration as an alternative treatment for OCD.
简介虽然认知行为疗法(CBT)能有效治疗强迫症(OCD),但许多患者拒绝接受 CBT 或过早放弃,部分原因是对暴露和反应预防(ERP)练习感到焦虑。基于推理的认知行为疗法(I-CBT)侧重于纠正扭曲的推理思维模式,增强基于现实的推理能力,并通过针对潜在的功能障碍推理来解决强迫症疑虑,但不包含ERP成分。我们假设 I-CBT 不会劣于 CBT。此外,我们还假设 I-CBT 比 CBT 更易忍受。方法 197 名参与者被随机分配到 20 个疗程的 CBT 或 I-CBT,并在基线、治疗后、6 个月和 12 个月的随访中接受评估。主要结果是使用耶鲁-布朗强迫症量表(Y-BOCS;非劣效差:2 分)测量的强迫症症状严重程度。次要结果是治疗耐受性,采用治疗可接受性/依从性量表(TAAS)进行评估。采用线性混合效应模型评估主要结果的非劣效性和次要结果的优效性。在任何评估点,Y-BOCS 均未发现具有统计学意义的组间差异,但置信区间超过了非劣效性阈值,因此结果尚无定论。虽然 CBT 和 I-CBT 对强迫症都有效,但就强迫症症状的严重程度而言,I-CBT 是否不劣于 CBT 仍无定论。然而,I-CBT具有更好的耐受性,值得考虑作为强迫症的替代治疗方法。
{"title":"Inference-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Multisite Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial.","authors":"Nadja Wolf,Patricia van Oppen,Adriaan W Hoogendoorn,Odile A van den Heuvel,Harold J G M van Megen,Aniek Broekhuizen,Mirjam Kampman,Daniëlle C Cath,Koen R J Schruers,Saskia M van Es,Tamara Opdam,Anton J L M van Balkom,Henny A D Visser","doi":"10.1159/000541508","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541508","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTIONAlthough cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) effectively treats obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), many patients refuse CBT or drop out prematurely, partly because of anxiety regarding exposure and response prevention (ERP) exercises. Inference-based cognitive behavioral therapy (I-CBT) focuses on correcting distorted inferential thinking patterns, enhancing reality-based reasoning, and addressing obsessional doubt by targeting underlying dysfunctional reasoning, without incorporating an ERP component. We hypothesized that I-CBT would be non-inferior to CBT. Additionally, we hypothesized that I-CBT would be more tolerable than CBT.METHODS197 participants were randomly assigned to 20 sessions CBT or I-CBT and assessed at baseline, posttreatment, and 6 and 12 months' follow-up. The primary outcome was OCD symptom severity measured using the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS; non-inferiority margin: 2 points). The secondary outcome, treatment tolerability, was assessed using the Treatment Acceptability/Adherence Scale (TAAS). A linear mixed-effects model was used to assess the non-inferiority of the primary outcome and superiority of secondary outcomes.RESULTSStatistically significant within-group improvements in the primary and secondary outcomes were observed in both treatments. No statistically significant between-group differences in Y-BOCS were found at any assessment point, but the confidence intervals exceeded the non-inferiority threshold, making the results inconclusive. The estimated mean posttreatment TAAS score was significantly higher in the I-CBT group than in the CBT group.CONCLUSIONWhile both CBT and I-CBT are effective for OCD, whether I-CBT is non-inferior to CBT in terms of OCD symptom severity remains inconclusive. Nevertheless, I-CBT offers better tolerability and warrants consideration as an alternative treatment for OCD.","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":22.8,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142486383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Inference-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Multisite Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial. 基于推理的认知行为疗法与认知行为疗法治疗强迫症:多点随机对照非劣效性试验》(Multisite Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial)。
IF 16.3 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2024-10-18 DOI: 10.1159/000541508
Nadja Wolf, Patricia van Oppen, Adriaan W Hoogendoorn, Odile A van den Heuvel, Harold J G M van Megen, Aniek Broekhuizen, Mirjam Kampman, Daniëlle C Cath, Koen R J Schruers, Saskia M van Es, Tamara Opdam, Anton J L M van Balkom, Henny A D Visser

Introduction: Although cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) effectively treats obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), many patients refuse CBT or drop out prematurely, partly because of anxiety regarding exposure and response prevention (ERP) exercises. Inference-based cognitive behavioral therapy (I-CBT) focuses on correcting distorted inferential thinking patterns, enhancing reality-based reasoning, and addressing obsessional doubt by targeting underlying dysfunctional reasoning, without incorporating an ERP component. We hypothesized that I-CBT would be non-inferior to CBT. Additionally, we hypothesized that I-CBT would be more tolerable than CBT.

Methods: 197 participants were randomly assigned to 20 sessions CBT or I-CBT and assessed at baseline, posttreatment, and 6 and 12 months' follow-up. The primary outcome was OCD symptom severity measured using the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS; non-inferiority margin: 2 points). The secondary outcome, treatment tolerability, was assessed using the Treatment Acceptability/Adherence Scale (TAAS). A linear mixed-effects model was used to assess the non-inferiority of the primary outcome and superiority of secondary outcomes.

Results: Statistically significant within-group improvements in the primary and secondary outcomes were observed in both treatments. No statistically significant between-group differences in Y-BOCS were found at any assessment point, but the confidence intervals exceeded the non-inferiority threshold, making the results inconclusive. The estimated mean posttreatment TAAS score was significantly higher in the I-CBT group than in the CBT group.

Conclusion: While both CBT and I-CBT are effective for OCD, whether I-CBT is non-inferior to CBT in terms of OCD symptom severity remains inconclusive. Nevertheless, I-CBT offers better tolerability and warrants consideration as an alternative treatment for OCD.

导言:虽然认知行为疗法(CBT)能有效治疗强迫症(OCD),但许多患者拒绝接受CBT或过早放弃,部分原因是对暴露和反应预防(ERP)练习的焦虑。基于推理的认知行为疗法(I-CBT)侧重于纠正扭曲的推理思维模式,增强基于现实的推理能力,并通过针对潜在的功能障碍推理来解决强迫症疑虑,但不包含ERP成分。我们假设 I-CBT 不会劣于 CBT。此外,我们还假设 I-CBT 比 CBT 更易忍受。方法:197 名参与者被随机分配到 20 个疗程的 CBT 或 I-CBT,并在基线、治疗后、6 个月和 12 个月的随访中接受评估。主要结果是使用耶鲁-布朗强迫症量表(Y-BOCS;非劣效差:2分)测量的强迫症症状严重程度。次要结果是治疗耐受性,采用治疗可接受性/依从性量表(TAAS)进行评估。采用线性混合效应模型评估主要结果的非劣效性和次要结果的优效性:结果:两种治疗方法的主要结果和次要结果在组内均有统计学意义的改善。在任何评估点,Y-BOCS均未发现具有统计学意义的组间差异,但置信区间超过了非劣效性阈值,因此结果尚无定论。I-CBT组治疗后的TAAS估计平均得分明显高于CBT组:虽然 CBT 和 I-CBT 对强迫症都有效,但就强迫症症状的严重程度而言,I-CBT 是否不劣于 CBT 仍无定论。然而,I-CBT具有更好的耐受性,值得考虑作为强迫症的替代治疗方法。
{"title":"Inference-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Multisite Randomized Controlled Non-Inferiority Trial.","authors":"Nadja Wolf, Patricia van Oppen, Adriaan W Hoogendoorn, Odile A van den Heuvel, Harold J G M van Megen, Aniek Broekhuizen, Mirjam Kampman, Daniëlle C Cath, Koen R J Schruers, Saskia M van Es, Tamara Opdam, Anton J L M van Balkom, Henny A D Visser","doi":"10.1159/000541508","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541508","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Although cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) effectively treats obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), many patients refuse CBT or drop out prematurely, partly because of anxiety regarding exposure and response prevention (ERP) exercises. Inference-based cognitive behavioral therapy (I-CBT) focuses on correcting distorted inferential thinking patterns, enhancing reality-based reasoning, and addressing obsessional doubt by targeting underlying dysfunctional reasoning, without incorporating an ERP component. We hypothesized that I-CBT would be non-inferior to CBT. Additionally, we hypothesized that I-CBT would be more tolerable than CBT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>197 participants were randomly assigned to 20 sessions CBT or I-CBT and assessed at baseline, posttreatment, and 6 and 12 months' follow-up. The primary outcome was OCD symptom severity measured using the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS; non-inferiority margin: 2 points). The secondary outcome, treatment tolerability, was assessed using the Treatment Acceptability/Adherence Scale (TAAS). A linear mixed-effects model was used to assess the non-inferiority of the primary outcome and superiority of secondary outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Statistically significant within-group improvements in the primary and secondary outcomes were observed in both treatments. No statistically significant between-group differences in Y-BOCS were found at any assessment point, but the confidence intervals exceeded the non-inferiority threshold, making the results inconclusive. The estimated mean posttreatment TAAS score was significantly higher in the I-CBT group than in the CBT group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While both CBT and I-CBT are effective for OCD, whether I-CBT is non-inferior to CBT in terms of OCD symptom severity remains inconclusive. Nevertheless, I-CBT offers better tolerability and warrants consideration as an alternative treatment for OCD.</p>","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.3,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142473225","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Study of Rates and Factors Associated to Psychosomatic Syndromes Assessed Using the Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research across Different Clinical Settings. 研究在不同临床环境中使用心身医学研究诊断标准评估心身综合征的比率和相关因素。
IF 22.8 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Pub Date : 2024-10-17 DOI: 10.1159/000541404
Wei Xu,Wenhao Jiang,Rongjing Ding,Hong Tao,Yanyong Wang,Yanping Tang,Dongfeng Liang,Yuping Wang,Mingwei Wang,Bingwei Chen,Youyong Kong,Lei Liu,Yingying Yue,Liangliang Tan,Lu Yu,Fiammetta Cosci,Yonggui Yuan,
INTRODUCTIONDiagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research (DCPR) serve as an instrument for identifying and classifying specific psychosomatic syndromes that are not adequately encompassed in standard nosography. The present study aimed at measuring the prevalence of DCPR syndromes in different clinical settings and exploring factors associated to such diagnoses.METHODSA cross-sectional and nationwide study recruited 6,647 patients in different clinical settings: 306 were diagnosed with fibromyalgia (FM), 333 with irritable bowel syndrome, 1,109 with migraine, 2,550 with coronary heart disease (CHD), and 2,349 with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Participants underwent DCPR diagnostic interview and were assessed for depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item Scale), and subjective well-being (World Health Organization-5 Well-Being Index). The PsychoSocial Index was used to evaluate global well-being, stress, and abnormal illness behavior. The prevalence of DCPR diagnoses was calculated, and factors associated to such diagnoses were analyzed by logistic regression.RESULTSAlexithymia (64.47%), irritable mood (20.55%), and demoralization (15.60%) were the most prevalent psychosomatic syndromes, with demoralization being most common in FM (49.02%). The factors associated to DCPR diagnoses encompassed high anxiety or abnormal illness behavior, and poor well-being. Notably, stress was found to be associated specifically to FM and T2D, with OR of 1.24 (95% CI: 1.06-1.46) and 1.26 (95% CI: 1.18-1.36), respectively.CONCLUSIONDCPR is a clinically helpful complementary assessment tool in need of being widely implemented in clinical settings in order to have a comprehensive picture of the patients.
导言心身医学研究诊断标准(DCPR)是一种工具,用于识别和分类标准分类学未充分涵盖的特定心身综合征。本研究旨在测量 DCPR 综合征在不同临床环境中的患病率,并探讨与此类诊断相关的因素:其中 306 人被诊断为纤维肌痛 (FM),333 人被诊断为肠易激综合征,1109 人被诊断为偏头痛,2550 人被诊断为冠心病 (CHD),2349 人被诊断为 2 型糖尿病 (T2D)。参与者接受了 DCPR 诊断访谈,并接受了抑郁(患者健康问卷-9)、焦虑(广泛性焦虑症 7 项量表)和主观幸福感(世界卫生组织-5 幸福指数)的评估。心理社会指数用于评估总体幸福感、压力和异常疾病行为。结果亚历山大症(64.47%)、易激惹情绪(20.55%)和士气低落(15.60%)是最常见的心身综合征,其中士气低落在 FM 中最为常见(49.02%)。与 DCPR 诊断相关的因素包括高度焦虑或异常疾病行为,以及幸福感差。值得注意的是,压力特别与 FM 和 T2D 相关,OR 分别为 1.24(95% CI:1.06-1.46)和 1.26(95% CI:1.18-1.36)。
{"title":"Study of Rates and Factors Associated to Psychosomatic Syndromes Assessed Using the Diagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research across Different Clinical Settings.","authors":"Wei Xu,Wenhao Jiang,Rongjing Ding,Hong Tao,Yanyong Wang,Yanping Tang,Dongfeng Liang,Yuping Wang,Mingwei Wang,Bingwei Chen,Youyong Kong,Lei Liu,Yingying Yue,Liangliang Tan,Lu Yu,Fiammetta Cosci,Yonggui Yuan,","doi":"10.1159/000541404","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541404","url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTIONDiagnostic Criteria for Psychosomatic Research (DCPR) serve as an instrument for identifying and classifying specific psychosomatic syndromes that are not adequately encompassed in standard nosography. The present study aimed at measuring the prevalence of DCPR syndromes in different clinical settings and exploring factors associated to such diagnoses.METHODSA cross-sectional and nationwide study recruited 6,647 patients in different clinical settings: 306 were diagnosed with fibromyalgia (FM), 333 with irritable bowel syndrome, 1,109 with migraine, 2,550 with coronary heart disease (CHD), and 2,349 with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Participants underwent DCPR diagnostic interview and were assessed for depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item Scale), and subjective well-being (World Health Organization-5 Well-Being Index). The PsychoSocial Index was used to evaluate global well-being, stress, and abnormal illness behavior. The prevalence of DCPR diagnoses was calculated, and factors associated to such diagnoses were analyzed by logistic regression.RESULTSAlexithymia (64.47%), irritable mood (20.55%), and demoralization (15.60%) were the most prevalent psychosomatic syndromes, with demoralization being most common in FM (49.02%). The factors associated to DCPR diagnoses encompassed high anxiety or abnormal illness behavior, and poor well-being. Notably, stress was found to be associated specifically to FM and T2D, with OR of 1.24 (95% CI: 1.06-1.46) and 1.26 (95% CI: 1.18-1.36), respectively.CONCLUSIONDCPR is a clinically helpful complementary assessment tool in need of being widely implemented in clinical settings in order to have a comprehensive picture of the patients.","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":22.8,"publicationDate":"2024-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142449368","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
期刊
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics
全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
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
×
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
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