Pub Date : 2025-01-01Epub Date: 2024-10-24DOI: 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":" ","pages":"68"},"PeriodicalIF":16.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","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}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01Epub Date: 2024-10-25DOI: 10.1159/000541742
Christopher Burton
{"title":"Developing and Testing Complex Interventions in Psychosomatic Medicine.","authors":"Christopher Burton","doi":"10.1159/000541742","DOIUrl":"10.1159/000541742","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":" ","pages":"26-30"},"PeriodicalIF":16.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","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}
Pub Date : 2025-01-01Epub Date: 2024-11-28DOI: 10.1159/000542437
Mark A Horowitz, James Davies
{"title":"Hidden Costs: The Clinical and Research Pitfalls of Mistaking Antidepressant Withdrawal for Relapse.","authors":"Mark A Horowitz, James Davies","doi":"10.1159/000542437","DOIUrl":"10.1159/000542437","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":" ","pages":"3-7"},"PeriodicalIF":16.3,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11797942/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142751386","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
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.
{"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":"1 1","pages":"1-13"},"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}
{"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":"30 1","pages":"1-4"},"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}
{"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":"63 1","pages":"1-7"},"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}
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.
{"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":"8 1","pages":"1-15"},"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}
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.
{"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":"104 1","pages":"1-11"},"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}
{"title":"Reply to Kisielewska and Mirucka: The Crucial Aspect of Ownership Illusions Is Their Strength, Not the Method to Induce Them.","authors":"Simone C Behrens,Katrin E Giel,Stephan Zipfel","doi":"10.1159/000541412","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541412","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":"193 1","pages":"1-2"},"PeriodicalIF":22.8,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142439378","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}
{"title":"The importance of the appropriate use of terms related to body ownership in research using avatars.","authors":"Monika Kisielewska,Beata Mirucka","doi":"10.1159/000541312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000541312","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":"24 1","pages":"1-3"},"PeriodicalIF":22.8,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142439377","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}
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：