International Journal of Group Psychotherapy最新文献

In light of two recent meta-analyses of the efficacy of group psychotherapy in treating posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), this article critically reviews the randomized control trial (RCT) generated findings as well as two of its outgrowths-the production of a variety of clinical practice guidelines for treating PTSD and the dissemination efforts to transfer laboratory findings to clinical practice. All three of these activities have received considerable pushback from experienced clinicians and Boulder-identified scientist practitioners, creating an ongoing and entrenched gap or split between researcher and clinician. The article also reviews the various suggestions that have been offered to heal this gap and ending the hegemony of RCT outcome research as the only game in town for declaring what constitutes evidence. Specifically, the literature suggests two primary strategies for helping to realize the scientist-practitioner model and thus advancing the cause of psychotherapy, in general, and group psychotherapy, in particular: (a) leveling the playing field so that both researcher and practitioner have real authority and voices for shaping the field; and (b) shifting the research priority away from a purely outcome focus, asking only does it work, and moving to a more sophisticated, theoretically guided empirical study of process-outcome, examining the how, why, when, and for whom it works.

The American Group Psychotherapy Association (AGPA) Practice Guidelines helped inspire the Dutch Group Therapy Association (NVGP) to develop the Dutch Practice Guidelines for Group Treatment. In this article, we provide a short review of the history of Dutch group psychotherapy. We discuss socioeconomic developments in the Netherlands and their consequences for health care in general and group psychotherapy in particular. After that, we introduce the procedures of the NVGP Dutch Task Force in developing their Practice Guidelines including their process to reach expert consensus. We then elaborate on the similarities and differences between the American and the Dutch Practice Guidelines. We end by presenting future directions and thoughts on international cooperation in the development of evidence-based practice guidelines for group treatment.

Law enforcement violence has emerged as a leading public health concern, and law enforcement officers are themselves at greater risk for a range of psychiatric disorders. Drawing on the significant empirical support for mentalization-based treatment (MBT), this paper explores the use of MBT as a transdiagnostic psychotherapy for law enforcement professionals. By helping patients to mentalize-that is, to "read," access, and reflect on mental states in oneself and other people-MBT could be useful as a dual-focus treatment, able to simultaneously impact psychiatric illness among law enforcement officers while also indirectly impacting the problem of law enforcement violence in the broader society. The core psychotherapeutic principles of MBT are reviewed, along with common vulnerabilities in mentalizing likely to arise for law enforcement professionals in the context of high emotional and interpersonal intensity. The authors outline a novel application of MBT which has implications for psychiatric treatment as well as police training: the single-session psychoeducation and psychotherapy group, where law enforcement officers practice both self-reflection and empathy in situations of relational conflict. Utilizing group process from a residential treatment program for first responders with mental health and substance use disorders, a case example is offered to illustrate this intervention.