认知修复疗法的满意度:使用认知修复满意度量表对实施和结果的影响。

IF 3 Q2 PSYCHIATRY Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) Pub Date : 2023-09-30 DOI:10.1038/s41537-023-00390-9
Joanne Evans, Rose Tinch-Taylor, Emese Csipke, Matteo Cella, Andrew Pickles, Paul McCrone, Dominic Stringer, Abigail Oliver, Clare Reeder, Max Birchwood, David Fowler, Kathryn Greenwood, Sonia Johnson, Jesus Perez, Rosa Ritunnano, Andrew Thompson, Rachel Upthegrove, Jon Wilson, Alex Kenny, Iris Isok, Eileen M Joyce, Til Wykes
{"title":"认知修复疗法的满意度:使用认知修复满意度量表对实施和结果的影响。","authors":"Joanne Evans, Rose Tinch-Taylor, Emese Csipke, Matteo Cella, Andrew Pickles, Paul McCrone, Dominic Stringer, Abigail Oliver, Clare Reeder, Max Birchwood, David Fowler, Kathryn Greenwood, Sonia Johnson, Jesus Perez, Rosa Ritunnano, Andrew Thompson, Rachel Upthegrove, Jon Wilson, Alex Kenny, Iris Isok, Eileen M Joyce, Til Wykes","doi":"10.1038/s41537-023-00390-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cognitive Remediation (CR) improves cognition and functioning but is implemented in a variety of ways (independent, group and one-to-one). There is no information on whether service users find these implementation methods acceptable or if their satisfaction influences CR outcomes. We used mixed participatory methods, including focus groups, to co-develop a CR satisfaction scale. This was refined using three psychometric criteria (Cronbach's alpha, item discrimination, test-retest agreement) to select items. Factor analysis explored potential substructures. The refined measure was used in structural equation joint modelling to evaluate whether satisfaction with CR is affected by implementation method and treatment engagement or influences recovery outcome, using data from a randomised controlled trial. Four themes (therapy hours, therapist, treatment effects, computer use) generated a 31-item Cognitive Remediation Satisfaction scale (CRS) that reduced to 18 Likert items, 2 binary and 2 open-ended questions following psychometric assessment. CRS had good internal consistency (Alpha = 0.814), test-retest reliability (r= 0.763), and concurrent validity using the Working Alliance Inventory (r = 0.56). A 2-factor solution divided items into therapy engagement and therapy effects. Satisfaction was not related to implementation method but was significantly associated with CR engagement. Therapy hours were significantly associated with recovery, but there was no direct effect of satisfaction on outcome. Although satisfaction is important to therapy engagement, it has no direct effect on outcome. CR therapy hours directly affect outcome irrespective of which implementation model is used, so measuring satisfaction early might help to identify those who are likely to disengage. The study has mixed methods design.</p>","PeriodicalId":74758,"journal":{"name":"Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10542804/pdf/","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Satisfaction with cognitive remediation therapy: its effects on implementation and outcomes using the cognitive remediation satisfaction scale.\",\"authors\":\"Joanne Evans, Rose Tinch-Taylor, Emese Csipke, Matteo Cella, Andrew Pickles, Paul McCrone, Dominic Stringer, Abigail Oliver, Clare Reeder, Max Birchwood, David Fowler, Kathryn Greenwood, Sonia Johnson, Jesus Perez, Rosa Ritunnano, Andrew Thompson, Rachel Upthegrove, Jon Wilson, Alex Kenny, Iris Isok, Eileen M Joyce, Til Wykes\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41537-023-00390-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Cognitive Remediation (CR) improves cognition and functioning but is implemented in a variety of ways (independent, group and one-to-one). There is no information on whether service users find these implementation methods acceptable or if their satisfaction influences CR outcomes. We used mixed participatory methods, including focus groups, to co-develop a CR satisfaction scale. This was refined using three psychometric criteria (Cronbach's alpha, item discrimination, test-retest agreement) to select items. Factor analysis explored potential substructures. The refined measure was used in structural equation joint modelling to evaluate whether satisfaction with CR is affected by implementation method and treatment engagement or influences recovery outcome, using data from a randomised controlled trial. Four themes (therapy hours, therapist, treatment effects, computer use) generated a 31-item Cognitive Remediation Satisfaction scale (CRS) that reduced to 18 Likert items, 2 binary and 2 open-ended questions following psychometric assessment. CRS had good internal consistency (Alpha = 0.814), test-retest reliability (r= 0.763), and concurrent validity using the Working Alliance Inventory (r = 0.56). A 2-factor solution divided items into therapy engagement and therapy effects. Satisfaction was not related to implementation method but was significantly associated with CR engagement. Therapy hours were significantly associated with recovery, but there was no direct effect of satisfaction on outcome. Although satisfaction is important to therapy engagement, it has no direct effect on outcome. CR therapy hours directly affect outcome irrespective of which implementation model is used, so measuring satisfaction early might help to identify those who are likely to disengage. The study has mixed methods design.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74758,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10542804/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41537-023-00390-9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41537-023-00390-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

认知补救(CR)可以改善认知和功能,但可以通过多种方式(独立、小组和一对一)实施。没有关于服务用户是否认为这些实施方法是可接受的,或者他们的满意度是否影响CR结果的信息。我们使用混合参与方法,包括重点小组,共同制定CR满意度量表。这是使用三个心理测量标准(克朗巴赫α、项目歧视、重测一致性)来选择项目的。因子分析探索了潜在的亚结构。使用随机对照试验的数据,在结构方程联合建模中使用改进的测量方法来评估CR的满意度是否受到实施方法和治疗参与的影响或影响恢复结果。四个主题(治疗时间、治疗师、治疗效果、计算机使用)生成了一个31项的认知补救满意度量表(CRS),在心理测量评估后,该量表减少到18个Likert项目、2个二元和2个开放式问题。CRS具有良好的内部一致性(Alpha = 0.814)、重测信度(r=0.763)和使用工作联盟量表的并发有效性(r = 0.56)。2因素解决方案将项目分为治疗参与和治疗效果。满意度与实施方法无关,但与CR参与度显著相关。治疗时间与恢复显著相关,但满意度对结果没有直接影响。尽管满意度对治疗参与很重要,但它对结果没有直接影响。无论使用哪种实施模式,CR治疗时间都会直接影响结果,因此尽早测量满意度可能有助于识别那些可能脱离的人。本研究采用混合方法设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

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
Satisfaction with cognitive remediation therapy: its effects on implementation and outcomes using the cognitive remediation satisfaction scale.

Cognitive Remediation (CR) improves cognition and functioning but is implemented in a variety of ways (independent, group and one-to-one). There is no information on whether service users find these implementation methods acceptable or if their satisfaction influences CR outcomes. We used mixed participatory methods, including focus groups, to co-develop a CR satisfaction scale. This was refined using three psychometric criteria (Cronbach's alpha, item discrimination, test-retest agreement) to select items. Factor analysis explored potential substructures. The refined measure was used in structural equation joint modelling to evaluate whether satisfaction with CR is affected by implementation method and treatment engagement or influences recovery outcome, using data from a randomised controlled trial. Four themes (therapy hours, therapist, treatment effects, computer use) generated a 31-item Cognitive Remediation Satisfaction scale (CRS) that reduced to 18 Likert items, 2 binary and 2 open-ended questions following psychometric assessment. CRS had good internal consistency (Alpha = 0.814), test-retest reliability (r= 0.763), and concurrent validity using the Working Alliance Inventory (r = 0.56). A 2-factor solution divided items into therapy engagement and therapy effects. Satisfaction was not related to implementation method but was significantly associated with CR engagement. Therapy hours were significantly associated with recovery, but there was no direct effect of satisfaction on outcome. Although satisfaction is important to therapy engagement, it has no direct effect on outcome. CR therapy hours directly affect outcome irrespective of which implementation model is used, so measuring satisfaction early might help to identify those who are likely to disengage. The study has mixed methods design.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Plasma essential amino acid levels in first episode psychosis at baseline and after antipsychotic treatment. Efficacy of xanomeline and trospium chloride in schizophrenia: pooled results from three 5-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, EMERGENT trials. Interpersonal emotion regulation and symptom dimensions of psychosis proneness in young adults. Brain structural associations of syntactic complexity and diversity across schizophrenia spectrum and major depressive disorders, and healthy controls. Assessing the validity of a self-reported clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia.
×
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