Refine
Document Type
- Article (24)
- Postprint (11)
- Review (5)
- Habilitation Thesis (1)
- Other (1)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (42)
Keywords
- psychotherapy (12)
- psychotherapy process (5)
- systematic review (5)
- therapist competence (5)
- Psychotherapy research (4)
- Simulated patients (4)
- Standardized patients (4)
- Systematic review (4)
- assessment (4)
- oncology (4)
In cancer patients, pain is one of the main symptoms and especially in the late stages of disease, these symptoms can be associated with considerable suffering. In psycho-oncology, preliminary psychological therapies targeting cancer pain have been tested; however, a systematic review of available interventions is lacking, especially considering their dissemination, evidence base, study quality, and the comparison with established treatments. Therefore, the aim of the current study is to systematically review the current research on psychological treatments for pain in cancer patients. During May 2014, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PSYNDEX, and CENTRAL databases were searched. Psychological treatments for pain in adult cancer patients studied in randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and referring to pain as primary or secondary outcome were included. After examination for inclusion, structured data extraction and assessment followed. Data were synthesized narratively. In the review, 32 RCTs were included. Studies mainly referred to patients with breast cancer or patients in earlier stages of the disease. The methodological quality of included studies was heterogeneous. Most commonly, short interventions were delivered by nurses in out-patient settings. Interventions including education and relaxation techniques were utilized most often, followed by interventions with behavioral or cognitive components. A need for research persists regarding efficacy of current psychotherapeutic interventions, or the role of mediator variables (e. g., coping) on pain perception in cancer patients. Studies with high methodological quality which comprehensively and transparently report on interventions and designs are lacking.
Patient involvement (PI) in research is increasingly required as a means to improve relevance and meaningfulness of research results. PI has been widely promoted by the National Institute for Health Research in England in the last years. In Germany, widespread involvement of patients in research is still missing. The methods used to realize PI have been developed mainly in English research contexts, and detailed information on how to involve patients in systematic reviews is rare. Therefore, the aim of the study was that patients contribute and prioritize clinically relevant outcomes to a systematic review on meta-cognitive interventions, and to evaluate a patient workshop as well as patients’ perceptions of research involvement. Seven patients with experience in psychiatric care participated in our workshop. They focused on outcomes pre-defined in the review protocol (e.g., meta-cognitive or cognitive changes, symptomatology, quality of life), neglected other outcomes (like satisfaction with treatment, acceptability), and added relevant new ones (e.g., scope of action/autonomy, applicability). Altogether, they valued the explicit workshop participation positively. However, some suggested to involve patients at an earlier stage and to adapt the amount of information given. Further systematic reviews would benefit from the involvement of patients in the definition of other components of the review question (like patients or interventions), in the interpretation of key findings or in drafting a lay summary.
Theoretischer Hintergrund:Supervision spielt eine zentrale Rolle zum Wissens- und Kompetenzerwerb sowie in der Qualitätssicherung.
Fragestellung:Ziel war es, den aktuellen Forschungsstand zur Supervision im Rahmen der kognitiven Verhaltenstherapie abzubilden, um daraus Schlussfolgerungen für die zukünftige Forschung abzuleiten.
Methode:Zur Evidenzsynthese wurde ein Scoping Review durchgeführt, das die Darstellung zentraler Konzepte, aktueller Evidenz und möglicher Forschungsbedarfe ermöglichte. Neben einer systematischen Literaturrecherche wurden Vorwärts- und Rückwärtssuchstrategien eingesetzt.
Ergebnisse:Eingeschlossen wurden zwölf Publikationen basierend auf zehn empirischen Studien. Alle Studien beschrieben Ausbildungssettings, aber nur wenige untersuchten übende Interventionen (z. B. Rollenspiele). Häufig wurden Effekte subjektiv erfasst, die methodische Qualität der Begleitstudien variierte.
Schlussfolgerungen:Notwendig sind weitere methodisch hochwertige Studien, experimentell orientiert oder in der klinischen Praxis, die die Supervisionsforschung bereichern können.
Der Leserbrief fokussiert in weiten Teilen auf das Gutachterwesen, weshalb wir ausschließlich auf die inhaltlichen Punkte im Zusammenhang mit unserer Arbeit eingehen. Untersucht wurden schmerzpsychologische Interventionen, wie beschrieben definiert als psychologische Interventionen, deren primäres Ziel die Schmerzreduktion war.
Die extrahierten Zielgrößen, wie Lebensqualität oder Depressivität, ergaben sich aus den in den Primärstudien untersuchten Hauptoutcomes und nicht aus der Suchstrategie.
Zur Einschätzung der methodischen Qualität der Primärstudien konnte ein Kriterium des von Johannsen und Kollegen [2] gebildeten Scores nicht berücksichtigt werden, da die eingeschlossenen Primärstudien keine metaanalytische Zusammenfassung erlaubten. Stellt man dies in Rechnung, bleibt die Vergleichbarkeit beider Werte erhalten.
Die Evidenzsynthese erfolgte narrativ in Text- und Tabellenform, d. h. in Form einer strukturierten Zusammenfassung und Diskussion von Studien [1].
Um unsere Arbeit zu fokussieren, hätten wir eine weitergehende Gegenüberstellung wie auch eine Überprüfung von Zitaten und Übersetzungen selbstverständlich vorgenommen, wenn wir den Hinweis dazu vor Publikation erhalten hätten.
Theoretischer Hintergrund:Supervision spielt eine zentrale Rolle zum Wissens- und Kompetenzerwerb sowie in der Qualitätssicherung.
Fragestellung:Ziel war es, den aktuellen Forschungsstand zur Supervision im Rahmen der kognitiven Verhaltenstherapie abzubilden, um daraus Schlussfolgerungen für die zukünftige Forschung abzuleiten.
Methode:Zur Evidenzsynthese wurde ein Scoping Review durchgeführt, das die Darstellung zentraler Konzepte, aktueller Evidenz und möglicher Forschungsbedarfe ermöglichte. Neben einer systematischen Literaturrecherche wurden Vorwärts- und Rückwärtssuchstrategien eingesetzt.
Ergebnisse:Eingeschlossen wurden zwölf Publikationen basierend auf zehn empirischen Studien. Alle Studien beschrieben Ausbildungssettings, aber nur wenige untersuchten übende Interventionen (z. B. Rollenspiele). Häufig wurden Effekte subjektiv erfasst, die methodische Qualität der Begleitstudien variierte.
Schlussfolgerungen:Notwendig sind weitere methodisch hochwertige Studien, experimentell orientiert oder in der klinischen Praxis, die die Supervisionsforschung bereichern können.
Purpose: The acquisition of skills is essential to the conceptualization of cognitive-behavioural therapy. Yet, what experiences are encountered and what skills actually learned during therapy, and whether patients and therapists have concurrent views hereof, remains poorly understood.
Method: An explorative pilot study with semi-structured, corresponding interview guides was conducted. Pilot data from our outpatient unit were transcribed and content-analyzed following current guidelines.
Results: The responses of 18 participants (patients and their psychotherapists) were assigned to six main categories. Educational and cognitive aspects were mentioned most frequently and consistently by both groups. Having learned Behavioural alternatives attained the second highest agreement between perspectives.
Conclusions: Patients and therapists valued CBT as an opportunity to learn new skills, which is an important prerequisite also for the maintenance of therapeutic change. We discuss limitations to generalizability but also theoretical and therapy implications.
ObjectivesThe use of simulated and standardized patients (SP) is widely accepted in the medical field and, from there, is beginning to disseminate into clinical psychology and psychotherapy. The purpose of this study was therefore to systematically review barriers and facilitators that should be considered in the implementation of SP interventions specific to clinical psychology and psychotherapy.MethodsFollowing current guidelines, a scoping review was conducted. The literature search focused on the MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science databases, including Dissertation Abstracts International. After screening for titles and abstracts, full texts were screened independently and in duplicate according to our inclusion criteria. For data extraction, a pre-defined form was piloted and used. Units of meaning with respect to barriers and facilitators were extracted and categorized inductively using content-analysis techniques. From the results, a matrix of interconnections and a network graph were compiled.ResultsThe 41 included publications were mainly in the fields of psychiatry and mental health nursing, as well as in training and education. The detailed category system contrasts four supercategories, i.e., which organizational and economic aspects to consider, which persons to include as eligible SPs, how to develop adequate scenarios, and how to authentically and consistently portray mental health patients.ConclusionsPublications focused especially on the interrelation between authenticity and consistency of portrayals, on how to evoke empathy in learners, and on economic and training aspects. A variety of recommendations for implementing SP programs, from planning to training, monitoring, and debriefing, is provided, for example, ethical screening of and ongoing support for SPs.
Purpose: The acquisition of skills is essential to the conceptualization of cognitive-behavioural therapy. Yet, what experiences are encountered and what skills actually learned during therapy, and whether patients and therapists have concurrent views hereof, remains poorly understood. Method: An explorative pilot study with semi-structured, corresponding interview guides was conducted. Pilot data from our outpatient unit were transcribed and content-analyzed following current guidelines. Results: The responses of 18 participants (patients and their psychotherapists) were assigned to six main categories. Educational and cognitive aspects were mentioned most frequently and consistently by both groups. Having learned Behavioural alternatives attained the second highest agreement between perspectives. Conclusions: Patients and therapists valued CBT as an opportunity to learn new skills, which is an important prerequisite also for the maintenance of therapeutic change. We discuss limitations to generalizability but also theoretical and therapy implications.
Objectives: The use of simulated and standardized patients (SP) is widely accepted in the medical field and, from there, is beginning to disseminate into clinical psychology and psychotherapy. The purpose of this study was therefore to systematically review barriers and facilitators that should be considered in the implementation of SP interventions specific to clinical psychology and psychotherapy. Methods: Following current guidelines, a scoping review was conducted. The literature search focused on the MEDLINE,PsycINFO and Web of Science databases, including Dissertation Abstracts International. After screening for titles and abstracts,full texts were screened independently and in duplicate according to our inclusion criteria. For data extraction, a pre-defined form was piloted and used. Units of meaning with respect to barriers and facilitators were extracted and categorized inductively using content-analysis techniques. From the results, a matrix of interconnections and a network graph were compiled. Results: The 41 included publications were mainly in the fields of psychiatry and mental health nursing, as well as in training and education. The detailed category system contrasts four supercategories, i.e., which organizational and economic aspects to consider, which persons to include as eligible SPs, how to develop adequate scenarios, and how to authentically and consistently portray mental health patients.Conclusions: Publications focused especially on the interrelation between authenticity and consistency of portrayals, on how to evoke empathy in learners, and on economic and training aspects. A variety of recommendations for implementing SP programs,from planning to training, monitoring, and debriefing, is provided, for example, ethical screening of and ongoing support for SPs.
We evaluated the effectiveness and acceptability of metacognitive interventions for mental disorders. We searched electronic databases and included randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials comparing metacognitive interventions with other treatments in adults with mental disorders. Primary effectiveness and acceptability outcomes were symptom severity and dropout, respectively. We performed random-effects meta-analyses. We identified Metacognitive Training (MCTrain), Metacognitive Therapy (MCTherap), and Metacognition Reflection and Insight Therapy (MERIT). We included 49 trials with 2,609 patients. In patients with schizophrenia, MCTrain was more effective than a psychological treatment (cognitive remediation, SMD = -0.39). It bordered significance when compared with standard or other psychological treatments. In a post hoc analysis, across all studies, the pooled effect was significant (SMD = -0.31). MCTrain was more effective than standard treatment in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (SMD = -0.40). MCTherap was more effective than a waitlist in patients with depression (SMD = -2.80), posttraumatic stress disorder (SMD = -2.36), and psychological treatments (cognitive-behavioural) in patients with anxiety (SMD = -0.46). In patients with depression, MCTherap was not superior to psychological treatment (cognitive-behavioural). For MERIT, the database was too small to allow solid conclusions. Acceptability of metacognitive interventions among patients was high on average. Methodological quality was mostly unclear or moderate. Metacognitive interventions are likely to be effective in alleviating symptom severity in mental disorders. Although their add-on value against existing psychological interventions awaits to be established, potential advantages are their low threshold and economy.