RESUMEN

Objective: Previous meta-analyses have shown that client-rated working alliance is negatively correlated with attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance. The purpose of this study is to provide an updated meta-analysis of the relation between alliance and the two dimensions of attachment insecurity. Method: Random effects models were used to examine the relation between the working alliance and attachment anxiety and the relation between the working alliance and attachment avoidance. Results: The overall relation between alliance and attachment anxiety was r = -.09 (p = .01, k = 33, I2 = 43.7%). The overall relation between alliance and attachment avoidance was r = -.13 (p < .001, k = 33, I2 = 44.7%). There was no evidence that these relations varied across study characteristics such as client race or the number of therapists in the study. Conclusion: The results support the negative relations between client-rated alliance and both dimensions of client-rated attachment insecurity. Further research is needed to identify the factors that moderate this relationship, using a more diverse sample of study characteristics and a wider range of measures.

RESUMEN

Although psychotherapy research has traditionally focused on decrease in distress, emotion research suggests the important role of positive emotional experience in healing and growing. Objective: The present study investigates the relationship between positive emotional experiences and working alliance. Method: We chose to investigate this relationship in accelerated experiential dynamic psychotherapy (AEDP), taking advantage of the modality's focus on both negative and positive emotional experiences. Fifty-eight clients receiving 16-sessions individual AEDP reported on their post-session levels of working alliance and positive emotions (enlivenment affect, positive relational affect, and peacefulness). The alliance-emotion relationship for each emotional categories was tested with separate disaggregated cross-lagged panel models. Results: Across the three categories, higher positive emotions at the end of the previous session were associated with higher working alliance at the end of the next session. On the other hand, working alliance did not contribute to any of the positive emotions in the next time point. Furthermore, the three emotion categories showed different patterns of development. Conclusion: The findings suggest that fostering positive emotions may be a promising venue to enhance working alliance. Furthermore, differentiating specific positive emotions is likely important both for research and practice.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

We investigated if improving a patient's memory for the content of their treatment, via the Memory Support Intervention, improves illness course and functional outcomes. The platform for investigating this question was major depressive disorder (MDD) and cognitive therapy (CT). Adults diagnosed with MDD (N = 178) were randomly allocated to CT + Memory Support (n = 91) or CT-as-usual (n = 87). Both treatments were comprised of 20-26, 50-min sessions over 16 weeks. Blind assessments were conducted before and immediately following treatment (post-treatment) and 6 months later (6FU). Patient memory for treatment, assessed with a free recall task, was higher in CT + Memory Support for past session recall at post-treatment. Both treatment arms were associated with reductions in depressive symptoms and functional impairment except: CT + Memory Support exhibited lower depression severity at 6FU (b = -3.09, p = 0.050, d = -0.27), and greater reduction in unhealthy days from baseline to 6FU (b = -4.21, p = 0.010, d = -1.07), compared to CT-as-usual. While differences in illness course and functional outcomes between the two treatment arms were limited, it is possible that future analyses of the type of memory supports and longer follow-up may yield more encouraging outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01790919. Registered October 6, 2016.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study examined the 6-month follow-up outcomes of the Transdiagnostic Sleep and Circadian Intervention (TranS-C), compared to Psychoeducation about sleep and health (PE). METHODS: Adolescents (mean [SD] = 14.77 [1.84] years) with eveningness chronotype and "at-risk" in at least one of five health domains were randomized to receive TranS-C (n = 89) or PE (n = 87) at a university-based clinic. Primary outcomes were average weeknight total sleep time and bedtime calculated from sleep diary, a questionnaire measure of circadian preference, and composite risks in five health domains. Secondary outcomes were selected sleep diary indices, sleepiness, and self- and parent-reported sleep, parent-reported risks in five health domains. RESULTS: Relative to PE, TranS-C showed treatment effects through 6-month follow-up on only one primary outcome; namely eveningness circadian preference. TranS-C also showed treatment effects on two sleep and circadian secondary outcomes, including the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and sleep-diary measured weeknight-weekend discrepancy in wakeup time. TranS-C did not show treatment effects on self-report or parent-report composite risks in five health domains. PE showed benefit, relative to TranS-C, from posttreatment to 6-month follow-up for reducing parent-reported behavioral health risk (secondary outcome). CONCLUSIONS: In at-risk adolescents, the evidence supports the TranS-C treatment effects over six months on improving sleep and circadian functioning on selected outcomes but not on reducing risk in five health domains.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The Memory Support Intervention was developed in response to evidence showing that: (1) patient memory for treatment is poor, (2) poor memory for treatment is associated with poorer adherence and poorer outcome, (3) the impact of memory impairment can be minimized by the use of memory support strategies and (4) improved memory for treatment improves outcome. The aim of this study protocol is to conduct a confirmatory efficacy trial to test whether the Memory Support Intervention improves illness course and functional outcomes. As a "platform" for the next step in investigating this approach, we focus on major depressive disorder (MDD) and cognitive therapy (CT). METHOD/DESIGN: Adults with MDD (n = 178, including 20% for potential attrition) will be randomly allocated to CT + Memory Support or CT-as-usual and will be assessed at baseline, post treatment and at 6 and 12 months' follow-up (6FU and 12FU). We will compare the effects of CT + Memory Support vs. CT-as-usual to determine if the new intervention improves the course of illness and reduces functional impairment (aim 1). We will determine if patient memory for treatment mediates the relationship between treatment condition and outcome (aim 2). We will evaluate if previously reported poor treatment response subgroups moderate target engagement (aim 3). DISCUSSION: The Memory Support Intervention has been developed to be "transdiagnostic" (relevant to a broad range of mental disorders) and "pantreatment" (relevant to a broad range of types of treatment). This study protocol describes a "next step" in the treatment development process by testing the Memory Support Intervention for major depressive disorder (MDD) and cognitive therapy (CT). If the results are promising, future directions will test the applicability to other kinds of interventions and disorders and in other settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT01790919 . Registered on 6 October 2016.

Asunto(s)