Paradoxical interventions: A meta-analysis.

IF 2.6 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Psychotherapy Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-03-16 DOI:10.1037/pst0000481
Paul R Peluso, Robert Freund
{"title":"Paradoxical interventions: A meta-analysis.","authors":"Paul R Peluso, Robert Freund","doi":"10.1037/pst0000481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article outlines the evidence base for the use of paradoxical interventions (PIs) in individual psychotherapy. Often misunderstood, PIs have shown long-term (distal) impacts on clinical outcomes, yet a review of the existing literature on these interventions illustrates a trending decline in consideration and use within both research and applied settings. Definitions of PIs and their constituent elements are presented along with clinical examples. We conducted one meta-analysis comparing PIs with a placebo or control and another comparing PIs to other therapeutic methods. PIs demonstrated a large effect (<i>d</i> = 1.1, <i>k</i> = 17 studies) compared to controls and a medium effect size (<i>d</i> = .49, <i>k</i> = 17 studies) compared to other therapeutic methods. We included a review of several case studies using PIs as well. Among the salient findings, there is a lack of assessment measure to track the implementation of PIs in session or a method to track their in-session effects. Further, there is a dearth of contemporary quantitative experimental research and development of PIs. We further advocate for the development and integration of PI training and supervision into clinical education and posteducation programs, given the current data demonstrating clinical utility. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20910,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000481","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article outlines the evidence base for the use of paradoxical interventions (PIs) in individual psychotherapy. Often misunderstood, PIs have shown long-term (distal) impacts on clinical outcomes, yet a review of the existing literature on these interventions illustrates a trending decline in consideration and use within both research and applied settings. Definitions of PIs and their constituent elements are presented along with clinical examples. We conducted one meta-analysis comparing PIs with a placebo or control and another comparing PIs to other therapeutic methods. PIs demonstrated a large effect (d = 1.1, k = 17 studies) compared to controls and a medium effect size (d = .49, k = 17 studies) compared to other therapeutic methods. We included a review of several case studies using PIs as well. Among the salient findings, there is a lack of assessment measure to track the implementation of PIs in session or a method to track their in-session effects. Further, there is a dearth of contemporary quantitative experimental research and development of PIs. We further advocate for the development and integration of PI training and supervision into clinical education and posteducation programs, given the current data demonstrating clinical utility. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

矛盾干预:荟萃分析。
本文概述了在个体心理治疗中使用矛盾干预(PIs)的证据基础。悖论性干预常常被误解,但它对临床结果产生了长期(远期)的影响,然而,对有关这些干预的现有文献的回顾表明,在研究和应用环境中,对悖论性干预的考虑和使用呈下降趋势。本文介绍了 PI 的定义及其构成要素,并列举了一些临床实例。我们进行了一项荟萃分析,将 PIs 与安慰剂或对照组进行了比较,还进行了另一项荟萃分析,将 PIs 与其他治疗方法进行了比较。与对照组相比,PIs 显现出较大效应(d = 1.1,k = 17 项研究),与其他治疗方法相比,PIs 显现出中等效应(d = 0.49,k = 17 项研究)。我们还对几项使用 PIs 的病例研究进行了回顾。在突出的研究结果中,我们发现缺乏一种评估措施来跟踪会话中引导式治疗的实施情况,也缺乏一种方法来跟踪会话中引导式治疗的效果。此外,当代定量实验研究和 PI 的开发也十分匮乏。鉴于目前的数据显示了临床效用,我们进一步主张开发 PI 培训和督导,并将其纳入临床教育和岗位教育计划。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA,保留所有权利)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychotherapy
Psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
12.00%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice, Training publishes a wide variety of articles relevant to the field of psychotherapy. The journal strives to foster interactions among individuals involved with training, practice theory, and research since all areas are essential to psychotherapy. This journal is an invaluable resource for practicing clinical and counseling psychologists, social workers, and mental health professionals.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信