Clinical Experiences Using Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Eating Disorders

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Ayla N. Gioia, Sabrina Ali, Erin E. Reilly
{"title":"Clinical Experiences Using Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Eating Disorders","authors":"Ayla N. Gioia,&nbsp;Sabrina Ali,&nbsp;Erin E. Reilly","doi":"10.1016/j.beth.2024.01.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Data suggests that despite the availability of evidence-based psychological treatments for eating disorders (EDs), techniques from these therapies may be less frequently used within real-life clinical practice. The aim of this study was to provide the opportunity for clinicians to give feedback on their experiences treating EDs using cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) through reporting on use of CBT techniques and barriers to treatment implementation in naturalistic settings. Clinicians (<em>N</em> = 126) who self-identified as using CBT for EDs reported demographic information, frequency/usefulness of empirically supported treatment techniques, problems/limitations of CBT, and barriers faced while implementing CBT. The most frequently used technique reported by clinicians was psychoeducation, and the least frequently used technique was use of surveys to address mind reading. Patients’ unwillingness to follow a meal plan/nutritional guide was rated as the most impactful barrier, alongside ED severity. Of the problems/limitations of CBT, too little guidance on treating co-occurring symptoms was rated as the most impactful. This study provided a mechanism for clinicians to share their experiences using CBT for EDs in real-world settings. Overall, results regarding frequency of use and usefulness of techniques indicate a high level of endorsement. Moreover, the most frequently endorsed barriers to/limitations of CBT related to lack of guidance on treating complex ED presentations. Future research should explore ways to treat cases that go beyond the prototypical ED case and explore ways to adapt CBT to meet the needs of naturalistic treatment settings.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48359,"journal":{"name":"Behavior Therapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavior Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005789424000182","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Data suggests that despite the availability of evidence-based psychological treatments for eating disorders (EDs), techniques from these therapies may be less frequently used within real-life clinical practice. The aim of this study was to provide the opportunity for clinicians to give feedback on their experiences treating EDs using cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) through reporting on use of CBT techniques and barriers to treatment implementation in naturalistic settings. Clinicians (N = 126) who self-identified as using CBT for EDs reported demographic information, frequency/usefulness of empirically supported treatment techniques, problems/limitations of CBT, and barriers faced while implementing CBT. The most frequently used technique reported by clinicians was psychoeducation, and the least frequently used technique was use of surveys to address mind reading. Patients’ unwillingness to follow a meal plan/nutritional guide was rated as the most impactful barrier, alongside ED severity. Of the problems/limitations of CBT, too little guidance on treating co-occurring symptoms was rated as the most impactful. This study provided a mechanism for clinicians to share their experiences using CBT for EDs in real-world settings. Overall, results regarding frequency of use and usefulness of techniques indicate a high level of endorsement. Moreover, the most frequently endorsed barriers to/limitations of CBT related to lack of guidance on treating complex ED presentations. Future research should explore ways to treat cases that go beyond the prototypical ED case and explore ways to adapt CBT to meet the needs of naturalistic treatment settings.

使用认知行为疗法治疗进食障碍的临床经验
有数据表明,尽管针对进食障碍(ED)有循证心理疗法,但在实际临床实践中,这些疗法中的技术可能不太常用。本研究旨在为临床医生提供机会,通过报告在自然环境中使用 CBT 技术和实施治疗的障碍,反馈他们使用认知行为疗法(CBT)治疗进食障碍的经验。自认为使用 CBT 治疗 ED 的临床医生(126 人)报告了人口统计学信息、经验支持治疗技术的使用频率/实用性、CBT 的问题/局限性以及实施 CBT 时面临的障碍。据临床医生报告,最常用的方法是心理教育,最不常用的方法是使用调查来解决读心术问题。患者不愿意遵守膳食计划/营养指南被评为最有影响的障碍,此外还有 ED 的严重程度。在 CBT 的问题/局限性中,影响最大的是对治疗共存症状的指导太少。这项研究为临床医生提供了一个机制,让他们分享在现实环境中使用 CBT 治疗 ED 的经验。总体而言,关于技术使用频率和实用性的结果显示了较高的认可度。此外,最常被认可的 CBT 障碍/限制与缺乏治疗复杂 ED 表现的指导有关。未来的研究应探索如何治疗超出典型 ED 病例的病例,并探索如何调整 CBT 以满足自然治疗环境的需求。
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
Behavior Therapy
Behavior Therapy Multiple-
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
2.70%
发文量
113
审稿时长
121 days
期刊介绍: Behavior Therapy is a quarterly international journal devoted to the application of the behavioral and cognitive sciences to the conceptualization, assessment, and treatment of psychopathology and related clinical problems. It is intended for mental health professionals and students from all related disciplines who wish to remain current in these areas and provides a vehicle for scientist-practitioners and clinical scientists to report the results of their original empirical research. Although the major emphasis is placed upon empirical research, methodological and theoretical papers as well as evaluative reviews of the literature will also be published. Controlled single-case designs and clinical replication series are welcome.
×
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