Treating taboo thoughts on a psychiatric intensive care unit: a four-phase mixed methods single case experimental design

IF 2 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Stephen Kellett, Chris Gaskell, Andy Keslake, Mike Seneviratne, Melanie Simmonds-Buckley
{"title":"Treating taboo thoughts on a psychiatric intensive care unit: a four-phase mixed methods single case experimental design","authors":"Stephen Kellett, Chris Gaskell, Andy Keslake, Mike Seneviratne, Melanie Simmonds-Buckley","doi":"10.1017/s1352465824000146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Well-designed evaluations of psychological interventions on psychiatric intensive care units (PICUs) are a rarity. Aims: To evaluate the effectiveness of cognitive behaviour therapy for intrusive taboo thoughts with a patient diagnosed with bipolar affective disorder admitted to a PICU due to significant ongoing risk of harm to self. Method: This was a four-phase ABC plus community follow-up (D) mixed methods <jats:italic>n</jats:italic>=1 single case experimental design. Four idiographic measures were collected daily across four phases; the baseline (A) was during PICU admission, the first treatment phase (B) was behavioural on the PICU, the second treatment phase (C) was cognitive on an acute ward and the follow-up phase (D) was conducted in the community. Four nomothetic measures were taken on admission, on discharge from the PICU, discharge from the acute ward and then at 4-week follow-up. The participant was also interviewed at follow-up using the Change Interview. Results: Compared with baseline, the behavioural and the cognitive interventions appeared effective in terms of improving calmness, optimism and rumination, but the effects on sociability were poor. There was evidence across idiographic and nomothetic outcomes of a relapse during the follow-up phase in the community. Eleven idiographic changes were reported in the interview and these tended to be unexpected, related to the therapy and personally important. Discussion: Single case methods can be responsive to tracking the progress of patients moving through in-patient pathways and differing modules of evidence-based interventions. There is a real need to implement robust outcome methodologies on PICUs to better evaluate the psychological aspects of care in this context.","PeriodicalId":47936,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1352465824000146","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Well-designed evaluations of psychological interventions on psychiatric intensive care units (PICUs) are a rarity. Aims: To evaluate the effectiveness of cognitive behaviour therapy for intrusive taboo thoughts with a patient diagnosed with bipolar affective disorder admitted to a PICU due to significant ongoing risk of harm to self. Method: This was a four-phase ABC plus community follow-up (D) mixed methods n=1 single case experimental design. Four idiographic measures were collected daily across four phases; the baseline (A) was during PICU admission, the first treatment phase (B) was behavioural on the PICU, the second treatment phase (C) was cognitive on an acute ward and the follow-up phase (D) was conducted in the community. Four nomothetic measures were taken on admission, on discharge from the PICU, discharge from the acute ward and then at 4-week follow-up. The participant was also interviewed at follow-up using the Change Interview. Results: Compared with baseline, the behavioural and the cognitive interventions appeared effective in terms of improving calmness, optimism and rumination, but the effects on sociability were poor. There was evidence across idiographic and nomothetic outcomes of a relapse during the follow-up phase in the community. Eleven idiographic changes were reported in the interview and these tended to be unexpected, related to the therapy and personally important. Discussion: Single case methods can be responsive to tracking the progress of patients moving through in-patient pathways and differing modules of evidence-based interventions. There is a real need to implement robust outcome methodologies on PICUs to better evaluate the psychological aspects of care in this context.
治疗精神病重症监护病房的禁忌思想:四阶段混合方法单病例实验设计
背景:对精神科重症监护病房(PICU)的心理干预进行精心设计的评估并不多见。目的:评估认知行为疗法对因持续面临重大自我伤害风险而入住 PICU 的双相情感障碍患者的侵入性禁忌想法的有效性。治疗方法这是一个四阶段 ABC 加社区随访(D)混合方法 n=1 单病例实验设计。在四个阶段中,每天收集四项特异性测量;基线(A)在 PICU 入院期间,第一治疗阶段(B)在 PICU 进行行为治疗,第二治疗阶段(C)在急症病房进行认知治疗,后续阶段(D)在社区进行。在入院时、从重症监护室出院时、从急症病房出院时以及四周的随访中,分别进行了四次提名测量。在随访时,还使用 "变化访谈 "对受试者进行了访谈。结果显示与基线相比,行为干预和认知干预在改善平静、乐观和反刍方面似乎很有效,但对社交能力的影响较差。有证据表明,在社区随访阶段,特异性和名义性结果都会导致复发。访谈中报告了 11 项特异性变化,这些变化往往是出乎意料的、与治疗有关的和对个人有重要意义的。讨论:单个病例方法可用于跟踪病人通过住院路径和循证干预的不同模块所取得的进展。PICU 确实需要实施强有力的结果评估方法,以更好地评估在这种情况下护理工作的心理方面。
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
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
82
期刊介绍: An international multidisciplinary journal aimed primarily at members of the helping and teaching professions. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy features original research papers, covering both experimental and clinical work, that contribute to the theory, practice and evolution of cognitive and behaviour therapy. The journal aims to reflect and influence the continuing changes in the concepts, methodology, and techniques of behavioural and cognitive psychotherapy. A particular feature of the journal is its broad ranging scope - both in terms of topics and types of study covered. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy encompasses most areas of human behaviour and experience, and represents many different research methods, from randomized controlled trials to detailed case studies.
×
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