Mechanisms of cognitive-behavioral and psychodynamic interventions for anxiety sensitivity- A randomized, controlled single-session study.

IF 3 1区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Psychotherapy Research Pub Date : 2025-08-25 DOI:10.1080/10503307.2025.2548498

Maayan Gerecht Hacohen, Amit Sharoni, Baraa Kabha, Orya Tishby, Jonathan D Huppert

{"title":"Mechanisms of cognitive-behavioral and psychodynamic interventions for anxiety sensitivity- A randomized, controlled single-session study.","authors":"Maayan Gerecht Hacohen, Amit Sharoni, Baraa Kabha, Orya Tishby, Jonathan D Huppert","doi":"10.1080/10503307.2025.2548498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: This study utilized a single-session, randomized controlled analog design to investigate the mechanisms underlying cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and psychodynamic therapy in treating anxiety sensitivity (AS). We hypothesized that changes in catastrophic interpretations of bodily sensations would predict reductions in AS in CBT, whereas improvements in panic-specific reflective functioning (pRF) would predict changes in the psychodynamic intervention (PDTp).Methods: Participants with elevated AS (N = 110; Mage = 43, 91 women) were randomized to CBT, PDTp, or a control group. Pre-to-post changes in mechanisms were examined as predictors of changes in AS at post-treatment and one-month follow-up.Results: Results partially supported the hypotheses. Catastrophic interpretations changed significantly in the CBT condition. However, pRF did not change in any group. The relationship between changes in mechanisms and AS was more complex than predicted. In CBT, reductions in AS were closely tied to changes in interpretations. Within-session, distress declined in CBT but did not consistently predict AS change. pRF change was related to AS reductions only in CBT.Conclusion: These findings highlight the clinical relevance of targeting catastrophic thinking in brief CBT for AS, and suggest that pRF may play a secondary role. Future work should test these mechanisms in clinical settings and longer treatments.","PeriodicalId":48159,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy Research","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2025.2548498","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: This study utilized a single-session, randomized controlled analog design to investigate the mechanisms underlying cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and psychodynamic therapy in treating anxiety sensitivity (AS). We hypothesized that changes in catastrophic interpretations of bodily sensations would predict reductions in AS in CBT, whereas improvements in panic-specific reflective functioning (pRF) would predict changes in the psychodynamic intervention (PDTp).

Methods: Participants with elevated AS (N = 110; Mage = 43, 91 women) were randomized to CBT, PDTp, or a control group. Pre-to-post changes in mechanisms were examined as predictors of changes in AS at post-treatment and one-month follow-up.

Results: Results partially supported the hypotheses. Catastrophic interpretations changed significantly in the CBT condition. However, pRF did not change in any group. The relationship between changes in mechanisms and AS was more complex than predicted. In CBT, reductions in AS were closely tied to changes in interpretations. Within-session, distress declined in CBT but did not consistently predict AS change. pRF change was related to AS reductions only in CBT.

Conclusion: These findings highlight the clinical relevance of targeting catastrophic thinking in brief CBT for AS, and suggest that pRF may play a secondary role. Future work should test these mechanisms in clinical settings and longer treatments.

查看原文本刊更多论文

焦虑敏感性的认知行为和心理动力学干预机制——一项随机、对照的单期研究。

目的：本研究采用单期随机对照模拟设计，探讨认知行为疗法（CBT）和心理动力疗法治疗焦虑敏感性（AS）的机制。我们假设，对身体感觉的灾难性解释的变化可以预测CBT中AS的减少，而恐慌特异性反射功能（pRF）的改善可以预测心理动力干预（PDTp）的变化。方法：AS升高的参与者（N = 110; Mage = 43,91名女性）被随机分为CBT组、PDTp组或对照组。在治疗后和一个月的随访中，检查了治疗前后机制的变化作为as变化的预测因素。结果：结果部分支持假设。灾难性解释在CBT条件下发生了显著变化。然而，pRF在任何组中都没有变化。机制变化与AS之间的关系比预测的更为复杂。在CBT中，AS的减少与解释的改变密切相关。在治疗过程中，CBT组的痛苦程度有所下降，但并不能始终预测AS的改变。pRF变化仅在CBT中与AS减少有关。结论：这些发现强调了针对灾难性思维的简短AS CBT的临床相关性，并提示pRF可能起次要作用。未来的工作应该在临床环境和长期治疗中测试这些机制。

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 Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

7.80

自引率

10.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Psychotherapy Research seeks to enhance the development, scientific quality, and social relevance of psychotherapy research and to foster the use of research findings in practice, education, and policy formulation. The Journal publishes reports of original research on all aspects of psychotherapy, including its outcomes, its processes, education of practitioners, and delivery of services. It also publishes methodological, theoretical, and review articles of direct relevance to psychotherapy research. The Journal is addressed to an international, interdisciplinary audience and welcomes submissions dealing with diverse theoretical orientations, treatment modalities.