强迫症及相关疾病患者的治疗障碍和治疗方式偏好。

IF 2.5 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Lauren Milgram, Teresa Toranzo, Rachel E Mathews, Adam B Lewin
{"title":"强迫症及相关疾病患者的治疗障碍和治疗方式偏好。","authors":"Lauren Milgram, Teresa Toranzo, Rachel E Mathews, Adam B Lewin","doi":"10.1002/jclp.70025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Facing numerous barriers to care, most individuals experiencing symptoms of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders do not receive evidence-based treatment. While much existing literature has identified barriers to mental health treatment broadly, little empirical work has assessed barriers specifically within a sample of individuals with obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, whose identified barriers and treatment preferences may differ from other clinical samples. In particular, this information is lacking for pediatric samples.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The current study examined treatment barriers and modality preferences among individuals (N = 216; 48 adults and 168 parents of youth) receiving telehealth-based treatment for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants endorsed an array of barriers to treatment, including barriers to both in-person and telehealth treatment modalities. Time and distance to in-person treatment were the most influential barriers associated with a preference for telehealth treatment, while difficulty building rapport with the clinician via telehealth and telehealth feeling impersonal were the most influential barriers associated with a preference for in-person treatment. Participants who indicated that clinician expertise was important in their decision-making were more likely to prefer in-person treatment, while participants who indicated that cost of treatment was important in their decision-making were more likely to prefer telehealth treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings can inform future efforts to increase the accessibility and uptake of evidence-based interventions for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.</p>","PeriodicalId":15395,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Treatment Barriers and Modality Preferences Among Individuals With Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders.\",\"authors\":\"Lauren Milgram, Teresa Toranzo, Rachel E Mathews, Adam B Lewin\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/jclp.70025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Facing numerous barriers to care, most individuals experiencing symptoms of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders do not receive evidence-based treatment. While much existing literature has identified barriers to mental health treatment broadly, little empirical work has assessed barriers specifically within a sample of individuals with obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, whose identified barriers and treatment preferences may differ from other clinical samples. In particular, this information is lacking for pediatric samples.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The current study examined treatment barriers and modality preferences among individuals (N = 216; 48 adults and 168 parents of youth) receiving telehealth-based treatment for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants endorsed an array of barriers to treatment, including barriers to both in-person and telehealth treatment modalities. Time and distance to in-person treatment were the most influential barriers associated with a preference for telehealth treatment, while difficulty building rapport with the clinician via telehealth and telehealth feeling impersonal were the most influential barriers associated with a preference for in-person treatment. Participants who indicated that clinician expertise was important in their decision-making were more likely to prefer in-person treatment, while participants who indicated that cost of treatment was important in their decision-making were more likely to prefer telehealth treatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings can inform future efforts to increase the accessibility and uptake of evidence-based interventions for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15395,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Clinical Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.70025\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.70025","RegionNum":3,"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

摘要

目的:面对众多的护理障碍,大多数经历强迫症症状和相关障碍的个体没有接受循证治疗。虽然现有的许多文献已经广泛地确定了精神健康治疗的障碍,但很少有实证工作专门评估强迫症和相关疾病患者样本中的障碍,他们确定的障碍和治疗偏好可能与其他临床样本不同。特别是,儿童样本缺乏这方面的信息。方法:本研究考察了个体间的治疗障碍和治疗方式偏好(N = 216;48名成年人和168名青少年父母接受基于远程保健的强迫症和相关疾病治疗。结果:与会者赞同一系列治疗障碍,包括面对面和远程保健治疗方式的障碍。时间和到现场治疗的距离是与偏爱远程保健治疗相关的最具影响力的障碍,而通过远程保健与临床医生建立融洽关系的困难以及远程保健感觉没有人情味是与偏爱现场治疗相关的最具影响力的障碍。表示临床医生专业知识对其决策很重要的参与者更有可能倾向于面对面治疗,而表示治疗费用对其决策很重要的参与者更有可能倾向于远程保健治疗。结论:研究结果可以为今后提高强迫症及相关疾病循证干预措施的可及性和接受程度提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Treatment Barriers and Modality Preferences Among Individuals With Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders.

Objectives: Facing numerous barriers to care, most individuals experiencing symptoms of obsessive-compulsive and related disorders do not receive evidence-based treatment. While much existing literature has identified barriers to mental health treatment broadly, little empirical work has assessed barriers specifically within a sample of individuals with obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, whose identified barriers and treatment preferences may differ from other clinical samples. In particular, this information is lacking for pediatric samples.

Methods: The current study examined treatment barriers and modality preferences among individuals (N = 216; 48 adults and 168 parents of youth) receiving telehealth-based treatment for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.

Results: Participants endorsed an array of barriers to treatment, including barriers to both in-person and telehealth treatment modalities. Time and distance to in-person treatment were the most influential barriers associated with a preference for telehealth treatment, while difficulty building rapport with the clinician via telehealth and telehealth feeling impersonal were the most influential barriers associated with a preference for in-person treatment. Participants who indicated that clinician expertise was important in their decision-making were more likely to prefer in-person treatment, while participants who indicated that cost of treatment was important in their decision-making were more likely to prefer telehealth treatment.

Conclusion: Findings can inform future efforts to increase the accessibility and uptake of evidence-based interventions for obsessive-compulsive and related disorders.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Psychology
Journal of Clinical Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.30%
发文量
177
期刊介绍: Founded in 1945, the Journal of Clinical Psychology is a peer-reviewed forum devoted to research, assessment, and practice. Published eight times a year, the Journal includes research studies; articles on contemporary professional issues, single case research; brief reports (including dissertations in brief); notes from the field; and news and notes. In addition to papers on psychopathology, psychodiagnostics, and the psychotherapeutic process, the journal welcomes articles focusing on psychotherapy effectiveness research, psychological assessment and treatment matching, clinical outcomes, clinical health psychology, and behavioral medicine.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信