探讨团体认知行为治疗与团体图式治疗治疗社交焦虑障碍和共病回避型人格障碍效果的调节因子和中介因子。

IF 2.7 3区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Astrid E Baljé, Anja Greeven, Mathijs Deen, Anne E van Giezen, Arnoud Arntz, Philip Spinhoven
{"title":"探讨团体认知行为治疗与团体图式治疗治疗社交焦虑障碍和共病回避型人格障碍效果的调节因子和中介因子。","authors":"Astrid E Baljé, Anja Greeven, Mathijs Deen, Anne E van Giezen, Arnoud Arntz, Philip Spinhoven","doi":"10.1002/cpp.70148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Identifying moderators and mediators in a randomised controlled trial is important to improve treatment effectiveness and elucidate mechanisms of change. Putative moderating and mediating variables of treatment outcome of 30 weekly sessions of group cognitive behavioural therapy (GCBT) and group schema therapy (GST) were investigated in a sample of 154 patients with both social anxiety disorder (SAD) and avoidant personality disorder (AVPD). Significant improvements were realised in both modalities at 3 and 12 months after treatment. No significant differences between conditions were found.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The current study explored several demographic and clinical patient characteristics as putative moderators of reducing SAD symptoms, AVPD manifestations, and treatment attrition. Emotion regulation, self-esteem, experiential avoidance and schema modes were considered as putative mediators of SAD symptoms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Baseline variables moderating treatment effects on SAD symptoms and AVPD manifestations were investigated by comparing multilevel models. Differential effects of moderators on attrition hazard were examined by Cox regression. To assess possible mediators (measured pre-, mid- and post-treatment) of the effect of GCBT versus GST on SAD symptoms, separate three-wave random-intercept cross-lagged panel models were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No moderators and mediators were identified. Self-esteem, the average mode score and avoidant protector mode at mid-treatment predicted social anxiety at the end of treatment irrespective of treatment condition, while an inverse relationship was ruled out.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The moderator analyses indicated that the examined patient characteristics cannot inform treatment decisions for either GCBT or GST. Furthermore, the mediation analysis did not point to different underlying treatment processes between both modalities.</p>","PeriodicalId":10460,"journal":{"name":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","volume":"32 5","pages":"e70148"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring Moderators and Mediators of the Outcome of Group Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Compared With Group Schema Therapy for Social Anxiety Disorder and Comorbid Avoidant Personality Disorder.\",\"authors\":\"Astrid E Baljé, Anja Greeven, Mathijs Deen, Anne E van Giezen, Arnoud Arntz, Philip Spinhoven\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cpp.70148\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Identifying moderators and mediators in a randomised controlled trial is important to improve treatment effectiveness and elucidate mechanisms of change. Putative moderating and mediating variables of treatment outcome of 30 weekly sessions of group cognitive behavioural therapy (GCBT) and group schema therapy (GST) were investigated in a sample of 154 patients with both social anxiety disorder (SAD) and avoidant personality disorder (AVPD). Significant improvements were realised in both modalities at 3 and 12 months after treatment. No significant differences between conditions were found.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The current study explored several demographic and clinical patient characteristics as putative moderators of reducing SAD symptoms, AVPD manifestations, and treatment attrition. Emotion regulation, self-esteem, experiential avoidance and schema modes were considered as putative mediators of SAD symptoms.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Baseline variables moderating treatment effects on SAD symptoms and AVPD manifestations were investigated by comparing multilevel models. Differential effects of moderators on attrition hazard were examined by Cox regression. To assess possible mediators (measured pre-, mid- and post-treatment) of the effect of GCBT versus GST on SAD symptoms, separate three-wave random-intercept cross-lagged panel models were performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No moderators and mediators were identified. Self-esteem, the average mode score and avoidant protector mode at mid-treatment predicted social anxiety at the end of treatment irrespective of treatment condition, while an inverse relationship was ruled out.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The moderator analyses indicated that the examined patient characteristics cannot inform treatment decisions for either GCBT or GST. Furthermore, the mediation analysis did not point to different underlying treatment processes between both modalities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10460,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy\",\"volume\":\"32 5\",\"pages\":\"e70148\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.70148\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical psychology & psychotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.70148","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在随机对照试验中确定调节因子和调节因子对于提高治疗效果和阐明改变机制非常重要。以154例社交焦虑障碍(SAD)和回避型人格障碍(AVPD)患者为研究对象,研究了群体认知行为治疗(GCBT)和群体图式治疗(GST) 30周治疗效果的调节变量和中介变量。治疗后3个月和12个月,两种治疗方式均有显著改善。两种情况之间没有发现显著差异。目的:目前的研究探讨了几种人口统计学和临床患者特征作为减轻SAD症状、AVPD表现和治疗损耗的推定调节因素。情绪调节、自尊、经验回避和图式模式被认为是SAD症状的可能中介。方法:通过比较多水平模型,研究调节SAD症状和AVPD表现的基线变量。采用Cox回归检验调节因子对磨耗危害的差异效应。为了评估GCBT与GST对SAD症状影响的可能介质(治疗前、治疗中和治疗后测量),进行了单独的三波随机截距交叉滞后面板模型。结果:未发现调节因子和中介因子。不论治疗状况如何,治疗中期的自尊、平均模式得分和回避保护模式均可预测治疗结束时的社交焦虑,但不存在负相关关系。结论:调节分析表明,所检查的患者特征不能为GCBT或GST的治疗决策提供信息。此外,中介分析并没有指出两种模式之间不同的潜在治疗过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exploring Moderators and Mediators of the Outcome of Group Cognitive Behavioural Therapy Compared With Group Schema Therapy for Social Anxiety Disorder and Comorbid Avoidant Personality Disorder.

Background: Identifying moderators and mediators in a randomised controlled trial is important to improve treatment effectiveness and elucidate mechanisms of change. Putative moderating and mediating variables of treatment outcome of 30 weekly sessions of group cognitive behavioural therapy (GCBT) and group schema therapy (GST) were investigated in a sample of 154 patients with both social anxiety disorder (SAD) and avoidant personality disorder (AVPD). Significant improvements were realised in both modalities at 3 and 12 months after treatment. No significant differences between conditions were found.

Objectives: The current study explored several demographic and clinical patient characteristics as putative moderators of reducing SAD symptoms, AVPD manifestations, and treatment attrition. Emotion regulation, self-esteem, experiential avoidance and schema modes were considered as putative mediators of SAD symptoms.

Methods: Baseline variables moderating treatment effects on SAD symptoms and AVPD manifestations were investigated by comparing multilevel models. Differential effects of moderators on attrition hazard were examined by Cox regression. To assess possible mediators (measured pre-, mid- and post-treatment) of the effect of GCBT versus GST on SAD symptoms, separate three-wave random-intercept cross-lagged panel models were performed.

Results: No moderators and mediators were identified. Self-esteem, the average mode score and avoidant protector mode at mid-treatment predicted social anxiety at the end of treatment irrespective of treatment condition, while an inverse relationship was ruled out.

Conclusions: The moderator analyses indicated that the examined patient characteristics cannot inform treatment decisions for either GCBT or GST. Furthermore, the mediation analysis did not point to different underlying treatment processes between both modalities.

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
Clinical psychology & psychotherapy
Clinical psychology & psychotherapy PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
106
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy aims to keep clinical psychologists and psychotherapists up to date with new developments in their fields. The Journal will provide an integrative impetus both between theory and practice and between different orientations within clinical psychology and psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy will be a forum in which practitioners can present their wealth of expertise and innovations in order to make these available to a wider audience. Equally, the Journal will contain reports from researchers who want to address a larger clinical audience with clinically relevant issues and clinically valid research.
×
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