减少身体重复性行为的三种自助技术的正面比较。

IF 2 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Behavior Modification Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2021-04-21 DOI:10.1177/01454455211010707
Steffen Moritz, Danielle Penney, Kaser Ahmed, Stella Schmotz
{"title":"减少身体重复性行为的三种自助技术的正面比较。","authors":"Steffen Moritz,&nbsp;Danielle Penney,&nbsp;Kaser Ahmed,&nbsp;Stella Schmotz","doi":"10.1177/01454455211010707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Body-focused repetitive behaviors (BFRBs) include skin picking, trichotillomania, nail biting and cavitadaxia/lip-cheek biting, among other behaviors. For the first time, we compared three different self-help techniques aimed at reducing BFRBs. We explored the acceptance and preliminary efficacy of the approaches and whether the techniques exerted differential effects depending on BFRB-type.A total of 113 participants with at least one BFRB were randomly allocated to either habit reversal training (HRT; active elements: awareness and competing response training), decoupling (DC) or decoupling in sensu (DC-is). Reassessment was conducted 4 weeks later. The Generic Body-Focused Repetitive Behavior Scale (GBS) served as the primary outcome. The completion rate was best for DC-is (68.6%) as compared to HRT (57.1%) and DC (53.5%). A total of 34.8% of completers in the DC group showed an improvement of at least 35% on the GBS compared to 10.0% in the HRT and 23.3% in the DC-is group. In accordance with previous work, moderator analyses showed that improvement under DC is best for non-skin-pickers. A dose-effect relationship emerged, particularly for HRT. Subjective appraisal ratings were more favorable for DC-is and HRT than for DC. With respect to completion rate, subjective appraisal and symptom improvement, DC-is yielded consistently satisfactory results, whereas HRT showed good subjective but rather poor objective improvement. Those who performed DC, especially non-skin-pickers, showed good improvement but overall completion and subjective efficacy were low. Future studies should investigate whether the three techniques exert add-on effects when combined and whether demonstration via new media (e.g., video) will augment comprehensibility and thus efficacy of the techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":48037,"journal":{"name":"Behavior Modification","volume":"46 4","pages":"894-912"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/01454455211010707","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Head-to-Head Comparison of Three Self-Help Techniques to Reduce Body-Focused Repetitive Behaviors.\",\"authors\":\"Steffen Moritz,&nbsp;Danielle Penney,&nbsp;Kaser Ahmed,&nbsp;Stella Schmotz\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01454455211010707\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Body-focused repetitive behaviors (BFRBs) include skin picking, trichotillomania, nail biting and cavitadaxia/lip-cheek biting, among other behaviors. For the first time, we compared three different self-help techniques aimed at reducing BFRBs. We explored the acceptance and preliminary efficacy of the approaches and whether the techniques exerted differential effects depending on BFRB-type.A total of 113 participants with at least one BFRB were randomly allocated to either habit reversal training (HRT; active elements: awareness and competing response training), decoupling (DC) or decoupling in sensu (DC-is). Reassessment was conducted 4 weeks later. The Generic Body-Focused Repetitive Behavior Scale (GBS) served as the primary outcome. The completion rate was best for DC-is (68.6%) as compared to HRT (57.1%) and DC (53.5%). A total of 34.8% of completers in the DC group showed an improvement of at least 35% on the GBS compared to 10.0% in the HRT and 23.3% in the DC-is group. In accordance with previous work, moderator analyses showed that improvement under DC is best for non-skin-pickers. A dose-effect relationship emerged, particularly for HRT. Subjective appraisal ratings were more favorable for DC-is and HRT than for DC. With respect to completion rate, subjective appraisal and symptom improvement, DC-is yielded consistently satisfactory results, whereas HRT showed good subjective but rather poor objective improvement. Those who performed DC, especially non-skin-pickers, showed good improvement but overall completion and subjective efficacy were low. Future studies should investigate whether the three techniques exert add-on effects when combined and whether demonstration via new media (e.g., video) will augment comprehensibility and thus efficacy of the techniques.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48037,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavior Modification\",\"volume\":\"46 4\",\"pages\":\"894-912\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/01454455211010707\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavior Modification\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01454455211010707\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/4/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavior Modification","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01454455211010707","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/4/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

以身体为中心的重复性行为(bfrb)包括抠皮肤、拔毛癖、咬指甲和咬口腔/咬嘴唇等行为。我们第一次比较了三种不同的旨在减少bfrb的自助技术。我们探讨了这些方法的接受程度和初步疗效,以及这些技术是否会根据bfrb类型产生不同的效果。共有113名至少有一种BFRB的参与者被随机分配到习惯逆转训练(HRT;主动要素:意识和竞争反应训练)、解耦(DC)或感知解耦(DC-is)。4周后重新评估。通用身体聚焦重复行为量表(GBS)作为主要观察指标。与HRT(57.1%)和DC(53.5%)相比,DC-is的完成率最高(68.6%)。与HRT组10.0%和DC-is组23.3%相比,DC组中34.8%的完成者的GBS至少改善了35%。根据先前的工作,调节因子分析表明,在DC下,非皮肤采摘者的改善效果最好。出现了剂量效应关系,尤其是激素替代疗法。主观评价评分对DC-is和HRT比DC更有利。在完成率、主观评价和症状改善方面,DC-is均获得满意的结果,而HRT的主观改善较好,客观改善较差。进行DC治疗的患者,尤其是非扒皮者,表现出良好的改善,但总体完成度和主观疗效较低。未来的研究应该调查这三种技术在结合时是否会产生附加效应,以及通过新媒体(如视频)的演示是否会增加技术的可理解性,从而提高技术的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A Head-to-Head Comparison of Three Self-Help Techniques to Reduce Body-Focused Repetitive Behaviors.

A Head-to-Head Comparison of Three Self-Help Techniques to Reduce Body-Focused Repetitive Behaviors.

A Head-to-Head Comparison of Three Self-Help Techniques to Reduce Body-Focused Repetitive Behaviors.

A Head-to-Head Comparison of Three Self-Help Techniques to Reduce Body-Focused Repetitive Behaviors.

Body-focused repetitive behaviors (BFRBs) include skin picking, trichotillomania, nail biting and cavitadaxia/lip-cheek biting, among other behaviors. For the first time, we compared three different self-help techniques aimed at reducing BFRBs. We explored the acceptance and preliminary efficacy of the approaches and whether the techniques exerted differential effects depending on BFRB-type.A total of 113 participants with at least one BFRB were randomly allocated to either habit reversal training (HRT; active elements: awareness and competing response training), decoupling (DC) or decoupling in sensu (DC-is). Reassessment was conducted 4 weeks later. The Generic Body-Focused Repetitive Behavior Scale (GBS) served as the primary outcome. The completion rate was best for DC-is (68.6%) as compared to HRT (57.1%) and DC (53.5%). A total of 34.8% of completers in the DC group showed an improvement of at least 35% on the GBS compared to 10.0% in the HRT and 23.3% in the DC-is group. In accordance with previous work, moderator analyses showed that improvement under DC is best for non-skin-pickers. A dose-effect relationship emerged, particularly for HRT. Subjective appraisal ratings were more favorable for DC-is and HRT than for DC. With respect to completion rate, subjective appraisal and symptom improvement, DC-is yielded consistently satisfactory results, whereas HRT showed good subjective but rather poor objective improvement. Those who performed DC, especially non-skin-pickers, showed good improvement but overall completion and subjective efficacy were low. Future studies should investigate whether the three techniques exert add-on effects when combined and whether demonstration via new media (e.g., video) will augment comprehensibility and thus efficacy of the techniques.

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
Behavior Modification
Behavior Modification PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: For two decades, researchers and practitioners have turned to Behavior Modification for current scholarship on applied behavior modification. Starting in 1995, in addition to keeping you informed on assessment and modification techniques relevant to psychiatric, clinical, education, and rehabilitation settings, Behavior Modification revised and expanded its focus to include treatment manuals and program descriptions. With these features you can follow the process of clinical research and see how it can be applied to your own work. And, with Behavior Modification, successful clinical and administrative experts have an outlet for sharing their solutions in the field.
×
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