青少年抑郁症心理治疗中的治疗联盟:治疗类型的差异和随时间的变化。

IF 1.8 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Antonella Cirasola, N. Midgley, P. Fonagy, Impact Consortium, Peter Martin
{"title":"青少年抑郁症心理治疗中的治疗联盟:治疗类型的差异和随时间的变化。","authors":"Antonella Cirasola, N. Midgley, P. Fonagy, Impact Consortium, Peter Martin","doi":"10.1037/int0000264","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although the alliance is usually considered a generic factor common to all therapies, there are theoretical reasons to suspect that the alliance may develop differently in different types of therapies. Yet, in youth psychotherapy little is known about this issue to date. This study investigated whether the mean strength of the alliance, as well as its trajectory over time, differed between three equally effective psychological treatments for adolescent depression. Data were drawn from the *anonymised* study, a randomized controlled trial comparing cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) and short-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy (STPP) versus a brief psychosocial intervention (BPI) in the treatment of adolescent depression. Adolescents’ (N=338) and therapists’ (n=159) ratings of the alliance were collected using the Working Alliance Inventory short form (WAI-S) at 6, 12 and 36 weeks after randomization. Data were analysed using multilevel linear models. Results showed that adolescents’ and therapists’ mean alliance ratings differed between treatment types, being highest in CBT, and lowest in the STPP at all time points. Mean therapists’ alliance ratings increased slightly over time in all arms, while mean adolescents’ ratings were stable over time in CBT and BPI, but slightly increased in the STPP group. These findings suggest that the mean strength of the alliance differs between treatment type and future research is required to help pinpoint what factors contribute to these differences and their relationship with treatment outcomes.","PeriodicalId":46982,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY INTEGRATION","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The therapeutic alliance in psychotherapy for adolescent depression: Differences between treatment types and change over time.\",\"authors\":\"Antonella Cirasola, N. Midgley, P. Fonagy, Impact Consortium, Peter Martin\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/int0000264\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although the alliance is usually considered a generic factor common to all therapies, there are theoretical reasons to suspect that the alliance may develop differently in different types of therapies. Yet, in youth psychotherapy little is known about this issue to date. This study investigated whether the mean strength of the alliance, as well as its trajectory over time, differed between three equally effective psychological treatments for adolescent depression. Data were drawn from the *anonymised* study, a randomized controlled trial comparing cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) and short-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy (STPP) versus a brief psychosocial intervention (BPI) in the treatment of adolescent depression. Adolescents’ (N=338) and therapists’ (n=159) ratings of the alliance were collected using the Working Alliance Inventory short form (WAI-S) at 6, 12 and 36 weeks after randomization. Data were analysed using multilevel linear models. Results showed that adolescents’ and therapists’ mean alliance ratings differed between treatment types, being highest in CBT, and lowest in the STPP at all time points. Mean therapists’ alliance ratings increased slightly over time in all arms, while mean adolescents’ ratings were stable over time in CBT and BPI, but slightly increased in the STPP group. These findings suggest that the mean strength of the alliance differs between treatment type and future research is required to help pinpoint what factors contribute to these differences and their relationship with treatment outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46982,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JOURNAL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY INTEGRATION\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JOURNAL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY INTEGRATION\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/int0000264\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY INTEGRATION","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/int0000264","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

尽管联盟通常被认为是所有疗法共同的通用因素,但有理论理由怀疑联盟在不同类型的疗法中可能会有不同的发展。然而,到目前为止,在青少年心理治疗中,人们对这个问题知之甚少。这项研究调查了三种同样有效的青少年抑郁症心理治疗方法之间联盟的平均强度及其随时间的发展轨迹是否存在差异。数据来自“匿名”研究,这是一项随机对照试验,比较了认知行为疗法(CBT)和短期精神分析心理疗法(STPP)与短期心理社会干预(BPI)治疗青少年抑郁症的效果。在随机分组后6、12和36周,使用工作联盟简表(WAI-S)收集青少年(N=338)和治疗师(N=159)对联盟的评分。数据采用多级线性模型进行分析。结果显示,不同治疗类型的青少年和治疗师的平均联盟评分不同,在所有时间点,CBT最高,STPP最低。所有组的平均治疗师联盟评分随时间略有上升,而CBT和BPI组的平均青少年评分随时间稳定,但STPP组略有上升。这些发现表明,不同治疗类型的联盟的平均强度不同,需要未来的研究来帮助确定导致这些差异的因素及其与治疗结果的关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The therapeutic alliance in psychotherapy for adolescent depression: Differences between treatment types and change over time.
Although the alliance is usually considered a generic factor common to all therapies, there are theoretical reasons to suspect that the alliance may develop differently in different types of therapies. Yet, in youth psychotherapy little is known about this issue to date. This study investigated whether the mean strength of the alliance, as well as its trajectory over time, differed between three equally effective psychological treatments for adolescent depression. Data were drawn from the *anonymised* study, a randomized controlled trial comparing cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) and short-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy (STPP) versus a brief psychosocial intervention (BPI) in the treatment of adolescent depression. Adolescents’ (N=338) and therapists’ (n=159) ratings of the alliance were collected using the Working Alliance Inventory short form (WAI-S) at 6, 12 and 36 weeks after randomization. Data were analysed using multilevel linear models. Results showed that adolescents’ and therapists’ mean alliance ratings differed between treatment types, being highest in CBT, and lowest in the STPP at all time points. Mean therapists’ alliance ratings increased slightly over time in all arms, while mean adolescents’ ratings were stable over time in CBT and BPI, but slightly increased in the STPP group. These findings suggest that the mean strength of the alliance differs between treatment type and future research is required to help pinpoint what factors contribute to these differences and their relationship with treatment outcomes.
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 PSYCHOTHERAPY INTEGRATION
JOURNAL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY INTEGRATION PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Journal of Psychotherapy Integration offers original peer-reviewed papers that move beyond the confines of single-school or single-theory approaches to psychotherapy and behavior change. The journal publishes articles that significantly advance the knowledge of psychotherapy integration and present new data, theory, or clinical techniques relevant to psychotherapy integration. Coverage includes articles integrating the knowledge of psychotherapy and behavior change with developments in the broader fields of psychology and psychiatry (e.g., cognitive sciences, psychobiology, health psychology, and social psychology). (formerly published by Kluwer Academic/Plenum)
×
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