Bouvet C, Cleach C
Laboratoire Evaclipsy, université Paris-Ouest-Nanterre-la-Défense, 200, avenue de la République, 92001 Nanterre cedex, France.
Encephale. 2011 May;37 Suppl 1:S19-26. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2010.03.008. Epub 2010 May 1.
Between 30 and 60% of patients drop-out of institutional psychiatric treatment. There are few studies on this issue and these have not provided a clear understanding of this fact. Although it is a different therapeutic setting, there are many studies on patients' dropout in psychotherapy: the influence of many patient sociodemographic variables such as gender, age, diagnostic, were studied without providing strong and regular links with early dropout. Other, more relational variables (such as object relation and interpersonal functioning), gave stronger results although insufficiently confirmed by different studies. A third kind of variable involves the concrete relationship between patient and therapist (therapeutic alliance, patient's expectations) and provided interesting results (but not easy to use in institutional treatment).
The aim of this study is to provide data to understand patients' institutional dropout in a French psychiatric centre. The latter's aim is psychosocial rehabilitation for schizophrenic and borderline patients. Thirty percent of these dropout during psychosocial treatment. According to the specificities and aims of this psychiatric centre, we hypothesize that there are strong links between relational dimensions (objet relation, interpersonal functioning), subjective evaluation of pathology intensity, and early dropout.
Thirty-one subjects; 65% schizophrenic, 23% borderline, 13% other (according to the ICD10 criteria); 71% females; mean age 34 years (min=23; max=55); mean education level=3.4 (2 years of high school university).
to have dropped out before 6 months' of the treatment, or continuing the treatment after 6 months (mean of treatment for all patients=15 months).
patients present in the service for less than 6 months).
At the beginning of the treatment, each patient (informed consent provided) underwent a psychological assessment with: Échelle d'aptitude psychosociale (EAPS) for assessing interactional functioning; SCL90-R for assessing the intensity of psychopathology; TAT (with Social Cognition and Object Relation Scale [SCORS] scales) and Rorschach (with Mutuality Of Autonomy [MOA] scale) for assessing object relations. After 6 months of treatment, each patient was evaluated with a five-point scale (dropout and continuity scale), which assessed the investment in the treatment (criteria: dropout at 3 or 6 months or continuity; according or not to the centre's professionals; level of assiduity). We have correlated this variable with EAPS, SCORS and MOA. In addition, we have calculated statistical relationships between age, gender, diagnostic, education level and early dropout.
Correlation was found neither between interactional functioning (EAPS) and dropout nor between object relations (SCORS and MOA) and dropout. Correlations were found between the dropout and intensity of the psychopathology (SCL90-R): the more the patient sees himself suffering, the more he invests the centre and the less he drops out (Spearman R=0.37, P<0.05). No differences were found between the dropout (N=10) and continuity group (N=21) regarding age, gender and diagnostic. However, a correlation was found regarding the education level: the more patients are educated, the more they continue the treatment (R=0.45; P<0.05).
The dropout (and the continuity of treatment) seems more likely related to concrete variables such as psychological and relational suffering, educational level in this study, than structural psychological variables such as object relation, relational skills, and diagnostic. Other studies are necessary for a better understanding of these drops out. An interesting way should be the study in institution of the therapeutic alliance.
在机构化精神治疗中,30%至60%的患者会退出治疗。关于这个问题的研究很少,且这些研究并未对这一现象给出清晰的理解。尽管这是一种不同的治疗环境,但有许多关于心理治疗中患者退出的研究:研究了许多患者的社会人口统计学变量,如性别、年龄、诊断结果等,却未发现与早期退出有紧密且规律的联系。其他一些更具关系性的变量(如客体关系和人际功能)得出了更强的结果,不过不同研究对其证实并不充分。第三种变量涉及患者与治疗师之间的具体关系(治疗联盟、患者期望),并给出了有趣的结果(但在机构治疗中不易应用)。
本研究的目的是提供数据,以了解法国一家精神科中心患者的机构治疗退出情况。该中心的目标是对精神分裂症和边缘型人格障碍患者进行心理社会康复治疗。在心理社会治疗期间,这些患者中有30%会退出。根据该精神科中心的特点和目标,我们假设关系维度(客体关系、人际功能)、对病理强度的主观评估与早期退出之间存在紧密联系。
31名受试者;65%为精神分裂症患者,23%为边缘型人格障碍患者,13%为其他患者(根据ICD - 10标准);71%为女性;平均年龄34岁(最小23岁;最大55岁);平均教育水平为3.4(相当于两年高中或大学水平)。
在治疗6个月前退出治疗,或在6个月后仍继续治疗(所有患者的平均治疗时长 = 15个月)。
在该机构接受服务少于6个月的患者。
在治疗开始时,每位患者(已签署知情同意书)接受了心理评估,包括:使用社会心理能力量表(EAPS)评估互动功能;使用症状自评量表90 - R(SCL90 - R)评估精神病理学强度;使用主题统觉测验(TAT,配有社会认知与客体关系量表[SCORS])和罗夏墨迹测验(配有自主性相互性量表[MOA])评估客体关系。治疗6个月后,使用五分制量表(退出与连续性量表)对每位患者进行评估,该量表评估了对治疗的投入程度(标准:3个月或6个月时退出或继续治疗;是否符合中心专业人员的判断;勤勉程度)。我们将此变量与EAPS、SCORS和MOA进行了相关性分析。此外,我们还计算了年龄、性别、诊断结果、教育水平与早期退出之间的统计关系。
未发现互动功能(EAPS)与退出之间以及客体关系(SCORS和MOA)与退出之间存在相关性。发现退出与精神病理学强度(SCL90 - R)之间存在相关性:患者认为自己痛苦程度越高,对中心的投入就越多,退出的可能性就越小(斯皮尔曼相关系数R = 0.37,P < 0.05)。在退出组(N = 10)和继续治疗组(N = 21)之间,年龄、性别和诊断结果方面未发现差异。然而,在教育水平方面发现了相关性:受教育程度越高的患者,越有可能继续治疗(R = 0.45;P < 0.05)。
在本研究中,退出治疗(以及治疗的连续性)似乎更可能与诸如心理和关系痛苦、教育水平等具体变量相关,而非与诸如客体关系、关系技能和诊断结果等结构性心理变量相关。需要开展其他研究以更好地理解这些退出情况。一种有趣的研究方向应该是对治疗联盟在机构环境中的研究。