Department of Psychology–MS 4235, Texas A&MUniversity, College Station, TX 77843–4235, USA.
Behav Ther. 2012 Mar;43(1):13-24. doi: 10.1016/j.beth.2011.03.004. Epub 2011 May 25.
Although meta-analyses affirm that various treatments for couple distress produce statistically and clinically significant outcomes, research findings also indicate that a large percentage of couples fail to benefit or subsequently deteriorate following current therapies. Based on these findings, we advocate potential advantages of integrative approaches to couple therapy. We distinguish among assimilative, transtheoretical, and pluralistic approaches to integration and describe exemplars of each. Integrative approaches to couple therapy are compared to distillatory or common factors approaches emphasizing common elements of treatment components, therapist characteristics, and client or relationship attributes. We argue that clinical practice of integrative approaches to couple therapy requires conceptual and clinical decision-making skills transcending those of any one theoretical modality and emphasizing the selection, sequencing, and pacing of diverse interventions in a coherent manner. We conclude with implications of integrative couple-based treatments for future research.
尽管荟萃分析肯定了各种治疗夫妻困境的方法在统计学和临床上都有显著的效果，但研究结果也表明，很大一部分夫妻在接受当前的治疗后没有受益，或者病情随后恶化。基于这些发现，我们提倡夫妻治疗中综合方法的潜在优势。我们区分同化、跨理论和多元方法的整合，并描述每一种方法的范例。我们将夫妻治疗的综合方法与强调治疗成分、治疗师特征和客户或关系属性的共同要素的浓缩或共同因素方法进行比较。我们认为，夫妻治疗的综合方法的临床实践需要超越任何一种理论模式的概念和临床决策技能，强调以连贯的方式选择、排序和调整各种干预措施。最后，我们讨论了夫妻为基础的综合治疗对未来研究的影响。
