Department of Psychology and Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse and Addictions (CASAA), The University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA.
Addiction. 2015 Mar;110(3):401-13. doi: 10.1111/add.12693. Epub 2014 Sep 12.
Increased expectations for the use of evidence-based methods in addiction treatment have fueled a debate regarding the relative importance of 'specific' versus 'common' factors in treatment outcome. This review explores the influence of these factors on addiction treatment outcome.
The authors review and link findings from four decades of research on specific and general factors in addiction treatment outcome research.
Although few would argue that what one does in addiction treatment is immaterial, outcome studies tend to find small to no difference when specific treatment methods are compared with each other or with treatment as usual. In contrast, there are usually substantial differences among therapists in client outcomes, and relational factors such as therapist empathy and therapeutic alliance can be significant determinants of addiction treatment outcome.
In addiction treatment, relational factors such as empathy, which are often described as common, non-specific factors, should not be dismissed as 'common' because they vary substantially across providers and it is unclear how common they actually are. Similarly they should not be relegated to 'non-specific' status, because such important relational influences can be specified and incorporated into clinical research and training.
对循证方法在成瘾治疗中应用的期望日益增加,这引发了一场关于治疗效果中“特定”因素与“共同”因素相对重要性的争论。本综述探讨了这些因素对成瘾治疗效果的影响。
作者回顾并关联了过去四十年来有关成瘾治疗效果研究中的特定和共同因素的发现。
虽然很少有人会认为成瘾治疗中所做的事情无关紧要,但在比较特定的治疗方法彼此之间或与常规治疗时,研究结果往往发现差异很小或没有差异。相比之下,治疗师在患者结果方面通常存在较大差异,而共情等关系因素和治疗联盟可能是成瘾治疗效果的重要决定因素。
在成瘾治疗中,共情等关系因素,通常被描述为共同的非特定因素,不应因其在提供者之间存在显著差异而被视为“常见”,也不应因其实际上是否常见而将其降级为“非特定”因素。同样,也不应将其归为“非特定”状态,因为这些重要的关系影响可以被具体说明并纳入临床研究和培训中。