Backhaus Samantha, Ibarra Summer, Parrott Devan, Malec James
Rehabilitation Hospital of Indiana, Neuro Rehabilitation Center, Indianapolis, IN; Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Indianapolis, IN.
Rehabilitation Hospital of Indiana, Neuro Rehabilitation Center, Indianapolis, IN; Indiana University School of Medicine, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Indianapolis, IN.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016 Feb;97(2):281-91. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2015.10.097. Epub 2015 Nov 10.
To compare the efficacy of 2 group treatments for persons with brain injury (BI) and their caregivers in promoting perceived self-efficacy (PSE) and emotional and neurobehavioral functioning.
Randomized controlled trial.
Outpatient BI rehabilitation.
Subjects (N=38), including 19 with BI and 19 caregivers, participated in a BI coping skills group or a support group.
BI coping skills is a manualized cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT). CBT was compared with a structurally equivalent support group.
Brain Injury Coping Skills Questionnaire (PSE), Brief Symptom Inventory-18 ([BSI-18]; emotional distress), and Frontal Systems Behavior Scale (neurobehavioral functions).
There were no significant differences between survivors and caregivers on the Brain Injury Coping Skills Questionnaire and BSI-18; therefore, groups were combined during final analyses. Frontal Systems Behavior Scale caregiver data were used for analysis. Both groups showed significantly improved PSE between baseline and follow-up on repeated-measures analysis of variance, with the CBT group showing greater stabilization of change. There was no significant group by time interaction on measures of neurobehavioral functions, but the CBT group showed significant improvements at 3-month follow-up. No significant effects were found on the BSI-18.
To our knowledge, no studies to date have been published comparing a CBT intervention with a support group in a BI population with caregiver participation. This study showed that given equivalent group structure, individuals with BI and caregivers may benefit from either type of intervention in enhancing PSE or maintaining emotional stability. However, there was a trend for individuals who received CBT to maintain the effects of improved PSE, whereas support group participants showed a trend for decline. This study offers a new conceptualization that with certain group dynamics and support, individuals with BI and caregivers may benefit similarly from either a support group or CBT intervention. However, because our sample did not include individuals in clinically significant emotional distress, we cannot rule out the possibility that those with more significant challenges in PSE or emotional functions may show greater benefits with a CBT group.
比较两种治疗方法对脑损伤(BI)患者及其照料者在促进自我效能感(PSE)以及情绪和神经行为功能方面的疗效。
随机对照试验。
门诊脑损伤康复机构。
38名受试者,包括19名脑损伤患者和19名照料者,参与了脑损伤应对技能组或支持组。
脑损伤应对技能是一种手册化的认知行为疗法(CBT)。将CBT与结构相当的支持组进行比较。
脑损伤应对技能问卷(PSE)、简明症状量表-18([BSI-18];情绪困扰)和额叶系统行为量表(神经行为功能)。
在脑损伤应对技能问卷和BSI-18上,幸存者和照料者之间无显著差异;因此,在最终分析时将两组合并。使用照料者的额叶系统行为量表数据进行分析。在重复测量方差分析中,两组在基线和随访之间的PSE均有显著改善,CBT组的变化稳定性更高。在神经行为功能测量方面,组间与时间无显著交互作用,但CBT组在3个月随访时显示出显著改善。在BSI-18上未发现显著影响。
据我们所知,迄今为止尚无研究发表,比较在有照料者参与的脑损伤人群中CBT干预与支持组的效果。本研究表明,在组结构相同的情况下,脑损伤患者及其照料者可能从任何一种干预类型中受益,以增强PSE或维持情绪稳定性。然而,接受CBT的个体有维持PSE改善效果的趋势,而支持组参与者有下降趋势。本研究提出了一种新的概念,即在特定的群体动态和支持下,脑损伤患者及其照料者可能从支持组或CBT干预中同样受益。然而,由于我们的样本未包括临床上有显著情绪困扰的个体,我们不能排除在PSE或情绪功能方面有更显著挑战的个体可能从CBT组中获得更大益处的可能性。