Suppr超能文献

我们真的在为饮食失调症提供循证治疗吗?饮食失调患者如何描述他们的认知行为疗法体验。

Are we really delivering evidence-based treatments for eating disorders? How eating-disordered patients describe their experience of cognitive behavioral therapy.

作者信息

Cowdrey Natasha D, Waller Glenn

机构信息

Clinical Psychology Unit, Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, UK.

Clinical Psychology Unit, Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, UK.

出版信息

Behav Res Ther. 2015 Dec;75:72-7. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2015.10.009. Epub 2015 Nov 3.

Abstract

Psychotherapists report routinely not practising evidence-based treatments. However, there is little research examining the content of therapy from the patient perspective. This study examined the self-reported treatment experiences of individuals who had been told that they had received cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT) for their eating disorder. One hundred and fifty-seven such sufferers (mean age = 25.69 years) were recruited from self-help organisations. Participants completed an online survey assessing demographics, clinical characteristics, and therapy components. The use of evidence-based CBT techniques varied widely, with core elements for the eating disorders (e.g., weighing and food monitoring) used at well below the optimum level, while a number of unevidenced techniques were reported as being used commonly. Cluster analysis showed that participants received different patterns of intervention under the therapist label of 'CBT', with evidence-based CBT being the least common. Therapist age and patient diagnosis were related to the pattern of intervention delivered. It appears that clinicians are not subscribing to a transdiagnostic approach to the treatment of eating disorders. Patient recollections in this study support the conclusion that evidence-based practice is not routinely undertaken with this client group, even when the therapy offered is described as such.

摘要

心理治疗师经常报告不采用循证治疗方法。然而,从患者角度研究治疗内容的研究却很少。本研究调查了那些被告知因其饮食失调接受过认知行为疗法(CBT)的个体的自我报告治疗经历。从自助组织招募了157名此类患者(平均年龄 = 25.69岁)。参与者完成了一项在线调查,评估人口统计学、临床特征和治疗组成部分。循证CBT技术的使用差异很大,饮食失调的核心要素(如称重和食物监测)的使用远低于最佳水平,而一些未经证实的技术却被报告为常用。聚类分析表明,参与者在“CBT”治疗师标签下接受了不同模式的干预,循证CBT是最不常见的。治疗师年龄和患者诊断与所提供的干预模式有关。看来临床医生在饮食失调治疗中并未采用跨诊断方法。本研究中患者的回忆支持了这样的结论:即使所提供的治疗被描述为循证治疗,该客户群体也未常规采用循证实践。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验