University of Bern, Switzerland; University of Zürich, Switzerland.
University of Zürich, Switzerland.
EBioMedicine. 2015 Nov 27;3:163-171. doi: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2015.11.049. eCollection 2016 Jan.
Despite long-standing calls to disseminate evidence-based treatments for generalized anxiety (GAD), modest progress has been made in the study of how such treatments should be implemented. The primary objective of this study was to test three competing strategies on how to implement a cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) for out-patients with GAD (i.e., comparison of one compensation vs. two capitalization models).
For our three-arm, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial (implementation of CBT for GAD [IMPLEMENT]), we recruited adults with GAD using advertisements in high-circulation newspapers to participate in a 14-session cognitive behavioral treatment (Mastery of your Anxiety and Worry, MAW-packet). We randomly assigned eligible patients using a full randomization procedure (1:1:1) to three different conditions of implementation: adherence priming (compensation model), which had a systematized focus on patients' individual GAD symptoms and how to compensate for these symptoms within the MAW-packet, and resource priming and supportive resource priming (capitalization model), which had systematized focuses on patients' strengths and abilities and how these strengths can be capitalized within the same packet. In the intention-to-treat population an outcome composite of primary and secondary symptoms-related self-report questionnaires was analyzed based on a hierarchical linear growth model from intake to 6-month follow-up assessment. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT02039193) and is closed to new participants.
From June 2012 to Nov. 2014, from 411 participants that were screened, 57 eligible participants were recruited and randomly assigned to three conditions. Forty-nine patients (86%) provided outcome data at post-assessment (14% dropout rate). All three conditions showed a highly significant reduction of symptoms over time. However, compared with the adherence priming condition, both resource priming conditions indicated faster symptom reduction. The observer ratings of a sub-sample of recorded videos (n = 100) showed that the therapists in the resource priming conditions conducted more strength-oriented interventions in comparison with the adherence priming condition. No patients died or attempted suicide.
To our knowledge, this is the first trial that focuses on capitalization and compensation models during the implementation of one prescriptive treatment packet for GAD. We have shown that GAD related symptoms were significantly faster reduced by the resource priming conditions, although the limitations of our study included a well-educated population. If replicated, our results suggest that therapists who implement a mental health treatment for GAD might profit from a systematized focus on capitalization models.
Swiss Science National Foundation (SNSF-Nr. PZ00P1_136937/1) awarded to CF.
尽管长期以来一直呼吁传播广泛性焦虑(GAD)的循证治疗方法,但在研究如何实施这些治疗方法方面仅取得了适度进展。本研究的主要目的是测试三种竞争性策略,以实施针对门诊 GAD 患者的认知行为治疗(CBT)(即比较一种补偿与两种资本化模型)。
对于我们的三臂、单盲、随机对照试验(实施 GAD 的 CBT [IMPLEMENT]),我们使用高发行量报纸上的广告招募患有 GAD 的成年人参加 14 节认知行为治疗(掌握您的焦虑和担忧,MAW- 包)。我们使用完全随机化程序(1:1:1)随机分配符合条件的患者到三种不同的实施条件:依从性启动(补偿模型),该模型系统地关注患者的个体 GAD 症状以及如何在 MAW- 包中补偿这些症状,以及资源启动和支持性资源启动(资本化模型),该模型系统地关注患者的优势和能力以及如何在同一数据包中利用这些优势。在意向治疗人群中,基于从摄入到 6 个月随访评估的分层线性增长模型,对主要和次要症状相关自我报告问卷的结果进行了综合分析。本试验在 ClinicalTrials.gov(标识符:NCT02039193)注册,并且对新参与者关闭。
从 2012 年 6 月至 2014 年 11 月,从筛选出的 411 名参与者中,招募了 57 名符合条件的参与者,并随机分配到三个条件。49 名患者(86%)在评估后提供了结果数据(14%的辍学率)。所有三种条件都显示出症状随时间的显著降低。然而,与依从性启动条件相比,两种资源启动条件均表明症状更快减轻。对录制视频的子样本(n=100)的观察者评分显示,与依从性启动条件相比,资源启动条件的治疗师进行了更多的面向优势的干预。没有患者死亡或试图自杀。
据我们所知,这是第一项专注于在实施 GAD 规范治疗包期间进行资本化和补偿模型的试验。我们已经表明,与依从性启动条件相比,资源启动条件可显著更快地减轻 GAD 相关症状,尽管我们研究的局限性包括受教育程度较高的人群。如果得到复制,我们的结果表明,实施 GAD 心理健康治疗的治疗师可能会从系统地关注资本化模型中受益。
瑞士科学基金会(SNSF-Nr. PZ00P1_136937/1)授予 CF。