Meditation and Compassion Therapy in Psychiatric Disorders: A Pilot Study.

Introduction Our study aimed to compare meditation and compassion-based group therapy with the standard of care in patients with eating disorders, drug addiction, alcohol addiction, and depression, concerning acceptance, mindfulness awareness, self-compassion, and psychological distress. Methods A controlled designed study was performed, comparing meditation and compassion-focused group therapy added to the standard of care with the standard of care alone, on patients with eating disorders, drug addiction, alcohol addiction, and mood disorders. Four validated questionnaires were administered: the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II (AAQ-II), which assesses the ability to be fully in touch with the present moment; the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS), which assesses the ability to experience consciously what is happening in the present moment; the Self-Compassion Scale (SCS), which assesses self-compassion characteristics, including loving-kindness; and the Symptom Checklist-90 (SCL-90), which measures psychological distress (anxiety, depression, psychotic behavior, etc.). Results There was a total of 75 subjects, out of which 48 represented the experimental group, and 27 represented the control group. The overall mean age of the subjects was 44.8 ± 13.2 years. There were statistically significant increases in the experimental group (baseline vs. end of study) for the AAQ-II, MAAS, and SCS scores, and a statistically significant decrease in the SCL-90 score. In the control group, there was a statistically significant decrease in the SCL-90 score, but no significant differences for other measurements. The comparisons between the two groups at the end of the study were as follows: AAQ-II: 0.7 (-5.74 to 7.15), p = 0.827; MAAS: 4.78 (-3.19 to 12.75), p = 0.233; SCS: 5.89 (-3.18 to 14.96), p = 0.199; SCL-90: -0.26 (-0.62 to 0.1), p = 0.157. Conclusion Within the experimental group, all scales improved statistically significantly. There were no statistically significant differences at the end of the study concerning the four scales between the groups. The comparison between groups was limited by data availability.