Grevenhaus Christin Janine, Flückiger Christoph, Theimer Lea, Benecke Cord
Department of Psychology, University of Kassel.
Res Psychother. 2024 Aug 29;27(2):803. doi: 10.4081/ripppo.2024.803.
The extent to which psychotherapeutic techniques have an impact on outcome has been studied on a regular basis. To date, there are no meta-analytic attempts to clarify the association between techniques and outcome in multi-therapeutic approach measures. This study aims to conduct a meta-analysis of the described association. A three-level meta-analysis and moderator-analysis were used. The meta-analysis revealed 13 studies with a total of 177 effect sizes. There was a significant effect r=.193 (t[176]=4.77, p<.01) with higher use of psychotherapeutic techniques being associated with better outcome. Significant moderator was therapeutic approach-specific subscales. The mean effect of cognitive-behavioral techniques was r=.088 (t[147]=1.50, p=.14, d=0.18; s=11, k=79), and the mean effect of psychodynamic techniques was r=.286 (t[147]=5.06, p<.01, d=0.60; s=11, k=70). The measurements for psychotherapeutic technique (Comparative Psychotherapy Process Scale and Psychotherapy-Process Q-Sort) showed no significant difference related to the association between technique and outcome (F[1, 175]=0.38, p=.54). This meta-analysis showed a positive relation between psychotherapeutic techniques and outcome. This leads to the assumption that specific psychotherapeutic techniques have positive effects on post-treatment outcome.
心理治疗技术对治疗效果的影响程度已被定期研究。迄今为止，尚无元分析尝试阐明多治疗方法措施中技术与效果之间的关联。本研究旨在对上述关联进行元分析。采用了三级元分析和调节分析。元分析显示有13项研究，共177个效应量。存在显著效应r = 0.193（t[176] = 4.77，p <.01），心理治疗技术的更多使用与更好的治疗效果相关。显著的调节因素是特定治疗方法的子量表。认知行为技术的平均效应为r = 0.088（t[147] = 1.50，p = 0.14，d = 0.18；s = 11，k = 79），心理动力学技术的平均效应为r = 0.286（t[147] = 5.06，p <.01，d = 0.60；s = 11，k = 70）。心理治疗技术的测量（比较心理治疗过程量表和心理治疗过程Q分类法）显示与技术和效果之间的关联无显著差异（F[1, 175] = 0.38，p = 0.54）。这项元分析表明心理治疗技术与治疗效果之间存在正相关。这导致人们假设特定的心理治疗技术对治疗后效果有积极影响。
