Search

The present study describes the development and validation of a German questionnaire assessing motivation to change in individuals with eating disorders (Stages of Change Questionnaire-Eating Disorders, SOCQ-ED). The SOCQ-ED measures stages of change separately for each eating disorder symptom domain. Psychometric properties were assessed in a sample of N=63 women with Anorexia Nervosa or Bulimia Nervosa. Test-retest reliability ranged from rtt=0.42 to 0.78 (Mdn=0.56), correlations with the University of Rhode Island Change Assessment were between r=0.21 and 0.32 and correlations with measurements of eating pathology ranged from r=0.19 to 0.46. The results provide initial support for the reliability and validity of the SOCQ-ED., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Research concerning the question, whether and to what extent cognitive-behavioral (CB) and psychodynamic (PD) therapy consist of differing process components under clinical representative conditions, is relevant especially for a valid interpretation of comparative outcome research, for identifying differential beneficial factors of psychotherapy and for a systematic indication for, respectively assignment of, patients to the two treatments. In this study it is investigated whether PD and CB differ concerning the realisation of factors of group experience, respectively of beneficial group elements (e. g. cohesion, catharsis, learning by feedback). For this purpose, in a naturalistic design, a stratified sample (N = 36) of 104 videotaped sessions (PD groups, interactional CB groups and indicative CB groups; N = 171 patients with a broad spectrum of F-diagnoses of ICD-10, especially F3/F4) were rated by observers using the Kieler-Gruppenpsychotherapie-Prozess-Skala (KGPPS). Analyses of variance and a priori Helmert-contrasts reveal differences between PD and CB with at least medium effect sizes in 12 of the 16 factors of group experience. However, differences also were found between the two CB group treatments (9 factors of group experience with differences with large effect sizes). The results suggest that the different treatment approaches foster different qualities and quantities of group experience and that the latter seems not to evolve from the group context "per se" (i. e. by the plurality of the group).

Aim: We conducted a study to investigate whether patients with somatization disorder show abnormal values in autonomic testing, especially in the central baroreceptor sensitivity., Patients and Methods: Seventy-one patients were included. All had a diagnosis of somatization disorder (ICD-10, F45.0). Psychometric testing was performed by means of validated questionnaires (STAI, STAXI, FPI, GBB, ADS, SOMS, SCL-90-R). Autonomic regulation was analyzed by international standards using frequency spectral calculation by fast Fourier transformation. Thereby 3 different groups were detected: 12 patients with a baroreceptor sensitivity (BRS) of less than 3.0 ms/mm Hg, 20 patients with normal BRS (> 9.0 ms/mm Hg), and an in-between group (n = 39) with intermediate BRS. Controlling for age, a covariance analysis was calculated., Results: The two extreme groups showed no difference in psychometric testing. However, significant differences were discernible in spectral values of mid-frequency-band (p < 0.05) in a covariance analysis with age as covariate. Equally the 24 h blood pressure determination showed significantly higher values for the group with BRS < 3.0 ms/mm Hg (p < 0.05 to 0.001)., Conclusions: In a high percentage (17 %) of patients diagnosed to have somatization disorder autonomic dysregulation becomes apparent and is accompanied by increased blood pressure. Therefore it doesn't seem accurate to overlook concomitant organic lesions in somatization disorders despite patients lacking overtly clinical signs but suffering from various unspecific symptoms.

Unlabelled: In previous research it was found that patients with diabetes mellitus suffer from multiple physical symptoms even early in their disease course. Such complaints may relate to blood glucose levels or can be understood as a sign of distress in respect to the diagnosis of a chronic disease., Purpose: This study was performed to evaluate in a cross-sectional analysis all the symptoms that patients may complain of and to relate these symptoms to a possible dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system., Method: We assessed the complaints of 66 patients with diabetes mellitus and compared these variables with those of patients with psychological disturbances (n = 794) or somatic disease (n = 162). The symptoms were recorded by means of several questionnaires such as the "Giessener Beschwerdebogen" (GBB), "the Freiburger Persönlichkeitsinventar" (FPI), the German version of the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) and the German version of the State Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI). The autonomic nervous system was assessed using resting and mental stress conditions in a subset of patients with diabetes mellitus (n = 29) and psychological disturbances (n = 44)., Results: Patients suffering from diabetes mellitus and psychological disturbances showed a tendency to higher scores in GBB, STAI and STAXI. As far as psychological disturbances are concerned, the complaints experienced by patients with diabetes mellitus were found to be similar to those with somatic diseases. Both groups, however, rate clearly below those with psychological disturbances. The results of autonomic testing showed a significant disturbance in patients with diabetes mellitus with reduced sensitivity of the baroreceptor indicating autonomic neuropathy., Conclusion: Some of the physical complaints of patients with diabetes mellitus can be understood in connection with autonomic dysfunction. Moreover, an explicitly psychological view of these complaints may not be correct.

In a naturalistic setting, we studied the long-term effects of an inpatient treatment program at a psychosomatic rehabilitation clinic, where patients were assigned to a department with either a psychoanalytic or behavior therapeutic orientated treatment after one week of comprehensive diagnosis. The study is based on a self-developed questionnaire which gathers retrospective information in a broad spectrum of problem areas at the point of admittance and release (t0 and t1) as well as current assessments one year following treatment (t2). Additionally, a symptom checklist (Giessener Beschwerdebogen) and a questionnaire assessing depression (Allgemeine Depressionsskala) were prospectively employed at t0 and t2. We asked a consecutive sample of 376 patients to participate, of which 56% answered at t2. Despite limitations of the internal and external validity of the study, we were able to show that substantial improvements are maintained following treatment for both therapies at one-year follow-up, whereas only small difference are found between the outcomes of the two different schools implemented in the clinic.