Search

A time-lagged design was used to examine how the perceptions of alliance to the group as a whole by the other group members at an earlier point in the group were related to an individual group member’s perceptions of alliance to the group as a whole at a later point in the group. We also examined how treatment outcome moderated this relationship. Seventy-three patients diagnosed as overweight or obese participating in 10 short-term therapy groups provided data for analyses. Group members completed measures of cohesion to the group and alliance to the group as a whole at the third, sixth, and last session of 12-session groups as well as pre- and posttest ratings on Obesity-Related Well-Being and the Outcome Questionnaire– 45. As hypothesized, earlier ratings of alliance to the group as a whole by the other group members were related to later ratings of alliance to the group as a whole by the group member. Also as hypothesized, when group members had a better outcome, there was a significant positive relationship between perceptions of alliance to the group as a whole by the other group members at an earlier point in the group and an individual group member’s perceptions of alliance to the group as a whole at a later point in time. When members had a worse outcome, there was no relationship between perceptions of alliance to the group as a whole by the other group members at an earlier point in the group and an individual group member’s perceptions of alliance to the group as a whole at a later point in the group.

To describe the multidisciplinary lifestyle intervention model used in an experimental CURIAMO (Centro Universitario Ricerca Interdipartimentale Attività Motoria) project designed to validate the short- and long-term efficacy of the model in obesity and Type 2 diabetes.Over a 3-yr period, about 1000 adults (70% diabetes-free and overweight or obese; 30% with Type 2 diabetes and overweight or obese).Age range 18-80 yr, body mass index27 kg/m2 with or without Type 2 diabetes mellitus; participants will be divided into three age groups (18-45, 45-65, 65-80 yr). The study duration will be from 5 to 6 yr: 1 yr of intervention followed by a mean follow-up period of 4 yr. In the first years, after a 4- month intensive lifestyle intervention, subjects will follow a maintenance programme. The intervention, which includes seven steps, involves the following experts: endocrinologists, sport medicine doctors or cardiologists, psychologists, dietitians, educators, nurses, exercise physiologists, and promoters of outdoor activities.The main endpoint of the study is to measure the efficacy of the lifestyle improvement intervention, defined as a loss of at least 7% of body weight combined with an increase of at least 10 MET/h-1·week-1 of energy expenditure by physical activity, after 1 yr and during the follow-up. A cost/utility analysis of the model will be made in participants with diabetes.We expect that the CURIAMO model will be highly effective, and that the aim of the intervention will be achieved in more than 70% of cases.

Background. A growing body of research has highlighted the negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on women’s mental health. Previous studies showed that women have higher levels of depression, anxiety and PTSD, and worse psychological adjustment than men, which also persisted after the earlier phase of the pandemic. This study aimed to evaluate changes in women’s psychological distress during the pandemic and to evaluate the factors that have a more significant impact in predicting women’s psychological distress. Methods. This two-wave longitudinal study (T1 = Italian first lockdown, and T2 = second phase, when the restrictive measures were eased) involved 893 women (Mage = 36.45, SD = 14.48). Participants provided demographic and health data as well as measures of psychological distress, emotion regulation processes, and ability to tolerate uncertainty. Results. No significant changes were found in women’s psychological distress between T1 and T2, i.e., during and after the first lockdown. Lower social stability status and higher maladaptive emotional coping predicted high psychological distress. Conclusions. Results showed that modifiable psychological variables play a central role in predicting distress and indicated that emotion regulation interventions might be helpful in increasing psychological resilience and mitigating the adverse impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic within the female population.

Background Although preliminary research has evidenced negative psychological consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic among the general population, little research has been carried out examining the interplay among the broader dimensions and correlates of individual distress. Via network analysis, the current study investigated the pathways that underlie some components of psychological distress and their changes over time (during and post COVID-19-related lockdown). Methods 1,129 adult participants (79.1% women) completed a two-wave online survey during and after the lockdown, and reported on variables such as depression, anxiety, stress, fear of COVID, intolerance of uncertainty, emotion regulation and social support. The networks were estimated via Gaussian Graphical Models and their temporal changes were compared through the centrality measures. Results Depression, stress, anxiety and fear of COVID formed a spatially contiguous pattern, which remained unchanged in both the two waves. After the lockdown, the fear of COVID node reduced its strength in the network, whereas inhibitory intolerance of uncertainty and emotion suppression were associated with depression. Emotion regulation was connected to depression, but not to stress and anxiety during both waves. Perceived emotional support had few connections to the other nodes. Limitations Only 32.7% of participants provided complete responses for both waves. Conclusion The COVID-19 outbreak has had a significant psychosocial impact on adults. In the context of the network approach, depressive symptoms had the highest strength and their associations to other dimensions of individual distress may be key factors in understanding the influence of exposure to the COVID-19 outbreak on mental health.

Although recent research has provided empirical support for the codevelopment of group interaction (defined as development in a common direction of perceptions of group relationships), no studies have yet investigated the "causes" of codevelopment among group members in the long term. The aim of the current study is to examine how the perceptions of an individual group member, and other group members, regarding group relationships influence each other over the course of treatment. We analyzed group data from 168 adult obese patients who participated in (1 of 20) 12-session therapy groups for weight management. Group relationships were measured by the Group Questionnaire (Krogel et al., 2013), which was administered to group members in early, middle and late group sessions. The longitudinal version of the group actor-partner interdependence model was used to analyze the influence among members. Results showed that there is no mutual influence in the codevelopment of both positive bonding and negative relationship. However, positive bonding of other group members in the middle of the group influenced positive bonding of the individual group member in the late group session. Moreover, individual group member negative relationships in early and middle sessions influenced other group member negative relationships in middle and late sessions. Finally, there was evidence of mutual influence in the codevelopment of positive working early in the group. The findings show that the process of influence among members is complex with regard to the specific dimension of the group relationship assessed and the time spent in group treatment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).