Search

Objective: This randomized prospective study examines durability of improvement in general symptomatology, psychosocial functioning and interpersonal problems, and compares the long-term efficacy of analytic and systemic group psychotherapy in women 1 year after completion of treatment for childhood sexual abuse., Design and Methods: Women (n = 106) randomly assigned to analytic or systemic psychotherapy completed the Symptom Checklist-90-R, Global Assessment of Functioning, Global Life Quality, Registration Chart Questionnaire, and Flashback Registration at pre-treatment, post-treatment, and at a 1-year follow-up., Results: Post-treatment gains were significant for both treatment modalities on all measures, but significantly larger after systemic therapy. Significant treatment response was maintained 1-year post-treatment, but different trajectories were observed: 1 year after treatment completion, improvements for analytic therapy were maintained, whereas they decreased after systemic therapy, resulting in no statistically significant difference in gains between the groups at the 1-year follow-up. Despite maintaining significant gains, more than half of the patients remained above cut-off for caseness concerning general symptomatology at post-treatment and at 1-year follow-up., Conclusion: The findings stress the importance of long-term follow-up data in effect studies. Different trajectories were associated with the two treatments, but improvement in the two treatment groups did not differ significantly at the 1-year follow-up. Implications of the difference in trajectories for treatment planning are discussed., Practitioner Points: Both analytic and systemic group therapy proved efficient in improving general symptomatology, psychosocial functioning, and interpersonal problems in women with a history of CSA and gains were maintained at a 1-year follow-up. Despite maintaining statistically significant gains at the 1-year follow-up, 54% of the patients remained above the cut-off for caseness with respect to general symptomatology, which may indicate a need for further treatment. Different pre-post follow-up treatment trajectories were observed between the two treatment modalities. Thus, while systemic group therapy showed a significantly better outcome immediately after termination, gains in the systemic treatment group decreased during follow-up, while gains were maintained during follow-up in analytic group therapy., (© 2013 The British Psychological Society.)

Background: Continuous feedback on patient improvement and the therapeutic alliance may reduce the number of dropouts and increase patient outcome. There are, however, only three published randomized trials on the effect of feedback on the treatment of eating disorders, showing inconclusive results, and there are no randomized trials on the effect of feedback in group therapy. Accordingly the current randomized clinical trial, initiated in September 2012 at the outpatient clinic for eating disorders at Stolpegaard Psychotherapy Centre, aims to investigate the impact of continuous feedback on attendance and outcome in group psychotherapy., Methods/design: The hypothesis is that continuous feedback to both patient and therapist on treatment progress and alliance will increase attendance and treatment outcome. The trial is set up using a randomized design with a minimum of 128 patients allocated to either an experimental or control group at a ratio of 1:1. The experimental group will receive standard treatment (systemic and narrative group psychotherapy) with feedback intervention, whereas the control group will receive standard treatment only. The participants are diagnosed with bulimia nervosa, binge eating disorder, or an eating disorder not otherwise specified, according to the DSM-IV. In the experimental group feedback to the participants, based on the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS) and the Group Session Rating Scale (GSRS), is actively added to standard treatment. The ORS assesses areas of life functioning known to change as a result of therapeutic intervention. The GSRS assesses key dimensions of effective therapeutic relationships. In the control group, the patients fill out the Outcome Rating Scale only, and feedback is not provided.The primary outcome is the rate of attendance to treatment sessions. The secondary outcome is the severity of eating disorder symptoms. Exploratory outcomes are the level of psychological and social functioning, and suicide or self-harm. This is measured with the ORS, Symptom Check List, WHO-Five Wellbeing Index, Sheehan Disability Scale and a modified version of the Self-Harm Inventory., Discussion: If the results will confirm the hypothesis, this trial will support feedback as a way to improve group treatment attendance for outpatients with eating disorders., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01693237.

Background: A primary challenge in mental health services is a high rate of non-attendance (i.e. no-show and drop-out) for patients referred to treatment for psychiatric disorders., Aim: The aim of the present study was to assess the influence of demographic and clinical variables on mental health treatment attendance and to investigate differences in predictors for no-shows and drop-outs., Methods: A naturalistic study of 2473 non-psychotic consecutive patients offered psychotherapeutic treatment at a community mental health centre in Denmark. Fifteen demographic and clinical variables were recorded at assessment. Bivariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to investigate the associations between these variables and no-show and drop-out., Results: Of the 2473 participants, 668 (27.0%) did not show up for treatment, whereas 290 (11.7%) dropped out of treatment. Regression analysis showed that the significant predictors of treatment no-show were: age below 25, no more than the compulsory 9 years of school education, no sick leave, a diagnosis of personality disorder, a Global Assessment of Functioning score (GAF) below 40 or above 70, no previous psychiatric/psychological treatment, no use of antidepressants and substance abuse. The significant predictors of treatment drop-out were: age below 45, no more than the compulsory 9 years of school education or up to 11 years of school education, no vocational/university education, unemployment and substance abuse., Conclusion: No-show was predicted by both demographic and clinical factors, whereas drop-out was predicted by demographic factors and substance abuse as the only clinical factor. Results and strategies to reduce non-attendance are discussed.

The socio-demographics and psychiatric diagnoses in a clinical sample of women with a history of mainly intrafamilial childhood sexual abuse (CSA) are described. The women were referred to five psychiatric centres for incest group psychotherapy. Data were gathered using interviews and self-administered questionnaires. Over a period of 2.5 years, 385 women with mean age of 33 years were referred with a history of CSA. Three hundred and forty of those had experienced intrafamilial CSA. The average age at first abuse was 6.8 years, and it lasted for a mean of 6 years. The women had been abused by a mean of 1.5 perpetrators. A quarter of the women had been subjected to violence in connection with the sexual abuse. The likelihood of violence having occurred rose significantly if there was more than one perpetrator and/or if penetration had been part of the sexual abuse. Violence was less common if the perpetrator was a brother. The women suffered from a broad spectrum of psychiatric symptoms and illnesses. More than half of the women had previously received psychiatric treatment. Compared to a random sample of the general female population, these women were less advantaged with regards to education, financial circumstances and cohabitation. The results emphasize the importance of offering comprehensive social and psychiatric intervention to help reducing the problems following CSA in women.