Search

Psychotherapy for individuals with psychosis is an effective treatment that promotes recovery in various ways. While there is strong quantitative evidence across modalities, less is known from the patient's perspective. There are many varied forms of psychotherapy, and gaining the patient's perspective can improve understanding of salient elements of psychotherapy and increase engagement, ultimately improving recovery rates. The purpose of this review is to identify and integrate data from published studies of patient perspectives of psychotherapy for psychosis to understand essential elements across approaches, differences between approaches, and how psychotherapy impacts recovery. We aimed to understand further: what are the perceptions about individual psychotherapy from the perspective of individuals with psychosis? The current study was a systematic review using PRISMA guidelines of studies that included qualitative interviews with persons with experiences of psychosis who participated in psychotherapy. All three authors participated in the literature search using Pubmed, APA PsycInfo, and Psychiatry Online. We identified N = 33 studies. Studies included cognitive therapies, acceptance and mindfulness approaches, trauma therapies, metacognitive therapy, and music therapy. All studies reported participants' perceived benefit with the therapeutic relationship as especially salient. Participants described diverse aspects of objective (e.g., symptoms, functioning) and subjective (e.g., self-experience or quality of life) recovery improvements, with perceived mechanisms of change, and with music therapy having some unique benefits. Participants also reported challenges and suggestions for improvement. Study findings highlight the salient aspects of psychotherapy identified by patients that may help therapists to individualize and improve approaches to psychotherapy when working with individuals experiencing psychosis. Overall, findings support the potential for integrative psychotherapy approaches for maximal treatment personalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Schizophrenia may reflect an interactive network of disturbances in cognition. In this study we have examined the relationship between two forms of cognition: metacognition and social cognition among a sample with schizophrenia (n = 41), early episode psychosis (n = 37), and major depression (n = 30) gathered in Moscow, Russia. Methods: Metacognition was assessed with the Metacognition Assessment Scale‐Abbreviated. Social cognition was assessed with the Ekman 60 Faces Test and the Interpersonal Reactivity Index. Verbal memory and global psychopathology were included as potential covariates. Results: Partial correlations controlling for demographics, neurocognition, and psychopathology revealed greater metacognitive capacity was linked to better facial emotion recognition and perspective taking in the prolonged schizophrenia group. Greater metacognitive capacity in the early psychosis group was linked with greater facial emotion recognition. Metacognition and social cognition were not related to one another in the depression group. Conclusions: Social cognition and metacognition may be uniquely related in psychosis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of BPA - Applied Psychology Bulletin (Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata) is the property of Giunti O.S. Organizzazioni Speciali and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Recovery from serious mental illness (SMI) is a complex process that can be supported by different levels of mental health care, for example, individual psychotherapy. Current individual evidence-based psychotherapy for persons with SMI is often focused on specific objective recovery outcomes, including symptom reduction and functional improvement, and requires a minimum level of insight. Less common but also important are broader, more flexible approaches that allow clients to explore their needs and challenges, without predetermined goals or a certain level of insight. The current article aims to describe (1) the development of metacognitive reflection and insight therapy (MERIT), an evidence-based psychotherapy that is focused on self-determination, or self-directed recovery, and (2) how MERIT advances care for persons with SMI by addressing a significant gap in the field for the treatment of people with SMI with limited metacognitive capacity and insight, offering an adaptable approach emphasizing self-directed recovery. MERIT utilizes a metacognitive framework that is guided by flexible key elements and an interpersonal environment. Training MERIT therapists early in their careers may be helpful in providing a holistic view of SMI to promote self-directed recovery in ways that are personalized and meaningful for each person. MERIT training has been completed in multiple countries across different levels of training (e.g., internship and psychology practicum). Professionals such as psychologists and social workers have effectively played a role in MERIT development and dissemination, which ultimately strives to advance psychotherapy for a wide range of individuals with SMI. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Metacognitive reflection and insight therapy (MERIT) is an one-on-one intervention that targets insight with the aim to help people with serious mental illness develop more integrated ideas about themselves and others in order to respond to their psychological and social challenges more adaptively. There is a growing body of evidence on MERIT's effectiveness. Considering the clinical demand for more cost-effective group psychotherapies, we modified the original individual MERIT format to a group-based intervention (MERITg) for application in inpatient and outpatient psychiatric settings. Thirty-one participants (inpatient = 10; outpatient = 21) with serious mental illness were surveyed on their experience of MERITg, which was offered adjunctively to their routine clinical care. Program evaluation measures were used to assess the feasibility and acceptance of the group. Across locations, more than half of all participants attended more than one group. Participants reported attending the group initially because they thought writing would be helpful, and further reported that they liked the group because they enjoyed writing and the discussion, and that they found it interesting to hear the perspectives and writings of others. Findings further support the need for future research on the efficacy and effectiveness of the group and its relationship to changes in metacognitive capacity and recovery. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).