Renewed Feedback-Informed Group Treatment for Patients with Anxiety and Depressive Disorders
-
Published:2024-01-30
Issue:
Volume:
Page:
-
ISSN:0894-587X
-
Container-title:Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Adm Policy Ment Health
Author:
Koementas-de Vos Marjolein M. W.ORCID, Tiemens Bea, Engelsbel Fabiana, de Jong Kim, Witteman Cilia L. M., Nugter M. Annet
Abstract
AbstractFeedback-Informed Group Treatment (FIGT) shows promise for improving outcomes, but results are mixed. The aim was investigating the feasibility, acceptability and effects of renewed FIGT on clinical outcomes and therapy processes. In a quasi-experimental pilot study, 65 patients with anxiety or depressive disorders and 15 therapists of interpersonal psychotherapy or cognitive behavioural therapy groups using renewed FIGT were included. Renewed FIGT contained three additions compared to the previous tool: (1) personalized goals along with the Outcome Questionnaire-45 (OQ-45), (2) therapists’ training, coaching and intervision, and (3) instructions to actively use feedback in the group. Data on feasibility, acceptability, outcomes and process factors were analysed and compared with those of historical cohorts using only OQ-45 feedback or no feedback, using descriptive, multilevel and covariance statistical analyses. Feasibility was mostly improved, with patients experiencing more feedback discussions and better usability compared to only OQ-45 feedback. At least two thirds of the patients and therapists give preference to using feedback in the future. At the end of the study, therapists were less convinced that the OQ-45 and goals were able to detect change. Renewed FIGT did not improve effectiveness on clinical outcomes. Compared to no feedback, patients experienced more cohesion, engagement and less avoidance, but improved less on depressive symptoms. Even when renewed FIGT is more feasible and usable than only OQ-45 feedback and associated with more cohesiveness and engagement, it may not automatically lead to improved effectiveness on clinical outcomes in short-term group therapy. Implications and future directions are described.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,Pshychiatric Mental Health
Reference55 articles.
1. Barkowski, S., Schwartze, D., Strauss, B., Burlingame, G. M., & Rosendahl, J. (2020). Efficacy of group psychotherapy for anxiety disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychotherapy Research, 30(8), 965–982. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2020.1729440 2. Bickman, L., Douglas, S. R., De Andrade, A. R., Tomlinson, M., Gleacher, A., Olin, S., & Hoagwood, K. (2016). Implementing a measurement feedback system: A tale of two sites. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 43(3), 410–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-015-0647-8 3. Björkman, T., & Svensson, B. (2005). Quality of life in people with severe mental illness. Reliability and validity of the Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life (MANSA). Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 59(4), 302–306. 4. Burlingame, G. M., McClendon, D. T., & Yang, C. (2018a). Cohesion in group therapy: A meta-analysis. Psychotherapy, 55(4), 384–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000173 5. Burlingame, G. M., Seebeck, J. D., Janis, R. A., Whitcomb, K. E., Barkowski, S., Rosendahl, J., & Strauss, B. (2016). Outcome differences between individual and group formats when identical and nonidentical treatments, patients, and doses are compared: A 25-year meta-analytic perspective. Psychotherapy, 53(4), 446–461. https://doi.org/10.1037/pst0000090
|
|