Frontiers in psychology · 2026
"Normal" vs. "difficult" cases with eating disorders: the therapists' perspective.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hartmann Armin, Lau Inga, Klose Carolin, Egenolf Milena, Zeeck Almut
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Patients with an eating disorder (ED) are considered difficult to treat. We aimed to identify the characteristics of patients with an ED, which are considered especially challenging to treat from the therapist's perspective.
METHODS: Psychotherapists with experience in ED treatment were asked to describe a "normal" as well as a "difficult" case they treated lately, using an online-survey. They described their patients by filling in a list of symptoms and their severity, on personality traits and functioning as well as a list of possible therapeutic challenges experienced over the course of treatment.
RESULTS: 127 psychotherapists were recruited. "Difficult" cases were characterized by variables which could be related to three areas: patients´ motivation (higher level of ambivalence), interactional behavior/personality traits (more antagonism) and somatic complications, such as electrolyte imbalance. Ambivalence was the strongest predictor of case difficulty, followed by patient personality. Therapist or work place characteristics were not associated with experiencing treatments as "normal" or "difficult."
DISCUSSION: In particular, aspects related to the therapeutic process and relationship characterize the group of "difficult" cases from a therapist's view.
METHODS: Psychotherapists with experience in ED treatment were asked to describe a "normal" as well as a "difficult" case they treated lately, using an online-survey. They described their patients by filling in a list of symptoms and their severity, on personality traits and functioning as well as a list of possible therapeutic challenges experienced over the course of treatment.
RESULTS: 127 psychotherapists were recruited. "Difficult" cases were characterized by variables which could be related to three areas: patients´ motivation (higher level of ambivalence), interactional behavior/personality traits (more antagonism) and somatic complications, such as electrolyte imbalance. Ambivalence was the strongest predictor of case difficulty, followed by patient personality. Therapist or work place characteristics were not associated with experiencing treatments as "normal" or "difficult."
DISCUSSION: In particular, aspects related to the therapeutic process and relationship characterize the group of "difficult" cases from a therapist's view.