The Australian and New Zealand journal of psychiatry · 2012
Suitability and acceptability of computerised cognitive behaviour therapy for anxiety disorders in secondary care.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Carter Frances A, Bell Caroline J, Colhoun Helen C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the suitability and acceptability of computerised cognitive behaviour therapy (CCBT).
METHOD: Participants were patients who had been referred to a secondary care service in the usual manner, and then offered participation in a randomised controlled trial comparing the efficacy of CCBT with a control condition (waitlist) for patients with a current primary diagnosis of generalised anxiety disorder, panic disorder or social phobia. Data were collected regarding the recruitment and retention of patients, and patient ratings (anchored Likert scales) of treatment credibility, treatment satisfaction, treatment acceptability and telephone support.
RESULTS: A total of 1141 referrals were received by the secondary care service. Of the 1141, 748 (66%) were not suitable for the study, 178 (16%) declined to participate and 127 (11%) were not contactable. Therefore, of the 1141 patients referred to the secondary care service, only 88 patients (8%) were eligible and consenting for the study. The single most common reason for patients not being suitable for the study was that the referral was urgent. In a clinical setting where CCBT could be used alongside clinical management, many of these patients may have been suitable for CCBT. Of the patients randomised to treatment (n = 40), 65% completed treatment. Drop-out rates were not significantly different across diagnostic groups. The single most commonly cited reason for not completing treatment was 'too busy'. Patient ratings of treatment were typically favourable (credibility, satisfaction, acceptability and telephone support).
CONCLUSIONS: CCBT was typically rated favourably by patients referred to a secondary care service and randomised to treatment. However, only a small minority of patients was eligible and consenting for the trial. Therefore, while CCBT may be an acceptable treatment, its suitability for secondary care settings remains unclear.
METHOD: Participants were patients who had been referred to a secondary care service in the usual manner, and then offered participation in a randomised controlled trial comparing the efficacy of CCBT with a control condition (waitlist) for patients with a current primary diagnosis of generalised anxiety disorder, panic disorder or social phobia. Data were collected regarding the recruitment and retention of patients, and patient ratings (anchored Likert scales) of treatment credibility, treatment satisfaction, treatment acceptability and telephone support.
RESULTS: A total of 1141 referrals were received by the secondary care service. Of the 1141, 748 (66%) were not suitable for the study, 178 (16%) declined to participate and 127 (11%) were not contactable. Therefore, of the 1141 patients referred to the secondary care service, only 88 patients (8%) were eligible and consenting for the study. The single most common reason for patients not being suitable for the study was that the referral was urgent. In a clinical setting where CCBT could be used alongside clinical management, many of these patients may have been suitable for CCBT. Of the patients randomised to treatment (n = 40), 65% completed treatment. Drop-out rates were not significantly different across diagnostic groups. The single most commonly cited reason for not completing treatment was 'too busy'. Patient ratings of treatment were typically favourable (credibility, satisfaction, acceptability and telephone support).
CONCLUSIONS: CCBT was typically rated favourably by patients referred to a secondary care service and randomised to treatment. However, only a small minority of patients was eligible and consenting for the trial. Therefore, while CCBT may be an acceptable treatment, its suitability for secondary care settings remains unclear.