...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Eating Disorders >Process evaluation of the MOSAIC trial: treatment experience of two psychological therapies for out-patient treatment of Anorexia Nervosa
【24h】

Process evaluation of the MOSAIC trial: treatment experience of two psychological therapies for out-patient treatment of Anorexia Nervosa

机译：MOSAIC试验的过程评估：两种心理疗法对神经性厌食症的门诊治疗经验

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

BackgroundThis study is part of a series of process evaluations within the MOSAIC Trial (Maudsley Outpatient Study of Treatments for Anorexia Nervosa and Related Conditions). This randomised controlled trial (RCT) compared two psychological treatments, the Maudsley Model for Treatment of Adults with Anorexia Nervosa (MANTRA) and Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM) for adult outpatients with Anorexia Nervosa. The present process study integrates quantitative (treatment acceptability and credibility) and qualitative (written) feedback to evaluate patients’ treatment experiences. MethodAll 142 MOSAIC participants were asked to (a) rate treatment acceptability and credibility on visual analogue scales (VAS) at six and 12?months post-randomisation, and (b) provide written feedback regarding their views on their treatment at 12?months. Transcripts were first analysed thematically and then rated according to the global valence of feedback (positive, mixedegative). Results114/142 (80.3?%) MOSAIC participants provided VAS data and 82 (57.7?%) provided written feedback. At 12?months, MANTRA patients gave significantly higher acceptability and credibility ratings compared to SSCM patients. A significantly higher proportion of MANTRA patients provided written feedback. MANTRA patients also tended to write in more detail and to give globally more positive feedback when compared to individuals receiving SSCM. Qualitative themes suggest that patients experienced the two treatments differently in terms of characteristics and outcomes. ConclusionsThis study highlights the benefits of incorporating qualitative and quantitative data into RCT process evaluations. MANTRA patients were more willing to express their views on treatment and generally felt more positively about this than those receiving SSCM.
机译：背景本研究是MOSAIC试验（神经性厌食症及相关病症治疗的Maudsley门诊研究）中一系列过程评估的一部分。这项随机对照试验（RCT）比较了两种心理治疗方法，即用于治疗成人神经性厌食症的Maudsley模型（MANTRA）和用于成人神经性厌食症门诊的专家支持临床管理（SSCM）。本过程研究整合了定量（治疗可接受性和可信度）和定性（书面）反馈，以评估患者的治疗经验。方法要求所有142位MOSAIC参与者（a）在随机化后6个月和12个月时以视觉模拟量表（VAS）评估治疗的可接受性和可信度，并（b）提供有关其对12个月时的治疗看法的书面反馈。首先对成绩单进行主题分析，然后根据总体反馈价（正，混合/负）进行评分。结果114/142（80.3％）的MOSAIC参与者提供了VAS数据，而82（57.7％）的参与者提供了书面反馈。与SSCM患者相比，MANTRA患者在12个月时的可接受性和可信度等级显着更高。 MANTRA患者提供书面反馈的比例明显更高。与接受SSCM的患者相比，MANTRA患者还倾向于写得更详细，并在全球范围内给予更多积极的反馈。定性主题表明，患者在特征和预后方面经历了两种不同的治疗方式。结论本研究突出了将定性和定量数据纳入RCT过程评估的好处。与接受SSCM的患者相比，MANTRA患者更愿意表达他们对治疗的看法，并且通常对此感到更加积极。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号