首页> 外文期刊>Psychotherapy >Comparing two methods of identifying alliance rupture events
【24h】

Comparing two methods of identifying alliance rupture events

机译:比较确定联盟破裂事件的两种方法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

This study compared two methods of detecting ruptures in therapy sessions, a procedure based on a self-report measure, the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI), and an observational Rupture Resolution Rating System (3RS). We anticipated that the 3RS would detect more ruptures than the WAI. We examined the longitudinal data of 38 patient-therapist dyads in a cognitive-behavioral therapy condition. The sample included cases that did not complete treatment (dropped cases) as well as good-outcome and poor-outcome cases. At the end of each session, patients completed the WAI self-report questionnaire. Six judges were trained to observe and detect the occurrence of ruptures, and then rated 201 videotaped sessions. Longitudinal statistical models were applied to the data retrieved from the WAI questionnaires completed by patients. We found discrepancies in the ability of the two methods to detect rupture events with the observational 3RS detecting more ruptures than the WAI. Thus, the use of observational systems for the detection of alliance ruptures is crucial for effectively assessing the quality of the therapeutic alliance over the course of treatment. Furthermore, observational systems proven to detect ruptures can be used to improve clinical practice and training of new clinicians.
机译:这项研究比较了两种在治疗过程中检测破裂的方法,一种基于自我报告测量的程序,工作联盟清单(WAI)和观察性破裂分辨率评估系统(3RS)。我们预计3RS会比WAI探测到更多的破裂。我们检查了在认知行为治疗条件下的38个患者治疗师二联的纵向数据。样本包括未完成治疗的病例(放弃的病例)以及好结果和差结果。在每个疗程结束时,患者填写WAI自我报告调查表。培训了六名法官以观察和发现破裂的发生,然后对201场录像进行了评分。纵向统计模型应用于从患者填写的WAI问卷中检索到的数据。我们发现两种方法检测破裂事件的能力存在差异,而观察性3RS检测的破裂比WAI多。因此,使用观察系统检测联盟破裂对于有效评估治疗过程中治疗联盟的质量至关重要。此外,经证明可检测破裂的观察系统可用于改善临床实践和培训新的临床医生。

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