1,104
Views
18
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
EMPIRICAL PAPER

Goldilocks on the couch: Moderate levels of psychodynamic and process-experiential technique predict outcome in psychodynamic therapy

, &
Pages 307-317 | Received 08 Nov 2013, Accepted 29 Sep 2014, Published online: 03 Nov 2014
 

Abstract

Objectives: Greater symptom change is often assumed to follow greater technique use, a “more is better” approach. We tested whether psychodynamic techniques, as well as common factors and techniques from other orientations, had a curvilinear relation to outcome (i.e., whether moderate or “just right” intervention levels predict better outcome than lower or higher levels). Methods: For 33 patients receiving supportive-expressive psychodynamic psychotherapy for depression, interventions were assessed at Week 4 using the multitheoretical list of therapeutic interventions and symptoms were rated with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Results: Moderate psychodynamic and experiential techniques predicted greater symptom change compared to lower or higher levels. Conclusion: This “Goldilocks effect” suggests a more complex relation of intervention use to outcome might exist.

Ziel: Es wird oft angekommen, dass eine stärkere Symptomveränderung einem häufigeren Einsatz von Techniken folgt, eine „mehr ist besser“ Herangehensweise. Wir untersuchten, ob psychodynamische Techniken, ebenso wie allgemeine Faktoren und Techniken aus anderen Orientierungen, einen kurvlinearen Zusammenhang zum Therapieergebnis aufweisen (d.h., ob ein moderates oder „genau richtiges“ Interventionsniveau ein besseres Ergebnis vorhersagt als niedrigere oder höhere Niveaus.) Methoden: Bei 33 Patienten, die eine unterstützend-expressive psychodynamische Psychotherapie gegen ihre Depression erhielten, wurden die Interventionen in der vierten Woche anhand einer multitheoretischen Liste therapeutischer Interventions und die Symptome anhand der Hamilton Rating Skala für Depression erfasst. Ergebnis: Moderate psychodynamische und erlebnisorientierte Techniken sagten im Vergleich zu niedrigeren und höheren Niveaus eine stärkere Symptomveränderung vorher. Schlussfolgerung: Dieser „Goldilocks Effekt“ legt nahe, dass ein komplexerer Zusammenhang zwischen der Verwendung von Interventionen und das Ergebnis existieren mag.

Obiettivi: spesso si pensa che un maggior cambiamento sintomatologico faccia seguito ad un maggior uso della tecnica, un approccio "più è meglio". Abbiamo valutato se le tecniche psicodinamiche, così come i fattori comuni e le tecniche provenienti da altri orientamenti, possano avere una relazione curvilinea all'esito (vale a dire, se livelli di intervento discreti o "appena giusti" predicono risultati migliori rispetto ai livelli inferiori o superiori). Metodi: sono stati valutati gli interventi effettuati alla settimana 4 in 33 pazienti trattati con psicoterapia psicodinamica supportivo-espressiva per la depressione, utilizzando un elenco multiteoretico degli interventi terapeutici; i sintomi sono stati valutati con la Hamilton Rating Scale per la Depressione. Risultati: tecniche discrete psicodinamiche ed esperienziali prevedevano un maggior cambiamento sintomatologico rispetto ai livelli inferiori o superiori. Conclusione: Questo "effetto Riccioli d'oro" suggerisce che può esistere una relazione più complessa tra interventi usati ed esito.

Objetivos: Assume-se muitas vezes que grandes mudanças ao nível dos sintomas decorrem de um maior uso de técnicas, numa abordagem “mais é melhor”. Testou-se se as técnicas psicodinâmicas, bem como os fatores comuns e técnicas de outras orientações, tinham uma relação curvilínea com o resultado (i.e., se níveis moderados ou “simplesmente suficientes” de intervenção prediziam melhor os resultados do que níveis inferiores ou superiores). Métodos: Um total de 33 pacientes foi sujeito a psicoterapia psicodinâmica de suporte expressivo para a depressão. As intervenções foram avaliadas na Semana 4 utilizando-se a lista multi-teórica de intervenções terapêuticas, e os sintomas terapêuticos foram classificados com a Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Resultados: As técnicas psicodinâmicas e experienciais moderadas predisseram uma maior mudança sintomatológica quando comparadas a níveis inferiores ou superiores. Conclusão: Este “efeito Goldilocks” sugere que pode existir uma relação mais complexa entre o uso da intervenção e os resultados.

目標:吾人常假設使用越多技術,則症狀的改變程度越大,即「越多越好」的概念,研究者欲針對心理動力取向與取自其他取向之共同因素與技術,檢驗其與療效之間是否有著曲線式的關係(亦即,是否中度或「恰到好處」的介入程度,比低度或高度之介入更能預測好的療效)。方法:33位因憂鬱而接受支持—表達式心理動力治療的病患,在第四週以多元理論取向檢核表對治療介入進行評估,並以漢彌頓憂鬱評量表評估其症狀。結果:相較於低度或高度運用技術,中度的心理動力式與體驗式技術能預測更佳的症狀變化。結論:由此「金髮姑娘效果」,推測介入之運用與療效間可能存在著更複雜的關係。

Funding

This work was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health [grant number R01 061410] to Jacques P. Barber. Pfizer provided medication and pill-placebo for the RCT from which these data were drawn.

Notes

1 Dynamic psychotherapy for substance use may operate differently than for other psychiatric disorders due to the externalizing and antisocial personality styles commonly found in substance users. These traits run contrary to the rationale of dynamic psychotherapy that internal conflict creates problems and so may require different strategies (perhaps either very forceful or very ginger intervention use) compared to psychodynamic work with more internalizing patients.

2 The process-experiential item representing role-playing was excluded from these analyses due the fact it was only found to occur in one session in this sample.

Additional information

Funding

Funding: This work was supported by the National Institute of Mental Health [grant number R01 061410] to Jacques P. Barber. Pfizer provided medication and pill-placebo for the RCT from which these data were drawn.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.