4.2 Article

Cognitive-behavioural intervention for depression after stroke: Five single case studies on effects and feasibility

Journal

NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL REHABILITATION
Volume 19, Issue 2, Pages 208-222

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09602010802091159

Keywords

Cognitive-behavioural therapy; Stroke; Depressive symptoms; Intervention; Single case

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of the study was to investigate whether or not a cognitive-behavioural intervention for depression after stroke has an effect and is feasible. A single-subject quasi experimental design (SSED) was used with an AB design and follow-up. The participants were five first episode stroke patients attending outpatient rehabilitation in a rehabilitation centre in The Netherlands. Mood and quality of life were measured on four occasions over four weeks (baseline phase A). During the eight week intervention phase (B) a visual analogue measure of mood was administered three times a week. Immediately after the intervention, and one and three months later, the baseline measures were repeated. The intervention (phase B) was based on cognitive-behavioural principles: recognising negative thoughts and challenging them, learning principles of relaxation, and planning of pleasurable activities. Following intervention three patients reported they had improved, three patients reported a minor improvement in quality of life, and four patients reported a more positive mood. Three months later three patients reported fewer depressive symptoms. Both patients and therapist were positive about the intervention and three months later, in daily life, all patients still applied the strategies. It was concluded that despite some ambiguous results, it seems that the cognitive-behavioural intervention has an effect on patients' mood. The intervention was rated as feasible by both patients and therapists.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available