4.7 Article

Efficacy of an outpatient treatment for prolonged grief disorder: A randomized controlled clinical trial

期刊

JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS
卷 167, 期 -, 页码 56-63

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2014.05.035

关键词

Bereavement; Prolonged grief disorder; Complicated grief; Persistent complex bereavement-related disorder; Randomized controlled trial; Psychotherapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Abnormal forms of grief, currently referred to as complicated grief or prolonged grief disorder, have been discussed extensively in recent years. While the diagnostic criteria are still debated, there is no doubt that prolonged grief is disabling and may require treatment. To date, few interventions have demonstrated efficacy. Methods: We investigated whether outpatients suffering from prolonged grief disorder (PGD) benefit from a newly developed integrative cognitive behavioural therapy for prolonged grief (PG-CBT). A total of 51 patients were randomized into two groups, stratified by the type of death and their relationship to the deceased; 24 patients composed the treatment group and 27 patients composed the wait list control group (WG). Treatment consisted of 20-25 sessions. Main outcome was change in grief severity; secondary outcomes were reductions in general psychological distress and in comorbidity. Results: Patients on average had 2.5 comorbid diagnoses in addition to PGD. Between group effect sizes were large for the improvement of grief symptoms in treatment completers (Cohen's d=1.61) and in the intent-to-treat analysis (d=132). Comorbid depressive symptoms also improved in PG-CBT compared to WG. The completion rate was 79% in PG-CBT and 89% in WG. Limitations: The major limitations of this study were a small sample size and that PG-CBT took longer than the waiting time. Conclusions: PG-CBT was found to be effective with an acceptable dropout rate. Given the number of bereaved people who suffer from PGD, the results are of high clinical relevance. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据