4.5 Article

Cognitive behavioural intervention for adults with anxiety complications of asthma: Prospective randomised trial

期刊

RESPIRATORY MEDICINE
卷 106, 期 6, 页码 802-810

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2012.02.006

关键词

Asthma; Cognitive behavioural therapy; Psychotherapy; Randomised controlled trial; Panic fear

资金

  1. Department of Health for England
  2. Wales Asthma Management Programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: High levels of asthma-related fear and panic exacerbate asthma symptoms and complicate the management of asthma. Asthma-specific fear may be reduced by a cognitive behavioural intervention. We aimed to test if there is a reduction in asthma-specific fear after cognitive behavioural intervention compared with routine treatment. Methods: Adults with asthma registered with family doctors in Sheffield UK were screened for anxiety and 94 highly anxious patients were randomly allocated to receive either a cognitive behavioural intervention to improve self-management of their anxiety (n = 50) or routine clinical care (n = 44). Asthma-specific fear at the end of treatment and at six month follow up were the primary endpoints. Service usage in the six months prior to and six months following the intervention was monitored to allow estimation of costs. Data were analysed by intention to treat. Findings: At the end of treatment, there was a significantly greater reduction in asthma-specific fear for people in the CBT group compared with controls. At six months after treatment the reduction in asthma-specific fear in the CBT group was increased and the difference between treatment and control group was statistically significant. Service use costs were not reduced in the CBT group. Interpretation: A brief cognitive behavioural intervention was found to have efficacy in reducing asthma-specific panic fear immediately after treatment and at 6 months follow up. There was no cost advantage to cognitive behavioural treatment. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.5
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