3.8 Article

Expanding Traditional Paradigms: An Integrative Approach to the Psychotherapeutic Treatment of Psychosis

期刊

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOTHERAPY INTEGRATION
卷 28, 期 2, 页码 154-170

出版社

AMER PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1037/int0000083

关键词

psychosis; CBT; psychodynamic theory; integration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The psychiatric treatment of individuals experiencing psychosis often follows the traditional medical model, focusing on symptom management, risk reduction, psychopharmacology, and stabilization. Frequently, this focus fails to integrate various psychological approaches to the unique personal narratives, the diverse cultures, and the person-centered needs of the individual. Though some individuals with psychotic disorders are helped by psychotropic medications, many experience limited benefit with respect to their psychotic symptoms, yet struggle with distressing side effects (Lencer et al., 2011; Leucht et al.. 2009). Notably, there are psychological approaches, such as cognitive-behavioral therapy, that are evidence-based treatments for the experience of psychosis, which should be considered as treatment planning is developed (Turkington et al.. 2008). Additionally, other approaches such as psychodynamic therapy have also shown some positive outcomes with people with psychosis (Karon & Vandenbos, 2004) and offer additional therapeutic value to the complexity of the treatment of psychosis. Therefore, integration of psychodynamic and cognitive-behavioral approaches may be most beneficial. In addition, other integrative components should consider that many individuals with severe mental illness have dealt with stigma, oppression. and marginalization both in society and in the mental health system. We offer an integrative approach to the treatment of the experience of psychosis, with both cognitive-behavioral and psychodynamic foundations, as well as recovery-oriented care concepts, cultural implications, and the personal narratives of each individual.

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

3.8
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