Empirically validated interventions for adult disorders

The movement toward evidence-based practice in psychology and medicine should offer few problems in cognitive-behavior therapies because it is consistent with the principles by which they have been developed and disseminated. However, the criteria for assessing empirical status, including the heavy emphasis on manualized treatments, need close examination. A possible outcome of the evidence-based movement would be to focus on the application of manualized treatments in both training and clinical practice; problems with that approach are discussed. Commitment to evidence-based treatment should also include comparisons between psychological and pharmacological interventions, so that rational health care decisions can be made. Psychologists should not be afraid of following the evidence, even when it supports treatments that are not cognitive-behavioral in stated orientation. Such results should be taken as an opportunity for theoretical development and new empirical inquiry rather than be a cause for concern.

Models of supervision : from theory to practice

This chapter will address psychodynamic, cognitive-behavioural, and developmental models in supervision by initially considering the historical underpinnings of each and then examining in turn some of the key processes that are evident in the supervisory relationships. Case studies are included where appropriate to highlight the application of theory to practice and several processes are fully elaborated over all models to enable a contemporary view of style and substance in the supervision context.

Mental health outcomes for unemployed individuals who attend occupational skills / personal development training programs

Four studies report on outcomes for long-term unemployed individuals who attend occupational skills/personal development training courses in Australia. Levels of distress, depression, guilt, anger, helplessness, positive and negative affect, life satisfaction and self esteem were used as measures of well-being. Employment value, employment expectations and employment commitment were used as measures of work attitude. Social support, financial strain, and use of community resources were used as measures of life situation. Other variables investigated were causal attribution, unemployment blame, levels of coping, self efficacy, the personality variable of neuroticism, the psycho-social climate of the training course, and changes to occupational status. Training courses were (a) government funded occupational skills-based programs which included some components of personal development training, and (b) a specially developed course which focused exclusively on improving well-being, and which utilised the cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) approach. Data for all studies were collected longitudinally by having subjects complete questionnaires pre-course, post-course, and (for 3 of the 4 studies) at 3 months follow-up, in order to investigate long-term effects. One of the studies utilised the case-study methodology and was designed to be illustrative and assist in interpreting the quantitative data from the other 3 evaluations. The outcomes for participants were contrasted with control subjects who met the same sel~tion criteria for training. Results confirmed earlier findings that the experiences of unemployment were negative. Immediate effects of the courses were to improve well-being. Improvements were greater for those who attended courses with higher levels of personal development input, and the best results were obtained from the specially developed CBT program. Participants who had lower levels of well-being at the beginning of the courses did better as a result of training than those who were already functioning at higher levels. Course participants gained only marginal advantages over control subjects in relation to improving their occupational status. Many of the short term well-being gains made as a result of attending the courses were still evident at 3 months follow-up. Best results were achieved for the specially designed CBT program. Results were discussed in the context of prevailing theories of Ynemployment (Fryer, 1986,1988; Jahoda, 1981, 1982; Warr, 1987a, 1987b).

Low intensity CBT by mail

Introduction: There are many low intensity (LI) cognitive behavoural therapy (CBT) solutions to the problem of limited service access. In this chapter, we aim to discuss a relatively low-technology approach to access using standard postal services-CBT by mail, or M-CBT. Bibliotherapies including M-CBT teach key concepts and self-management techniques, together with screening tools and forms to structure home practice. M-CBT differs from other bibliotherapies by segmenting interventions and mailing them at regular intervals. Most involve participants returning copies of monitoring forms or completed handouts. Therapist feedback is provided, often in personal letters that accompany the printed materials. Participants may also be given access to telephone or email support. ----- ----- M-CBT clearly fulfills criteria for an LI CBT (see Bennett-Levy et al., Chapter 1, for a definition of LI interventions). Once written, they involve little therapist time and rely heavily on self-management. However, content and overall treatment duration need not be compromised. Long-term interventions with multiple components can be delivered via this method, provided their content can be communicated in letters and engagement is maintained.

Implementing low intensity CBT in case management of clients with severe mental illness

In a previous chapter (Dean and Kavanagh, Chapter 37), the authors made a case for applying low intensity (LI) cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) to people with serious mental illness (SMI). As in other populations, LI CBT interventions typically deal with circumscribed problems or behaviours. LI CBT retains an emphasis on self-management, has restricted content and segment length, and does not necessarily require extensive CBT training. In applying these interventions to SMI, adjustments may be needed to address cognitive and symptomatic difficulties often faced by these groups. What may take a single session in a less affected population may require several sessions or a thematic application of the strategy within case management. In some cases, the LI CBT may begin to appear more like a high-intensity (HI) intervention, albeit simple and with many LI CBT characteristics still retained. So, if goal setting were introduced in one or two sessions, it could clearly be seen as an LI intervention. When applied to several different situations and across many sessions, it may be indistinguishable from a simple HI treatment, even if it retains the same format and is effectively applied by a practitioner with limited CBT training. ----- ----- In some ways, LI CBT should be well suited to case management of patients with SMI. treating staff typically have heavy workloads, and find it difficult to apply time-consuming treatments (Singh et al. 2003). LI CBT may allow provision of support to greater numbers of service users, and allow staff to spend more time on those who need intensive and sustained support. However, the introduction of any change in practice has to address significant challenges, and LI CBT is no exception. ----- ----- Many of the issues that we face in applying LI CBT to routine case management in a mnetal health service and their potential solutions are essentially the same as in a range of other problem domains (Turner and Sanders 2006)- and, indeed, are similar to those in any adoption of innovation (Rogers 2003). Over the last 20 years, several commentators have described barriers to implementing evidence-based innovations in mental health services (Corrigan et al. 1992; Deane et al. 2006; Kavanagh et al. 1993). The aim of the current chapter is to present a cognitive behavioural conceptualisation of problems and potential solutions for dissemination of LI CBT.

Adapting low intensity CBT interventions for clients with severe mental illness

Many people with severe mental illness (SMI) such as schizophrenia, whose psychotic symptoms are effectively managed, continue to experience significant functional problems. This chapter argues that low intensity (LI) cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT; e.g. for depression, anxiety, or other issues) is applicable to these clients, and that LI CBT can be consistent with long-term case management. However, adjustments to LI CBT strategies are often necessary and boundaries between LI CBT and high intensity (HI) CBT (with more extensive practitioner contact and complexity) may become blurred. Our focus is on LI CBT's self-management emphasis, its restricted content and segment length, and potential use after limited training. In addition to exploring these issues, it draws on the authors' Collaborative Recovery (CR; Oades et al. 2005) and 'Start Over and Survive' programs (Kavanagh et al. 2004) as examples. ----- ----- Evidence for the effectiveness of LI CBT with severe mental illness is often embedded within multicomponent programs. For example, goal setting and therapeutic homework are common components of such programs, but they can also be used as discrete LI CBT interventions. A review of 40 randomised controlled trials involving recipients with schizophrenia or other sever mental illnesses has identified key components of illness management programs (Mueser et al. 2002). However, it is relatively rare for specific components of these complex interventions to be assessed in isolation. Given these constraints, the evidence for specific LI CBT interventions with severe mental ilnness is relatively limited.

Brief motivational interviewing for depression and anxiety

Motivational interviewing (MI)can be applied as a brief, low intensity (LI) intervention of 1-4 individualised sessions (typically 45-60 minutes in duration), including screening, assessment feedback, and psycho-education. MI is a client-centred, directive therapeutic style that enhances readiness for change by helping clients explore and resolve ambivalence (Miller and Rollnick 2002). A summary of the key components of brief MI interventions is provided in Table 16.1. There is a well-established evidence base for MI in the treatment of substance misuse (particularly alcohol misuse; Moyer et al. 2002), as well as a growing evidence for the use of MI in the treatment of other mental disorders (e.g. depression, PTSD, OCD), as well as suicidality and physical health problems (Hettema et al. 2005). Brief MI intervention can be delivered as a standalone treatment or as a motivational prelude to pharmacological and/or other psychological treatments (Hettema et al. 2005). MI has been used as an accompaniment to cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) in the treatment of both depression and anxiety for resolving ambivalence about change and developing strategies for responding to resistance (e.g. treatment attendance, homework/medication compliance; Arkowitz et al. 2008a, 2008b). This chapter will describe how to apply brief MI interventions to the treatment of depression and anxiety as applied to the case of Megan (see Box 16.1) along with some of the challenges and potential solutions to applying MI in practice.

The psychosocial factors influencing aggressive driving behaviour

Many drivers in highly motorised countries believe that aggressive driving is increasing. While the prevalence of the behaviour is difficult to reliably identify, the consequences of on-road aggression can be severe, with extreme cases resulting in property damage, injury and even death. This research program was undertaken to explore the nature of aggressive driving from within the framework of relevant psychological theory in order to enhance our understanding of the behaviour and to inform the development of relevant interventions. To guide the research a provisional ‘working’ definition of aggressive driving was proposed encapsulating the recurrent characteristics of the behaviour cited in the literature. The definition was: “aggressive driving is any on-road behaviour adopted by a driver that is intended to cause physical or psychological harm to another road user and is associated with feelings of frustration, anger or threat”. Two main theoretical perspectives informed the program of research. The first was Shinar’s (1998) frustration-aggression model, which identifies both the person-related and situational characteristics that contribute to aggressive driving, as well as proposing that aggressive behaviours can serve either an ‘instrumental’ or ‘hostile’ function. The second main perspective was Anderson and Bushman’s (2002) General Aggression Model. In contrast to Shinar’s model, the General Aggression Model reflects a broader perspective on human aggression that facilitates a more comprehensive examination of the emotional and cognitive aspects of aggressive behaviour. Study One (n = 48) examined aggressive driving behaviour from the perspective of young drivers as an at-risk group and involved conducting six focus groups, with eight participants in each. Qualitative analyses identified multiple situational and person-related factors that contribute to on-road aggression. Consistent with human aggression theory, examination of self-reported experiences of aggressive driving identified key psychological elements and processes that are experienced during on-road aggression. Participants cited several emotions experienced during an on-road incident: annoyance, frustration, anger, threat and excitement. Findings also suggest that off-road generated stress may transfer to the on-road environment, at times having severe consequences including crash involvement. Young drivers also appeared quick to experience negative attributions about the other driver, some having additional thoughts of taking action. Additionally, the results showed little difference between males and females in the severity of behavioural responses they were prepared to adopt, although females appeared more likely to displace their negative emotions. Following the self-reported on-road incident, evidence was also found of a post-event influence, with females being more likely to experience ongoing emotional effects after the event. This finding was evidenced by ruminating thoughts or distraction from tasks. However, the impact of such a post-event influence on later behaviours or interpersonal interactions appears to be minimal. Study Two involved the quantitative analysis of n = 926 surveys completed by a wide age range of drivers from across Queensland. The study aimed to explore the relationships between the theoretical components of aggressive driving that were identified in the literature review, and refined based on the findings of Study One. Regression analyses were used to examine participant emotional, cognitive and behavioural responses to two differing on-road scenarios whilst exploring the proposed theoretical framework. A number of socio-demographic, state and trait person-related variables such as age, pre-study emotions, trait aggression and problem-solving style were found to predict the likelihood of a negative emotional response such as frustration, anger, perceived threat, negative attributions and the likelihood of adopting either an instrumental or hostile behaviour in response to Scenarios One and Two. Complex relationships were found to exist between the variables, however, they were interpretable based on the literature review findings. Factor analysis revealed evidence supporting Shinar’s (1998) dichotomous description of on-road aggressive behaviours as being instrumental or hostile. The second stage of Study Two used logistic regression to examine the factors that predicted the potentially hostile aggressive drivers (n = 88) within the sample. These drivers were those who indicated a preparedness to engage in direct acts of interpersonal aggression on the road. Young, male drivers 17–24 years of age were more likely to be classified as potentially hostile aggressive drivers. Young drivers (17–24 years) also scored significantly higher than other drivers on all subscales of the Aggression Questionnaire (Buss & Perry, 1992) and on the ‘negative problem orientation’ and ‘impulsive careless style’ subscales of the Social Problem Solving Inventory – Revised (D’Zurilla, Nezu & Maydeu-Olivares, 2002). The potentially hostile aggressive drivers were also significantly more likely to engage in speeding and drink/drug driving behaviour. With regard to the emotional, cognitive and behavioural variables examined, the potentially hostile aggressive driver group also scored significantly higher than the ‘other driver’ group on most variables examined in the proposed theoretical framework. The variables contained in the framework of aggressive driving reliably distinguished potentially hostile aggressive drivers from other drivers (Nagalkerke R2 = .39). Study Three used a case study approach to conduct an in-depth examination of the psychosocial characteristics of n = 10 (9 males and 1 female) self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers. The self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers were aged 24–55 years of age. A large proportion of these drivers reported a Year 10 education or better and average–above average incomes. As a group, the drivers reported committing a number of speeding and unlicensed driving offences in the past three years and extensive histories of violations outside of this period. Considerable evidence was also found of exposure to a range of developmental risk factors for aggression that may have contributed to the driver’s on-road expression of aggression. These drivers scored significantly higher on the Aggression Questionnaire subscales and Social Problem Solving Inventory Revised subscales, ‘negative problem orientation’ and ‘impulsive/careless style’, than the general sample of drivers included in Study Two. The hostile aggressive driver also scored significantly higher on the Barrett Impulsivity Scale – 11 (Patton, Stanford & Barratt, 1995) measure of impulsivity than a male ‘inmate’, or female ‘general psychiatric’ comparison group. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey (Carlson, 1982), the self-confessed hostile aggressive drivers scored equal or higher scores than the comparison group of incarcerated individuals on the subscale measures of chemical abuse, thought disturbance, anti-social tendencies and self-depreciation. Using the Carlson Psychological Survey personality profiles, seven participants were profiled ‘markedly anti-social’, two were profiled ‘negative-explosive’ and one was profiled as ‘self-centred’. Qualitative analysis of the ten case study self-reports of on-road hostile aggression revealed a similar range of on-road situational factors to those identified in the literature review and Study One. Six of the case studies reported off-road generated stress that they believed contributed to the episodes of aggressive driving they recalled. Intense ‘anger’ or ‘rage’ were most frequently used to describe the emotions experienced in response to the perceived provocation. Less frequently ‘excitement’ and ‘fear’ were cited as relevant emotions. Notably, five of the case studies experienced difficulty articulating their emotions, suggesting emotional difficulties. Consistent with Study Two, these drivers reported negative attributions and most had thoughts of aggressive actions they would like to take. Similarly, these drivers adopted both instrumental and hostile aggressive behaviours during the self-reported incident. Nine participants showed little or no remorse for their behaviour and these drivers also appeared to exhibit low levels of personal insight. Interestingly, few incidents were brought to the attention of the authorities. Further, examination of the person-related characteristics of these drivers indicated that they may be more likely to have come from difficult or dysfunctional backgrounds and to have a history of anti-social behaviours on and off the road. The research program has several key theoretical implications. While many of the findings supported Shinar’s (1998) frustration-aggression model, two key areas of difference emerged. Firstly, aggressive driving behaviour does not always appear to be frustration driven, but can also be driven by feelings of excitation (consistent with the tenets of the General Aggression Model). Secondly, while the findings supported a distinction being made between instrumental and hostile aggressive behaviours, the characteristics of these two types of behaviours require more examination. For example, Shinar (1998) proposes that a driver will adopt an instrumental aggressive behaviour when their progress is impeded if it allows them to achieve their immediate goals (e.g. reaching their destination as quickly as possible); whereas they will engage in hostile aggressive behaviour if their path to their goal is blocked. However, the current results question this assertion, since many of the hostile aggressive drivers studied appeared prepared to engage in hostile acts irrespective of whether their goal was blocked or not. In fact, their behaviour appeared to be characterised by a preparedness to abandon their immediate goals (even if for a short period of time) in order to express their aggression. The use of the General Aggression Model enabled an examination of the three components of the ‘present internal state’ comprising emotions, cognitions and arousal and how these influence the likelihood of a person responding aggressively to an on-road situation. This provided a detailed insight into both the cognitive and emotional aspects of aggressive driving that have important implications for the design of relevant countermeasures. For example, the findings highlighted the potential value of utilising Cognitive Behavioural Therapy with aggressive drivers, particularly the more hostile offenders. Similarly, educational efforts need to be mindful of the way that person-related factors appear to influence one’s perception of another driver’s behaviour as aggressive or benign. Those drivers with a predisposition for aggression were more likely to perceive aggression or ‘wrong doing’ in an ambiguous on-road situation and respond with instrumental and/or hostile behaviour, highlighting the importance of perceptual processes in aggressive driving behaviour.

Neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors as pharmacotherapeutic targets for the treatment of alcohol use disorders

Alcohol use disorders (AUDs) are complex and developing effective treatments will require the combination of novel medications and cognitive behavioral therapy approaches. Epidemiological studies have shown there is a high correlation between alcohol consumption and tobacco use, and the prevalence of smoking in alcoholics is as high as 80% compared to about 30% for the general population. Both preclinical and clinical data provide evidence that nicotine administration increases alcohol intake and nonspecific nicotinic receptor antagonists reduce alcohol-mediated behaviors. As nicotine interacts specifically with the neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) system, this suggests that nAChRs play an important role in the behavioral effects of alcohol. In this review, we discuss the importance of nAChRs for the treatment of AUDs and argue that the use of FDA approved nAChR ligands, such as varenicline and mecamylamine, approved as smoking cessation aids may prove to be valuable treatments for AUDs. We also address the importance of combining effective medications with behavioral therapy for the treatment of alcohol dependent individuals.

What's in your tool box?

This is a professional practice paper for Psychology practitioners to reflect on their skills and therapeutic practices. A Master- practitioner model or Artizan - apprentice analogy is used to understand the development of a practicing psychologist from his/her "salad days" (when we are green [Shakespeare- Anthony and Cleopatra]) to our Autumn years in the profession.

Observed family interaction and outcome in patients with first-admission psychoses

Families of 52 first-admission patients diagnosed with a severe psychiatric disorder were videotaped interacting with the patient. Behavioral coding was used to derive several indices of interaction: base rates of positive and negative behavior by patients and relatives, cumulative affect of patients and relatives (the difference between the rates of positive and negative behaviors), and classification of families as affect-regulated or unregulated. Family-affect regulation reflects positive cumulative affect by both people in a given interaction. Six months after hospital discharge patients were assessed on occurrence of relapse, global functioning, severity of psychiatric symptoms, and quality of life. Relative to affect-unregulated family interaction, affect-regulated interaction predicted significantly fewer relapses, better global functioning, fewer positive and negative psychiatric symptoms, and higher patient quality of life. Most of the predictions by family-affect regulation were independent of

The factor structure of the COPE Questionnaire in a sample of clinically depressed and anxious adults

The Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced is a multidimensional scale designed to assess how people respond to stress. The COPE has been validated in a variety of populations displaying variations in factor structure. However, in terms of mental health populations, it has only been validated in alcohol-dependent samples. This paper investigated the factor structure of the COPE in a sample of adults diagnosed with depression and anxiety. Two hundred and seventy-one patients attending cognitive behaviour therapy for anxiety and depression completed the COPE. Confirmatory factor analysis found a poor fit for both lower order and higher order factors based upon the Lyne and Roger (2000) study. Exploratory factor analyses identified six primary subscales (Active Planning, Social Support, Denial, Acceptance, Disengagement, Restraint) which explained approximately 60% of the variance in coping. These 6 subscales may assist researchers and clinicians to validly measure coping in anxious and depressed adults.