Is it magic? An exploratory randomized controlled trial comparing imagery rescripting and cognitive restructuring in the treatment of depression

2021 ◽  
pp. 101721
Author(s):  
Olivia Y.T. Ma ◽  
Barbara C.Y. Lo
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cognitive Restructuring ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Treatment Of Depression ◽  
Imagery Rescripting

Imagery Rescripting and Imaginal Exposure in Nightmare Disorder Compared to Positive Imagery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Carolin Schmid ◽  
Kathrin Hansen ◽  
Tana Kröner-Borowik ◽  
Regina Steil
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Active Control ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Individual Treatment ◽  
Single Individual ◽  
Imaginal Exposure ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Imagery Rescripting ◽  
Nightmare Disorder

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Both imagery rescripting and imaginal exposure have been proven to be effective in the treatment of chronic nightmares when compared to a waitlist condition. Little is known about their comparative efficacy and their efficacy compared to an active control. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> The aims of this study were to compare the two treatments to one another and to positive imagery as an active control, and to explore covariates of the treatment effect. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> In this single-blinded randomized controlled trial, 96 patients with nightmare disorder (idiopathic nightmares) from an outpatient clinic were randomly assigned to a single individual treatment session of rescripting, exposure, or positive imagery and 4 weeks of practice at home. The primary outcome was nightmare distress, and the secondary outcomes were nightmare frequency, nightmare effects, self-efficacy, and general psychopathology. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Nightmare distress was reduced in all groups (imagery rescripting: Cohen’s <i>d</i> = –1.04, imaginal exposure: <i>d</i> = –0.68, positive imagery: <i>d</i> = –0.57), as were nightmare frequency, nightmare effects, and psychopathology. Self-efficacy was enhanced. No differential treatment effects were found on any primary or secondary measure. Treatment gains were not associated with demographic or disorder characteristics, baseline values, treatment credibility, or the number of practice sessions. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> Even short nightmare treatments are effective regardless of personal characteristics, and different interventions produce similar results. Future research should aim to clarify the mechanisms of action. Health care should make more use of these powerful and easy-to-administer nightmare treatments.

A randomized, controlled trial of duloxetine alone vs. duloxetine plus a telephone intervention in the treatment of depression

2008 ◽  
Vol 108 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 33-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
David G.S. Perahia ◽  
Deborah Quail ◽  
Paul Gandhi ◽  
Daniel J. Walker ◽  
Robert C. Peveler
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Telephone Intervention ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Treatment Of Depression

A randomized controlled trial of exposure therapy and cognitive restructuring for posttraumatic stress disorder.

2008 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 695-703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard A. Bryant ◽  
Michelle L. Moulds ◽  
Rachel M. Guthrie ◽  
Suzanne T. Dang ◽  
Julie Mastrodomenico ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
Posttraumatic Stress ◽  
Stress Disorder ◽  
Exposure Therapy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Cognitive Restructuring ◽  
Randomized Controlled
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document