Introduction to the special issue on the efficacy and effectiveness of couple and family interventions: Evidence base update 2010–2019

Author(s):  
Andrea K. Wittenborn ◽  
Kendal Holtrop
2020 ◽  
pp. 531-537
Author(s):  
Juliana Onwumere ◽  
Elizabeth Kuipers

Families can play an important role in supporting individuals living with psychosis disorders and helping to facilitate their improved outcomes. This chapter, offered by Juliana Onwumere and Elizabeth Kuipers, provides an overview of the literature reporting on family involvement in the care of adults with lived experiences of psychosis, the impact of the caregiving role on carer well-being, and the predictive links between caregiving relationships and key patient outcomes including relapse. The chapter reports on the application of family interventions, the evidence base supporting its application and inclusion in treatment guidelines, and implementation issues.


2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dörte Bemme ◽  
Laurence J Kirmayer

In recent years, efforts in Global Mental Health (GMH) have evolved alongside critical engagement with the field's claims and interventions. GMH has shifted its agenda and epistemological underpinnings, increased its evidence base, and joined other global policy platforms such as the Sustainable Development Goals. This editorial introduction to a thematic issue traces the recent shifts in the GMH agenda and discusses the changing construct of “mental health” as GMH moves away from a categorical biomedical model toward dimensional and transdiagnostic approaches and embraces digital technologies. We highlight persistent and emerging lines of inquiry and advocate for meaningful interdisciplinary engagement. Taken together, the articles in this special issue of Transcultural Psychiatry provide a snapshot of current interdisciplinary work in GMH that considers the socio-cultural and historical dimensions of mental health important and proposes reflexive development of interventions and implementation strategies.


2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 395-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Kent

Practical relevance A number of systemic diseases are associated with neurological deficits. Most systemic diseases that impact on the nervous system result in multifocal neurological signs; however, isolated deficits can also be observed. This article reviews the clinical signs, pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment and prognosis of four important systemic diseases with neurological consequences: feline infectious peritonitis, toxoplasmosis, hypertension and hepatic encephalopathy. Clinical challenges Early recognition of systemic signs of illness in conjunction with neurological deficits will allow for prompt diagnosis and treatment. While neurological examination of the feline patient can undoubtedly be challenging, hopefully the accompanying articles in this special issue will enable the clinician to approach these cases with more confidence. Evidence base The veterinary literature contains numerous reports detailing the impact of systemic disease on the nervous system. Unfortunately, very few references provide detailed descriptions of large cohorts of affected cats. This review summarises the literature underpinning the four key diseases under discussion.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 3075
Author(s):  
Tara Donker ◽  
Annet Kleiboer

The present Special Issue of Journal of Clinical Medicine includes a series of important papers that aim to further the evidence base of innovative technological advances in the screening and treatment of mental health, and to further our understanding of their implications for mental health care [...]


Author(s):  
Hilde Tubex ◽  
Anna Eriksson

The main driver for this special issue was a profound concern about prison research and its future. The development of penal policy these days seems to be driven by levers such as increasing ‘law and order’ discourse which claims that the use of imprisonment is legitimate and that ‘prison works’; neo-liberal punitiveness in the implementation of imprisonment; and a managerial focus on ‘what works’ in prisons. This situation carries the risks that statutory agencies and academic researchers are drifting apart, which might jeopardise both the future of prison research and the evidence base of penal policy.The focus of this special issue is not on the ‘findings’ of prison research but, more importantly, on ‘how’ we do it and ‘why’ we do it certain ways, including the many legitimate concerns around access, choice of method, managing field work and communicating results, as well as ethical dilemmas that arise in all of these situations. We provide space for this very important discussion, reflecting not only the practical challenges of researching a total institution but also the politics which permeates every stage of such research. We invite you, the reader, to join us in this conversation.Download the PDF file from this page to find out more about this special edition.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tania M. Lincoln ◽  
Anya Pedersen

There are numerous psychological approaches to psychosis that differ in focus, specificity and formats. These include psychodynamic, humanistic, cognitive-behavioural and third-wave-approaches, psychoeducation, various types of training-based approaches and family interventions. We briefly describe the main aims and focus of each of these approaches, followed by a review of their evidence-base in regard to improvement in symptoms, relapse and functioning. We conducted a systematic search for meta-analyses dating to 2017 for each of the approaches reviewed. Where numerous meta-analyses for an approach were available, we selected the most recent, comprehensive and methodologically sound ones. We found convincing short- and long-term evidence for cognitive behavioural approaches if the main aim is to reduce symptom distress. Evidence is also strong for psychoeducative family interventions that include skills training if the main aim is to reduce relapse and rehospitalisation. Acceptance and commitment therapy, mindfulness-based approaches, meta-cognitive and social skills training, as well as systemic family interventions, were also found to be efficacious, depending on the outcome of interest, but meta-analyses for these approaches were based on a comparatively lower number of outcome studies and a narrower selection of outcome measures. We found no convincing evidence for psychodynamic approaches, humanistic approaches or patient-directed psychoeducation (without including the family). An array of evidence-based psychological therapies is available for psychotic disorders from which clinicians and patients can choose, guided by the strength of the evidence and depending on the outcome area focused on. Increased effort is needed in terms of dissemination and implementation of these therapies into clinical practice. Meta-analyses show convincing evidence for CBT if the main target is psychotic symptoms. Meta-analyses show convincing evidence for family interventions if the main target is relapse. Effects are promising for ACT, mindfulness-based and systemic approaches, but more research is needed. The array of effective approaches allows clinicians and patients to select the most appropriate one. Meta-analyses show convincing evidence for CBT if the main target is psychotic symptoms. Meta-analyses show convincing evidence for family interventions if the main target is relapse. Effects are promising for ACT, mindfulness-based and systemic approaches, but more research is needed. The array of effective approaches allows clinicians and patients to select the most appropriate one.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document