Cargando…

F50. METACOGNITIVE REFLECTION AND INSIGHT THERAPY: A MULTICENTER RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

BACKGROUND: Difficulties in metacognition, or the ability to think about thinking and feeling, form an impediment to daily life functioning for persons with a psychotic disorder. In the past years, our research team has undertaken a multicenter, randomized controlled trial to investigate the efficac...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Jong, Steven, van Donkersgoed, Rozanne, Timmerman, Marieke, Rot, Marije aan het, Wunderink, Lex, Arends, Johan, van der Gaag, Mark, Aleman, Andre, Lysaker, Paul, Pijnenborg, Marieke
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5888450/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby017.581
_version_ 1783312525146718208
author de Jong, Steven
van Donkersgoed, Rozanne
Timmerman, Marieke
Rot, Marije aan het
Wunderink, Lex
Arends, Johan
van der Gaag, Mark
Aleman, Andre
Lysaker, Paul
Pijnenborg, Marieke
author_facet de Jong, Steven
van Donkersgoed, Rozanne
Timmerman, Marieke
Rot, Marije aan het
Wunderink, Lex
Arends, Johan
van der Gaag, Mark
Aleman, Andre
Lysaker, Paul
Pijnenborg, Marieke
author_sort de Jong, Steven
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Difficulties in metacognition, or the ability to think about thinking and feeling, form an impediment to daily life functioning for persons with a psychotic disorder. In the past years, our research team has undertaken a multicenter, randomized controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of a new intervention designed to assist persons with a psychotic disorder to improve their metacognitive functioning (Metacognitive Reflection and Insight Therapy; MERIT). METHODS: After training thirteen therapists from seven mental healthcare institutes in the Netherlands, participants (n=70) with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were included and randomized into either the MERIT condition or a treatment-as-usual condition. Persons randomized into the MERIT condition received 40 sessions of metacognitive psychotherapy, while persons in the control condition received care as usual. Measures of primary outcome (metacognition), secondary outcomes (empathy, depression, insight, stigma, social functioning, symptoms and quality of life) and control variables (neurocognition, premorbid IQ) were collected at baseline (pre), directly after therapy end (post) and at 6-month follow-up. After the follow-up measurement, research assistants were unblinded in order to conduct an interview with the participants regarding their experience of the therapy. RESULTS: Multilevel intention-to-treat and sensitivity analyses demonstrated that in both groups metacognition had improved, with no significant differences between the groups (χ2 (1)=0.435, p=.51). At 6-month follow-up, however, participants in the MERIT condition demonstrated they had continued to improve on metacognition, while scores from the control condition dipped back down (χ2 (1)=3.763, p=.05). Gains mainly seemed to be on metacognitive Self-Reflectivity (χ2 (1)=10.295, p=.001). No effects were found on secondary measures in either condition. DISCUSSION: During this presentation, we will discuss our findings and the therapy protocol, including a discussion of the clinical relevance of the current intervention, analysis of post-therapy interviews surrounding the participant’s experiences of the therapy, as well as practical limitations that were encountered during this five-year trial. NOTE: S. de Jong (speaker) and R.J.M van Donkersgoed are early career scientists, expected to defend their dissertations in 2018.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5888450
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58884502018-04-11 F50. METACOGNITIVE REFLECTION AND INSIGHT THERAPY: A MULTICENTER RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL de Jong, Steven van Donkersgoed, Rozanne Timmerman, Marieke Rot, Marije aan het Wunderink, Lex Arends, Johan van der Gaag, Mark Aleman, Andre Lysaker, Paul Pijnenborg, Marieke Schizophr Bull Abstracts BACKGROUND: Difficulties in metacognition, or the ability to think about thinking and feeling, form an impediment to daily life functioning for persons with a psychotic disorder. In the past years, our research team has undertaken a multicenter, randomized controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of a new intervention designed to assist persons with a psychotic disorder to improve their metacognitive functioning (Metacognitive Reflection and Insight Therapy; MERIT). METHODS: After training thirteen therapists from seven mental healthcare institutes in the Netherlands, participants (n=70) with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were included and randomized into either the MERIT condition or a treatment-as-usual condition. Persons randomized into the MERIT condition received 40 sessions of metacognitive psychotherapy, while persons in the control condition received care as usual. Measures of primary outcome (metacognition), secondary outcomes (empathy, depression, insight, stigma, social functioning, symptoms and quality of life) and control variables (neurocognition, premorbid IQ) were collected at baseline (pre), directly after therapy end (post) and at 6-month follow-up. After the follow-up measurement, research assistants were unblinded in order to conduct an interview with the participants regarding their experience of the therapy. RESULTS: Multilevel intention-to-treat and sensitivity analyses demonstrated that in both groups metacognition had improved, with no significant differences between the groups (χ2 (1)=0.435, p=.51). At 6-month follow-up, however, participants in the MERIT condition demonstrated they had continued to improve on metacognition, while scores from the control condition dipped back down (χ2 (1)=3.763, p=.05). Gains mainly seemed to be on metacognitive Self-Reflectivity (χ2 (1)=10.295, p=.001). No effects were found on secondary measures in either condition. DISCUSSION: During this presentation, we will discuss our findings and the therapy protocol, including a discussion of the clinical relevance of the current intervention, analysis of post-therapy interviews surrounding the participant’s experiences of the therapy, as well as practical limitations that were encountered during this five-year trial. NOTE: S. de Jong (speaker) and R.J.M van Donkersgoed are early career scientists, expected to defend their dissertations in 2018. Oxford University Press 2018-04 2018-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5888450/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby017.581 Text en © Maryland Psychiatric Research Center 2018. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Abstracts
de Jong, Steven
van Donkersgoed, Rozanne
Timmerman, Marieke
Rot, Marije aan het
Wunderink, Lex
Arends, Johan
van der Gaag, Mark
Aleman, Andre
Lysaker, Paul
Pijnenborg, Marieke
F50. METACOGNITIVE REFLECTION AND INSIGHT THERAPY: A MULTICENTER RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title F50. METACOGNITIVE REFLECTION AND INSIGHT THERAPY: A MULTICENTER RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title_full F50. METACOGNITIVE REFLECTION AND INSIGHT THERAPY: A MULTICENTER RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title_fullStr F50. METACOGNITIVE REFLECTION AND INSIGHT THERAPY: A MULTICENTER RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title_full_unstemmed F50. METACOGNITIVE REFLECTION AND INSIGHT THERAPY: A MULTICENTER RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title_short F50. METACOGNITIVE REFLECTION AND INSIGHT THERAPY: A MULTICENTER RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
title_sort f50. metacognitive reflection and insight therapy: a multicenter randomized controlled trial
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5888450/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby017.581
work_keys_str_mv AT dejongsteven f50metacognitivereflectionandinsighttherapyamulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT vandonkersgoedrozanne f50metacognitivereflectionandinsighttherapyamulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT timmermanmarieke f50metacognitivereflectionandinsighttherapyamulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT rotmarijeaanhet f50metacognitivereflectionandinsighttherapyamulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT wunderinklex f50metacognitivereflectionandinsighttherapyamulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT arendsjohan f50metacognitivereflectionandinsighttherapyamulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT vandergaagmark f50metacognitivereflectionandinsighttherapyamulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT alemanandre f50metacognitivereflectionandinsighttherapyamulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT lysakerpaul f50metacognitivereflectionandinsighttherapyamulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT pijnenborgmarieke f50metacognitivereflectionandinsighttherapyamulticenterrandomizedcontrolledtrial