首页> 外文期刊>Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health >Flexible ACT & Resource-group ACT: Different Working Procedures Which Can Supplement and Strengthen Each Other. A Response#
【24h】

Flexible ACT & Resource-group ACT: Different Working Procedures Which Can Supplement and Strengthen Each Other. A Response#

机译:灵活的ACT和资源组ACT:可以相互补充和加强的不同工作程序。一个答复#

获取原文
       

摘要

This article is a response to Nordén and Norlander’s ‘Absence of Positive Results for Flexible Assertive Community Treatment. What is the next approach?’[ 1 ], in which they assert that ‘at present [there is] no evidence for Flexible ACT and… that RACT might be able to provide new impulses and new vitality to the treatment mode of ACT’. We question their analyses and conclusions. We clarify Flexible ACT, referring to the Flexible Assertive Community Treatment Manual (van Veldhuizen, 2013) [ 2 ] to rectify misconceptions. We discuss Nordén and Norlander’s interpretation of research on Flexible ACT. The fact that too little research has been done and that there are insufficient positive results cannot serve as a reason to propagate RACT. However, the Resource Group method does provide inspiration for working with clients to involve their networks more effectively in Flexible ACT.
机译:本文是对Nordén和Norlander的“缺乏积极灵活的社区治疗的积极结果”的回应。下一步的方法是什么?[1],他们断言“目前[没有]灵活ACT的证据,并且……RACT可能能够为ACT的治疗模式提供新的动力和新的活力”。我们质疑他们的分析和结论。我们通过参考《灵活自信社区治疗手册》(van Veldhuizen,2013)[2]来澄清“灵活ACT”,以纠正误解。我们讨论了Nordén和Norlander对Flexible ACT研究的解释。研究做得太少且阳性结果不足的事实不能作为传播RACT的理由。但是,资源组方法的确为与客户合作以使其网络更有效地参与Flexible ACT提供了灵感。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号