首页> 外文OA文献 >Low-Intensity CBT Interventions for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Compared to Waiting List for Therapist-Led CBT : 3-Arm Randomised Controlled Trial of Clinical Effectiveness
【2h】

Low-Intensity CBT Interventions for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Compared to Waiting List for Therapist-Led CBT : 3-Arm Randomised Controlled Trial of Clinical Effectiveness

机译:强迫症的低强度CBT干预与治疗师引导的CBT等待名单相比:临床有效性的3臂随机对照试验

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is prevalent and without adequate treatment usually follows a chronic course. ‘High intensity’ cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) from a specialist therapist is current ‘best practice’. However, access is difficult because of limited numbers of therapists, and because of the disabling effects of OCD symptoms. There is a potential role for ‘low intensity’ interventions as part of a stepped care model. Low intensity interventions (written or web-based materials with limited therapist support) can be provided remotely, which has the potential to increase access. However, current evidence concerning low intensity interventions is insufficient. We aimed to determine the clinical effectiveness of two forms of low-intensity CBT prior to high-intensity CBT, in adults meeting DSM-IV criteria for OCD.
机译:强迫症(OCD)很普遍,并且没有得到适当的治疗,通常是慢性病。专业治疗师的“高强度”认知行为疗法(CBT)是当前的“最佳实践”。但是,由于治疗师的数量有限以及OCD症状的致残作用,很难获得药物。作为分级护理模型的一部分,“低强度”干预可能具有潜在作用。可以远程提供低强度干预(在治疗师支持下的书面或基于Web的材料),这可能会增加访问范围。但是,目前有关低强度干预措施的证据不足。我们旨在确定在满足OCD DSM-IV标准的成年人中,在高强度CBT之前使用两种形式的低强度CBT的临床疗效。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
代理获取

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