Defense Mechanisms and Treatment Response in Depressed Inpatients.

The study investigated the extent to which defensive functioning and defense mechanisms predict clinically meaningful symptomatic improvement within brief psychodynamic psychotherapy for recurrent and chronic depression in an inpatient setting. Treatment response was defined as a reduction in symptom severity of 46% or higher from the baseline score on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). A subsample of 41 patients (19 responders and 22 non-responders) from an RCT was included. For each case, two sessions (the second and the penultimate) of brief inpatient psychodynamic psychotherapy (a manualized 12-session therapy program developed in Lausanne) were transcribed and then coded using the Defense Mechanism Rating Scales (DMRS) and the Psychotic Defense Mechanism Rating Scales (P-DMRS), an additional scale developed to study psychotic defenses. Results showed that defensive functioning and mature and immature defense changed during psychotherapy and predicted treatment response. Patient's defenses observed throughout therapy also predicted treatment response at 12-month follow-up. The addition of psychotic defenses allows a better prediction of the treatment response. Overall, these results are in line with previous research and provide further validation of defensive functioning as a predictor of outcomes and a mechanism of change in psychotherapy

Oncology Clinicians' Defenses and Adherence to Communication Skills Training with Simulated Patients: an Exploratory Study

The aim of this exploratory study was to assess the impact of clinicians' defense mechanisms—defined as self-protective psychological mechanisms triggered by the affective load of the encounter with the patient—on adherence to a communication skills training (CST). The population consisted of oncology clinicians (N = 31) who participated in a CST. An interview with simulated cancer patients was recorded prior and 6months after CST. Defenses were measured before and after CST and correlated with a prototype of an ideally conducted interview based on the criteria of CST-teachers. Clinicians who used more adaptive defense mechanisms showed better adherence to communication skills after CST than clinicians with less adaptive defenses (F(1, 29) = 5.26, p = 0.03, d = 0.42). Improvement in communication skills after CST seems to depend on the initial levels of defenses of the clinician prior to CST. Implications for practice and training are discussed. Communication has been recognized as a central element of cancer care [1]. Ineffective communication may contribute to patients' confusion, uncertainty, and increased difficulty in asking questions, expressing feelings, and understanding information [2, 3], and may also contribute to clinicians' lack of job satisfaction and emotional burnout [4]. Therefore, communication skills trainings (CST) for oncology clinicians have been widely developed over the last decade. These trainings should increase the skills of clinicians to respond to the patient's needs, and enhance an adequate encounter with the patient with efficient exchange of information [5]. While CSTs show a great diversity with regard to their pedagogic approaches [6, 7], the main elements of CST consist of (1) role play between participants, (2) analysis of videotaped interviews with simulated patients, and (3) interactive case discussion provided by participants. As recently stated in a consensus paper [8], CSTs need to be taught in small groups (up to 10-12 participants) and have a minimal duration of at least 3days in order to be effective. Several systematic reviews evaluated the impact of CST on clinicians' communication skills [9-11]. Effectiveness of CST can be assessed by two main approaches: participant-based and patient-based outcomes. Measures can be self-reported, but, according to Gysels et al. [10], behavioral assessment of patient-physician interviews [12] is the most objective and reliable method for measuring change after training. Based on 22 studies on participants' outcomes, Merckaert et al. [9] reported an increase of communication skills and participants' satisfaction with training and changes in attitudes and beliefs. The evaluation of CST remains a challenging task and variables mediating skills improvement remain unidentified. We recently thus conducted a study evaluating the impact of CST on clinicians' defenses by comparing the evolution of defenses of clinicians participating in CST with defenses of a control group without training [13]. Defenses are unconscious psychological processes which protect from anxiety or distress. Therefore, they contribute to the individual's adaptation to stress [14]. Perry refers to the term "defensive functioning” to indicate the degree of adaptation linked to the use of a range of specific defenses by an individual, ranging from low defensive functioning when he or she tends to use generally less adaptive defenses (such as projection, denial, or acting out) to high defensive functioning when he or she tends to use generally more adaptive defenses (such as altruism, intellectualization, or introspection) [15, 16]. Although several authors have addressed the emotional difficulties of oncology clinicians when facing patients and their need to preserve themselves [7, 17, 18], no research has yet been conducted on the defenses of clinicians. For example, repeated use of less adaptive defenses, such as denial, may allow the clinician to avoid or reduce distress, but it also diminishes his ability to respond to the patient's emotions, to identify and to respond adequately to his needs, and to foster the therapeutic alliance. Results of the above-mentioned study [13] showed two groups of clinicians: one with a higher defensive functioning and one with a lower defensive functioning prior to CST. After the training, a difference in defensive functioning between clinicians who participated in CST and clinicians of the control group was only showed for clinicians with a higher defensive functioning. Some clinicians may therefore be more responsive to CST than others. To further address this issue, the present study aimed to evaluate the relationship between the level of adherence to an "ideally conducted interview”, as defined by the teachers of the CST, and the level of the clinician' defensive functioning. We hypothesized that, after CST, clinicians with a higher defensive functioning show a greater adherence to the "ideally conducted interview” than clinicians with a lower defensive functionin

New, but improved? Comparison between first and revised version of the Helping Alliance questionnaire

There is a consensus in the psychotherapy research field to consider the therapeutic alliance, broadly defined as the mutual collaboration between the therapist and the patient, as a robust and consistent predictor of therapy outcome. There is little agreement, however, on the best way to operationalise and measure it. Several instruments are available, each of them displaying some unique features so that investigators have problems to choose among them on the basis of considerations other than ease of administration, continuity with previous research or availability. One of the early self-report measures and widely used instruments was the Helping Alliance questionnaire (HAq-I) (Alexander and Luborsky, 1986). In recent years, we have become aware that it was limited by the presence of items that were explicitly assessing early symptomatic improvement and by the fact that all the items were worded positively. A revised version (HAq-II) was developed (Luborsky et al., 1996), guided by two main goals: (1) to reduce the inclination of the scale toward measuring early symptomatic improvement and thus confusing these two dimensions, and (2) to better incorporate the various aspects of the alliance related to the collaborative effort of patient and therapist. The new instrument includes 5 from the 11 items of the HAq-I and 14 new items - 5 of them worded negatively. The aim of the study is twofold: to validate the French version of the new HAq-II and to investigate empirically to what extent the HAq-II has improved over the HAq-I. The sample included 60 self-referred outpatients assigned to a Brief Psychodynamic Investigation (BPI), a manual-based investigation procedure in four sessions guided by psychodynamic principles. We looked at the correlation between the two HAq (I and II) and the Working Alliance Inventory (WAI), patient pretreatment characteristics (SCL-90, HDRS, HAMA, IIP) and outcome (SCL-90, SAS and patient satisfaction). Results showed that the French version of the HAq-II has good psychometric properties. Estimates of internal consistency and test-retest reliability were fairly similar to the original English version. Indication of its validity included high correlation with other alliance measures and independence from patient pretreatment characteristics. Surprisingly, HAq-II score predicted patient's satisfaction with the treatment but not symptomatic improvement. Taken together, these first results are promising and indicate that the translated version of the HAq-II is a valid instrument for measuring the helping alliance. Concerning the comparison between the two versions of the HAq, HAq-II has proved to be an improvement compared to the original HAq-I scale: it better relates to the alliance construct and it is less influenced by the symptoms of the patient. Considering also its better construct validity (Luborsky et al., 1996), we definitely recommend the use of the revised HAq-II instead of the initial version of the scale. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved

Psychodynamic aspects of communication skills training: a pilot study

Goals of work:: Communication between patients and oncology clinicians is a key element of cancer care. Emotionally charged consultations may trigger clinicians' defense mechanisms, protecting them from painful emotions. Defense mechanisms, however, may also hamper the recognition of patients' suffering. This pilot study aims to explore clinicians' defense mechanisms observed in communication skills training (CST). Patients and methods:: A verbatim transcription of videotaped interviews with simulated patients were evaluated before (N = 10) and after CST (N = 10) with the defense mechanism rating scales (DMRS). Main results:: A wide variety of defense mechanisms were observed such as obsessional (e.g. intellectualisation) or disavowal (e.g. denial or projection). Immature defense mechanisms decreased after CST. Conclusions:: A wide variety of defense mechanisms are operant in oncology clinicians facing challenging interviews with simulated patients. Defense mechanisms may be modified by CS

Efficacy of an adjunctive brief psychodynamic psychotherapy to usual inpatient treatment of depression: Results of a randomized controlled trial.

For severe and chronic depression, inpatient treatment may be necessary. Current guidelines recommend combined psychological and pharmacological treatments for moderate to severe depression. Results for positive effects of combined treatment for depressed inpatients are still ambiguous. This randomised controlled trial examined the efficacy of adding an intensive and brief psychodynamic psychotherapy (IBPP) to treatment-as-usual (TAU) for inpatients with DSM-IV major depressive episode. The primary outcomes were reduction in depression severity, and response and remission rates at post-treatment, 3-month and 12-month follow-up points. A linear mixed model analysis (N=149) showed a higher reduction in the observer-rated severity of depressive symptoms at each follow-up point for the IBPP condition compared with the TAU condition (post-treatment ES=0.39, 95%CI 0.06-0.71; 3-month ES=0.46, 95%CI 0.14-0.78; 12-month ES=0.32, 95%CI 0.01-0.64). Response rate was superior in the IBPP group compared with the TAU group at all follow-up points (post-treatment OR =2.69, 95%CI 1.18-6.11; 3-month OR=3.47, 95%CI 1.47-8.25; 12-month OR=2.26, 95%CI 1.02-4.97). IBPP patients were more likely to be remitted 3 months (OR=2.82, 95%CI 1.12-7.10) and 12 months (OR=2.93, 95%CI 1.12-7.68) after discharge than TAU patients. Heterogeneous sample with different subtypes of depression and comorbidity. IBPP decreased observer-rated depression severity up to 12 months after the end of treatment. IBPP demonstrated immediate and distant treatment responses as well as substantial remissions at follow-up. IBPP appears to be a valuable adjunct in the treatment of depressed inpatients