7 research outputs found

    Empathic and Nonempathic Interaction in Chronic Pain Couples

    Get PDF
    Empathy and empathic response are receiving greater attention in pain research as investigators acknowledge that other forms of interaction may impact the pain process. The purpose of this study was to examine validation and invalidation as forms of empathic and nonempathic responses in chronic pain couples. Participants were 92 couples in which at least one spouse reported chronic musculoskeletal pain. Each couple participated in two videotaped interactions about the ways in which the pain has impacted their lives together. Trained raters then coded interactions for each partner’s use of validation and invalidation. Couples also completed surveys on spouse responses to pain, marital satisfaction, and perceived spousal support. Correlations demonstrated validation by spouses of persons with pain was associated with punishing, solicitous, and distracting spouse responses to pain, marital satisfaction, and perceived spousal support. In contrast, spouses’ invalidation scores were correlated with punishing spouse responses. Exploratory factor analyses were then conducted to determine the extent to which spouses’ responses to pain and spouse validation and invalidation loaded on similar factors. Results indicated that validation and invalidation are more closely related to punishing spouse responses than to solicitous or distracting spouse responses. These results have implications for theoretical and clinical work on spouse responding

    Current State of Evidence for Medication Treatment of Preschool Internalizing Disorders

    Get PDF
    Psychotropic medications are being prescribed off-label by psychiatrists to treat preschool children diagnosed with internalizing disorders. In this review, the current state of evidence is presented for medications used to treat preschool children (ages 2-5 year olds) diagnosed with anxiety and/or depressive disorders. Eleven studies were systematically identified for this review based on a priori criteria. Overall, the available literature revealed that studies addressing the medication treatment of internalizing disorders in preschoolers are extremely limited and represent relatively weak research methodologies. Given the increasing prevalence of the use of psychotropic medications to treat preschool children and the unique challenges associated with working with this population, it is imperative that mental health practitioners are aware of the current, albeit limited, research on this practice to help make informed treatment decisions. Suggestions about how to monitor potential costs and benefits in those unique cases in which psychopharmacological treatments might be considered for young children are given. Moreover, areas of additional research for this population are discussed

    Current State of Evidence for Medication Treatment of Preschool Internalizing Disorders

    No full text
    Psychotropic medications are being prescribed off-label by psychiatrists to treat preschool children diagnosed with internalizing disorders. In this review, the current state of evidence is presented for medications used to treat preschool children (ages 2–5 year olds) diagnosed with anxiety and/or depressive disorders. Eleven studies were systematically identified for this review based on a priori criteria. Overall, the available literature revealed that studies addressing the medication treatment of internalizing disorders in preschoolers are extremely limited and represent relatively weak research methodologies. Given the increasing prevalence of the use of psychotropic medications to treat preschool children and the unique challenges associated with working with this population, it is imperative that mental health practitioners are aware of the current, albeit limited, research on this practice to help make informed treatment decisions. Suggestions about how to monitor potential costs and benefits in those unique cases in which psychopharmacological treatments might be considered for young children are given. Moreover, areas of additional research for this population are discussed

    Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial of Neurofeedback for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder With 13-Month Follow-up

    No full text
    Objective: To determine whether theta/beta-ratio (TBR) electroencephalographic biofeedback (neurofeedback [NF]) has a specific effect on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) beyond nonspecific benefit. Method: In a 2-site double-blind randomized clinical trial, 144 children aged 7 to 10 years with rigorously diagnosed moderate/severe ADHD and theta/beta-ratio (TBR) ≥4.5 were randomized 3:2 to deliberate TBR downtraining versus a control of equal duration, intensity, and appearance. Two early dropouts left 142 children for modified intent-to-treat analysis. The control used prerecorded electroencephalograms with the participant's artifacts superimposed. Treatment was programmed via Internet by an off-site statistician-guided co-investigator. Fidelity was 98.7% by trainers/therapists and 93.2% by NF expert monitor. The primary outcome was parent- and teacher-rated inattention; analysis was mixed-effects regression. Because the expense and effort of NF can be justified only by enduring benefit, follow-ups were integrated. Results: Blinding was excellent. Although both groups showed significant improvement (p <.001, d = 1.5) in parent/teacher-rated inattention from baseline to treatment end and 13-month follow-up, NF was not significantly superior to the control condition at either time point on this primary outcome (d = 0.01, p =.965 at treatment end; d = 0.23, p =.412 at 13-month follow-up). Responders (Clinical Global Impression−Improvement [CGI-I] = 1−2) were 61% of NF and 54% of controls (p =.36). Adverse events were distributed proportionally between treatments. The 13-month follow-up found nonsignificant improvement from treatment end for NF (d = 0.1), with mild deterioration for controls (d = −0.07). NF required significantly less medication at follow-up (p =.012). Conclusion: This study does not support a specific effect of deliberate TBR NF at either treatment end or 13-month follow-up. Participants will be reassessed at 25-month follow-up. Clinical trial registration information: Double-Blind 2-Site Randomized Clinical Trial of Neurofeedback for ADHD; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT02251743
    corecore