Objective. This article introduces the concept of “personalization of the treatment”, concept that is connected to the idea that patients with the same descriptive-nosographic diagnosis but different for others variables, can profit in different way of the different types of treatment. Exists an ample literature regarding pre-treatments predictors related to social-demographics variables, personality dimensions, cognitive and psychodynamic constructions, relational patterns, attachment patterns and severity of the symptoms; what has not been resolved yet is the problem of superiority of a treatment compared to another in the care of a disease. Therefore, considering that fitting the therapeutic relationship and the type of intervention to the specific needs and to patient’s characteristics, increases treatment’s efficiency, this article intends to evaluate the points of strenght and the weakness of main psychotherapic interventions and to highlight the therapeutic factors related to intervention models. Methods. Have been taken into account therapeutic factors with demonstrated or likely effectiveness, taken from the final report of the 29th APA Task Force based on the therapeutic relationship empirically supported (Norcross, 2001). We also take in consideration the list of mediators of outcome for the mood disorders identified by Beutler. It is assessed how the main approach taken into consideration the therapeutic factors and mediators of change identified by literature in their pathological models (Karasu, 1996). Results. Considering the typology of interventions from the point of view of the therapeutic factors, it’s possible to observe that general differences lose part of their importance, because of the valorization of the role of common factors. Moreover come out different aspects of mood disorder and, probably, different clinical typologies of patients. Conclusions. The article is a first step in understanding how and for who works the various components that characterize the psychotherapeutic treatment, pointing out quite precisely the problems that the research itself has raised, with its results and highlighting the necessity to work on the relationship between types clinical, mediators of change, characteristics of therapist and treatment.
La personalizzazione dei trattamenti psicoterapeutici nei disturbi dell’umore / E.D. Fava, P. Zuglian, D. Taino, C. Di Genova. - In: PSICHIATRIA DI COMUNITA'. - ISSN 1724-0751. - 8:2(2009), pp. 96-105.
La personalizzazione dei trattamenti psicoterapeutici nei disturbi dell’umore
E.D. FavaPrimo
;P. ZuglianSecondo
;
2009
Abstract
Objective. This article introduces the concept of “personalization of the treatment”, concept that is connected to the idea that patients with the same descriptive-nosographic diagnosis but different for others variables, can profit in different way of the different types of treatment. Exists an ample literature regarding pre-treatments predictors related to social-demographics variables, personality dimensions, cognitive and psychodynamic constructions, relational patterns, attachment patterns and severity of the symptoms; what has not been resolved yet is the problem of superiority of a treatment compared to another in the care of a disease. Therefore, considering that fitting the therapeutic relationship and the type of intervention to the specific needs and to patient’s characteristics, increases treatment’s efficiency, this article intends to evaluate the points of strenght and the weakness of main psychotherapic interventions and to highlight the therapeutic factors related to intervention models. Methods. Have been taken into account therapeutic factors with demonstrated or likely effectiveness, taken from the final report of the 29th APA Task Force based on the therapeutic relationship empirically supported (Norcross, 2001). We also take in consideration the list of mediators of outcome for the mood disorders identified by Beutler. It is assessed how the main approach taken into consideration the therapeutic factors and mediators of change identified by literature in their pathological models (Karasu, 1996). Results. Considering the typology of interventions from the point of view of the therapeutic factors, it’s possible to observe that general differences lose part of their importance, because of the valorization of the role of common factors. Moreover come out different aspects of mood disorder and, probably, different clinical typologies of patients. Conclusions. The article is a first step in understanding how and for who works the various components that characterize the psychotherapeutic treatment, pointing out quite precisely the problems that the research itself has raised, with its results and highlighting the necessity to work on the relationship between types clinical, mediators of change, characteristics of therapist and treatment.Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.