Suchergebnisse

Background  The assimilation model and the assimilation of problematic experiences scale (APES), provide a structured account of changes occurring within psychotherapy. The model proposes that the clients assimilate their problematic experience through the development of schema observable in the psychotherapeutic setting. The model provides a way of describing change in psychotherapy independent of affiliation to a single theoretical school. This paper aims to demonstrate the application of APES methodology to psychotherapy with people with intellectual disabilities.Methods  An innovative research procedure is implemented, utilizing transcript and rating procedures in relation to a client and therapist dialogue within psychodynamic psychotherapy. Outcome data is collected from psychometric questionnaires. Quantitative data and qualitative methods are combined to portray results in the format of a single case study.Results  The presented case illustrates assimilation achieved by a client with intellectual disabilities within and across psychotherapy sessions. Outcome data is also provided.Conclusions  This study provides a newly obtained information on the applicability of psychotherapy and the assimilation model in relation to this client group. The outcome data acts as a point of reference with which to examine the nature and validity of APES findings. The present authors argue that process research has a significant role in advancing our understanding of psychotherapy with the people with intellectual disabilities.

Background  Although there is an established body of evidence attesting to the dose–effect relationship in psychotherapy with non‐disabled adults, the issue as to whether such a relationship exists for persons with intellectual disabilities has not been previously examined. Dose–effect essentially concerns the amount of psychotherapy required to produce positive results.Method  The current study used a naturalistic design to examine and compare the outcomes of three groups of participants with co‐morbid psychological problems undergoing treatments of differing lengths (i.e. 'doses') with psychodynamic psychotherapy. Three measures of psychopathology were completed at assessment and at subsequent eight‐session intervals until the conclusion of treatment. Each patient received a 3‐month follow‐up appointment, at which time the measures were again completed. Three treatment duration groups were subsequently constructed and compared via anova: eight sessions (n = 8), 16 sessions (n = 5) and 24 plus sessions (n = 7).Results  Results were supportive of a dose–effect relationship, in that outcomes were generally equivalent regardless of treatment duration.Conclusion  In short, most change appears to occur in the first eight sessions of treatment, with subsequent outcomes trailing off over time. The clinical implications of the study are discussed in the context of the methodological limitations identified.

Introduction  People with intellectual disabilities are now acknowledged to be susceptible to the full range of mental health disorders. This acknowledgement has resulted in the need to develop and evaluate instruments for the assessment and detection of mental health problems. This research evaluates the use of the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) with 200 people with mild intellectual disabilities representing community, clinical and forensic populations.Results and conclusions  Results illustrate the reliability of the BSI for each of the groups and demonstrates how the Positive Symptom Total (PST) index effectively discriminates between study groups. Case rates for each group are provided. The study illustrates that the BSI could be employed as a brief multitrait assessment instrument and as a treatment outcome measure with people with an intellectual disability.

BackgroundWe looked at the research that other people have done about what makes people with a learning disability happy and satisfied with their lives. Researchers call being happy and satisfied with your life 'subjective well‐being'. They found out that having things like money and good health does not always mean people are happy. They also found that some people are really happy, even if there are things in their lives they would like to change. None of the people who have done research about 'subjective well‐being' have interviewed people with a learning disability about what makes them happy with their lives.Materials and MethodsWe have carried out a study about what makes people with a learning disability happy and satisfied with their lives. This report talks about the research that we did, and what we found out. We interviewed 20 people with a learning disability who said they were very happy and satisfied. We asked them about what things helped them feel like this.ResultsThe people we spoke to said things like relationships, choice and independence, activities and valuable social roles made them feel satisfied with their lives. They told us about the things that enable them to lead happy lives, and the things that disable them. We also found out about the importance of personal characteristics. These are things like looking on the bright side of life or having ways to manage difficult emotions like sadness or anger.ConclusionsWe found out that it is important for people with a learning disability to have good things in their lives, but it is also important to be enabled to access these good things.