Long-term psychotherapy is more effective than short-term therapy when treating complicated conditions, according to research published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (1 October 2008).
The LA Times (30 September 2008) quotes the JAMA editor, Richard M. Glass, who comments upon the the report's positive findings: "It is ironic and disturbing that this occurs at a time when provision of psychotherapy by psychiatrists in the United States is declining significantly. The reasons for this merit careful evaluation. To some extent this may reflect the cost-efficacy of treatments for some mental disorders with medications and brief supportive visits. However, this trend appears to be strongly related to financial incentives and other pressures to minimize costs. Is this what is really wanted for patients with disabling disorders that could respond to more intensive treatment?"
His point is well made.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Actually, his point is quite badly made. The so-called "research" is just a meta-analysis of real research published previously.
It shows that some psychodynamic therapists can help some patients given enough time, and that patients with complex problems take longer to be helped. These are things we already knew.
John M. Grohol reviews the meta-analysis here, commenting:
Reviewing the studies in this analysis gives one a little pause in feeling the cards were stacked for a positive outcome.
The 'well made' comment doesn't refer to the study but follows on from Glass' observation that it is ironic that positive research about psychotherapy coincides with the decline in its availability.
Post a Comment