Search

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) which includes Exposure and Response (ERP) is a highly effective, gold standard treatment for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). Nonetheless, not all patients with OCD significantly benefit from CBT. This has generated interest in the potential benefits of Mindfulness-Based Interventions (MBIs), either integrated with CBT, to enhance engagement with ERP tasks, or delivered as a stand-alone, first-line or therapy to augment CBT. This paper reports on two qualitative studies that involved a thematic analysis of interview data with participants in a 10-week Mindfulness-Based ERP (MB-ERP) course (study 1) and a 9-week Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy course adapted for OCD (MBCT-OCD) (study 2). Whilst MB-ERP integrated a mindfulness component into a standard ERP protocol, MBCT-OCD adapted the psychoeducational components of the standard MBCT for depression protocol to suit OCD, but without explicit ERP tasks. Three common main themes emerged across MB-ERP and MBCT-OCD: 'satisfaction with course features', 'acceptability of key therapeutic tasks 'and 'using mindfulness to respond differently to OCD'. Sub-themes identified under the first two main themes were mostly unique to MB-ERP or MBCT-OCD, with the exception of '(struggles with) developing a mindfulness practice routine' whilst most of the sub-themes under the last main theme were shared across MB-ERP and MBCT-OCD participants. Findings suggested that participants generally perceived both MBIs as acceptable and potentially beneficial treatments for OCD, in line with theorised mechanisms of change.

Access to psychological therapies continues to be poor for people experiencing psychosis. To address this problem, researchers are developing brief interventions that address the specific symptoms associated with psychosis, i.e., hearing voices. As part of the development work for a brief Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) intervention for voices we collected qualitative data from people who hear voices (study 1) and clinicians (study 2) on the potential barriers and facilitators to implementation and engagement. Thematic analysis of the responses from both groups revealed a number of anticipated barriers to implementation and engagement. Both groups believed the presenting problem (voices and psychosis symptoms) may impede engagement. Furthermore clinicians identified a lack of resources to be a barrier to implementation. The only facilitator to engagement was reported by people who hear voices who believed a compassionate, experienced and trustworthy therapist would promote engagement. The results are discussed in relation to how these barriers could be addressed in the context of a brief intervention using CBT techniques.

Compassion has long been regarded as a core part of our humanity by contemplative traditions, and in recent years, it has received growing research interest. Following a recent review of existing conceptualisations, compassion has been defined as consisting of the following five elements: 1) recognising suffering, 2) understanding the universality of suffering in human experience, 3) feeling moved by the person suffering and emotionally connecting with their distress, 4) tolerating uncomfortable feelings aroused (e.g., fear, distress) so that we remain open to and accepting of the person suffering, and 5) acting or being motivated to act to alleviate suffering. As a prerequisite to developing a high quality compassion measure and furthering research in this field, the current study empirically investigated the factor structure of the five-element definition using a combination of existing and newly generated self-report items. This study consisted of three stages: a systematic consultation with experts to review items from existing self-report measures of compassion and generate additional items (Stage 1), exploratory factor analysis of items gathered from Stage 1 to identify the underlying structure of compassion (Stage 2), and confirmatory factor analysis to validate the identified factor structure (Stage 3). Findings showed preliminary empirical support for a five-factor structure of compassion consistent with the five-element definition. However, findings indicated that the 'tolerating' factor may be problematic and not a core aspect of compassion. This possibility requires further empirical testing. Limitations with items from included measures lead us to recommend against using these items collectively to assess compassion. Instead, we call for the development of a new self-report measure of compassion, using the five-element definition to guide item generation. We recommend including newly generated 'tolerating' items in the initial item pool, to determine whether or not factor-level issues are resolved once item-level issues are addressed.

Perinatal mental health difficulties are associated with adverse consequences for parents and infants. However, the potential risks associated with the use of psychotropic medication for pregnant and breastfeeding women and the preferences expressed by women for non-pharmacological interventions mean it is important to ensure that effective psychological interventions are available. It has been argued that mindfulness-based interventions may offer a novel approach to treating perinatal mental health difficulties, but relatively little is known about their effectiveness with perinatal populations. This paper therefore presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of mindfulness-based interventions for reducing depression, anxiety and stress and improving mindfulness skills in the perinatal period. A systematic review identified seventeen studies of mindfulness-based interventions in the perinatal period, including both controlled trials (n = 9) and pre-post uncontrolled studies (n = 8). Eight of these studies also included qualitative data. Hedge's g was used to assess uncontrolled and controlled effect sizes in separate meta-analyses, and a narrative synthesis of qualitative data was produced. Pre- to post-analyses showed significant reductions in depression, anxiety and stress and significant increases in mindfulness skills post intervention, each with small to medium effect sizes. Completion of the mindfulness-based interventions was reasonable with around three quarters of participants meeting study-defined criteria for engagement or completion where this was recorded. Qualitative data suggested that participants viewed mindfulness interventions positively. However, between-group analyses failed to find any significant post-intervention benefits for depression, anxiety or stress of mindfulness-based interventions in comparison to control conditions: effect sizes were negligible and it was conspicuous that intervention group participants did not appear to improve significantly more than controls in their mindfulness skills. The interventions offered often deviated from traditional mindfulness-based cognitive therapy or mindfulness-based stress reduction programmes, and there was also a tendency for studies to focus on healthy rather than clinical populations, and on antenatal rather than postnatal populations. It is argued that these and other limitations with the included studies and their interventions may have been partly responsible for the lack of significant between-group effects. The implications of the findings and recommendations for future research are discussed.

ObjectiveMindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) can reduce risk of depressive relapse for people with a history of recurrent depression who are currently well. However, the cognitive, affective and motivational features of depression and anxiety might render MBIs ineffective for people experiencing current symptoms. This paper presents a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of MBIs where participants met diagnostic criteria for a current episode of an anxiety or depressive disorder.MethodPost-intervention between-group Hedges g effect sizes were calculated using a random effects model. Moderator analyses of primary diagnosis, intervention type and control condition were conducted and publication bias was assessed.ResultsTwelve studies met inclusion criteria (n = 578). There were significant post-intervention between-group benefits of MBIs relative to control conditions on primary symptom severity (Hedges g = -0.59, 95% CI = -0.12 to -1.06). Effects were demonstrated for depressive symptom severity (Hedges g = -0.73, 95% CI = -0.09 to -1.36), but not for anxiety symptom severity (Hedges g = -0.55, 95% CI = 0.09 to -1.18), for RCTs with an inactive control (Hedges g = -1.03, 95% CI = -0.40 to -1.66), but not where there was an active control (Hedges g = 0.03, 95% CI = 0.54 to -0.48) and effects were found for MBCT (Hedges g = -0.39, 95% CI = -0.15 to -0.63) but not for MBSR (Hedges g = -0.75, 95% CI = 0.31 to -1.81).ConclusionsThis is the first meta-analysis of RCTs of MBIs where all studies included only participants who were diagnosed with a current episode of a depressive or anxiety disorder. Effects of MBIs on primary symptom severity were found for people with a current depressive disorder and it is recommended that MBIs might be considered as an intervention for this population.