Abstract
To investigate through the prototype methodology as well as the interaction structures methodology which are the factors involved in the psychotherapeutic progress in the treatment of a patient with chronic diseases and somatic symptoms. 62 of the total 120 videotaped sessions were analysed by independent judges using the Psychotherapy Process Q-Set. The interaction structures as well as the extent to which each session conformed to the ideal psychodynamic, cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and reflective function prototypes were evaluated through multiple regression analysis, in order to test which factors were able to predict therapeutic progress. The psychotherapeutic process was characterized by moderate adherence to both psychodynamic and CBT prototypes and by greater adherence to the reflective function prototype. The therapeutic progress was better predicted by the adherence to the psychodynamic prototype. Both the psychodynamic technique and the reflective function were prominent factors in this case. Mentalization has been considered a “common factor” among different psychotherapeutic approaches, and our results highlight the importance of considering it along with specific technical aspects. Examining elements of the therapeutic process focusing on the complex interaction among these different aspects can provide helpful new insights into the process factors associated with a favourable outcome.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ablon, J. S., & Jones, E. (2005). On analytic process. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 53, 543–567. https://doi.org/10.1177/00030651050530020101.
Aisenstein, M. (2020). A view on patients with somatic or painful conditions. Romanian Society of Psychoanalysis, 13(1), 15–28. https://doi.org/10.2478/rjp-2020-0003.
de Francisco Carvalho, L., & da Rocha, G. M. A. (2009). Tradução e adaptação cultural do Outcome Questionnaire (OQ-45) para o Brasil. Psico-USF (Impresso), 14(3), 309–316. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-82712009000300007.
Eldar, S., Gómez, A. F., & Hofmann, S. G. (2017). Psychopathology and classification. In S. G. Hofmann (Ed.), International perspectives on psychotherapy (pp. 1–33). Springer.
Erkic, M., Bailer, J., Fenske, S. C., Schmidt, S. N. L., Trojan, J., Schröder, A., et al. (2017). Impaired emotion processing and a reduction in trust in patients with somatic symptom disorder. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 25, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpp.2151.
Goodman, G. (2013). Is mentalization a common process factor in transference-focused psychotherapy and dialectical behavior therapy sessions? Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 23(2), 179–192. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032354.
Halfon, S., Goodman, G., & Bulut, P. (2018). Interaction structures as predictors of outcome in a naturalistic study of psychodynamic child psychotherapy. Psychotherapy Research, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2018.1519267.
Jones, E. E. (2000). Therapeutic action: A guide to psychoanalytic therapy. Northvale: Jason Aronson.
Lambert, M., Burlingame, G., Umphress, V., Hansen, N., Vermeersch, D., Clouse, G., & Yanchar, S. (1996). The reliability and validity of the outcome questionnaire. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 3(4), 249–258.
Laskoski, P. B., Hauck, S., Teche, S. P., Padoan, C. S., Barros, A. J. S., Serralta, F. B. & Eizirik, C. L. (2019). Interaction structures in the psychodynamic psychotherapy of a patient with chronic diseases and somatic symptoms. Trends Psychiatry Psychother, 41(2), 128–135. https://doi.org/10.1590/2237-6089-2017-0146.
Laskoski, P. B., Serralta, F. B., Barros, A. J. S., Teche, S. P., Hauck, S., & Eizirik, C. L. (2020). From soma to psyche: An outcome evaluation of psychodynamic psychotherapy in a patient with somatic symptoms and chronic diseases. British Journal of Psychotherapy, 36(1), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjp.12523.
Serralta, F. B., & Ablon, J. S. (2016). Development of Brazilian prototypes for short-term psychotherapies. Trends Psychiatry Psychother. (Imprint), 38(2), 71–79 Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2237-60892016000200071.
Shedler, J. (2010). The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. The American Psychological Association, 65(2), 98–109. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018378.
Funding
This research was funded by Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPQ). The funding source did not play any role in the collection, analysis, interpretation of the data, manuscript writing, or the decision to submit for publication.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
P.B.L.: Study conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting of manuscript, Finalizing Manuscript. S.H.: Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting of manuscript, Finalizing Manuscript. F.O.: Interpretation of data, Drafting of manuscript, Finalizing Manuscript. A.G.: Analysis, Interpretation of data, Drafting of manuscript, Finalizing Manuscript. F.B.S.: Study conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting of manuscript, Finalizing Manuscript. G.F.: Study conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting of manuscript, Finalizing Manuscript. All authors agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Laskoski, P.B., Hauck, S., Orsucci, F. et al. Psychodynamic Factor as Predictor of Outcome in the Treatment of a Psychosomatic Spectrum Patient. J Contemp Psychother 51, 145–153 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-020-09486-0
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-020-09486-0