A Comparative Study of the Impact of Education vs. Process Groups for Families of Patients with Affective Disorders

Abstract

This clinical project compares the relative impact of two types of multiple family groups on psychiatric inpatients and their families. Forty patients with a diagnosis of affective disorder, and their family members, were randomly assigned to a traditional multiple family group with a process orientation that emphasized support, destigmatization, and self-help about common problems; or to a psychoeducational multiple family group that emphasized the provision of information about the patient's illness and methods of coping with it effectively. Both groups, which met for four hours on a Saturday afternoon, were an integral part of an ongoing inpatient program specializing in the treatment of affective disorders. Pre- and post-measures were obtained regarding family and patient knowledge about affective disorders, level of personal distress, attitudes about the illness, and dyadic adjustment. In addition, both patients and family members were asked to rate their satisfaction with the group experience. A number of differences in knowledge, attitude and dyadic adjustment were found in the participants of both groups immediately following their respective group sessions, but there were only a few statistically significant differences between the two groups. Those who attended the psychoeducational session, however, reported significantly more satisfaction with the experience.

Family therapy and psychopathology: developments in research and approaches to treatment

“…I n one investigation, Glick and colleagues studied a multidimensional approach with hospitalized patients in which few positive results were detected . The second study by Anderson, Griffin et al (1986) compared multiple family therapy in combination with self-help groups with pure psychoeducation. They did not find differences between the two approaches which might have been due to the heterogeneity of the samples.…”

The Effects on Mood of Adjunctive Single-Family and Multi-Family Group Therapy in the Treatment of Hospitalized Patients with Major Depression

“…Each group consisted of 4–7 patients and their partners (with the patients’ children being invited to take part in group sessions 2 and 5). The multi-family group format affords many opportunities of helping families to learn from each others’ strengths, to reduce the sense of isolation and stigma and to use the group as a resource for problem solving [[24,31,32,33,34]; for a detailed description of the treatment, see Lemmens et al, [35]].…”

“…The results have been mixed, with 1 study [22] showing a possible negative effect at the 18-month follow-up of an inpatient psycho-educational family intervention and 1 study [23] showing higher rates of improvement and greater proportions of patients whose depression remitted after family therapy in the post-hospital period. There are virtually no empirical data on the use of other family intervention formats such as multi-family therapy groups, which are frequently offered to inpatients with major depression and their families [24,25,26,27]. …”

A Cognitive Behavioural Illness Management Program for Severe Depression: Predictors of Treatment Response

“…Over the past two decades a range of different illness selfmanagement programs have been developed based on Anderson's "psycho educational" multifamily workshops for schizophrenia Anderson et al [16] and later depression Anderson et al [15] providing information and skills about the illness and its treatment. Psycho educational programs are to train persons with a psychiatric disorder in subject areas that serve the goals of treatment and rehabilitation such as enhancing the person's acceptance of his illness, promoting active cooperation with treatment and rehabilitation, strengthening coping skills to deal with common aspects of the illness (e.g., stigma) and to compensate for deficiencies by the disorder Bäuml and Pitschel-Walz [17,18].…”

“…They are all based on cognitive techniques. The first additionally draws on behavioural Lewinsohn et al [13] and interpersonal strategies Klerman et al [9], the second on stress reduction Kabat Zinn [14] and the latter on acquiring knowledge about the illness including its psychological and pharmacological treatment options [13,15].…”