We partner with a secure submission system to handle manuscript submissions.
Please note:
You will need an account for the submission system, which is separate to your Cambridge Core account. For login and submission support, please visit the
submission and support pages.
Please review this journal's author instructions, particularly the
preparing your materials
page, before submitting your manuscript.
Click Proceed to submission system to continue to our partner's website.
To save this undefined to your undefined account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your undefined account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
People with hoarding behaviours often struggle to engage in treatment. This study aimed to explore the experiences of a sample of people who identify as engaging in hoarding behaviours and who are seeking support. Exploring motivation to seek help, the barriers those who hoard face in accessing support and what facilitates accepting help, can aid understanding of how best to intervene.
Method:
Eight individuals who self-identified as seeking help in relation to hoarding behaviours were recruited via social media and support groups. Interviews were conducted by telephone or video call, before being transcribed and analysed using interpretative phenomenological analysis.
Results:
Participants described complex help-seeking narratives and reported continued ambivalence about addressing their hoarding behaviours. The four group experiential themes identified were Wrestling with identity; Who can I trust?; Services don’t fit; and Being overlooked: ‘they’re too busy looking at the thing, not the person’. Difficulties trusting others and services were identified; services were experienced as rejecting and many participants sought help for problems other than their hoarding. Problems accessing appropriate help for hoarding were predominant in the narratives, although participants who had accessed peer support described this as valuable.
Conclusions:
There are both internal (e.g. fear of judgement; feeling overwhelmed) and external (e.g. service gaps) barriers that make finding useful help for hoarding behaviours very difficult. Services may facilitate those seeking help by taking a compassionate and person-centred approach to hoarding problems.
How we adapt treatment algorithms to complex, clinically untested, difficult-to-engage patient groups without losing evidence base in everyday practice is a clinical challenge. Here we describe process and reasoning for fast, pragmatic, context-relevant and service-based adaptations of a group intervention for unaccompanied minor asylum seekers (UASC) arriving in Europe. We employed a distillation-matching model and deployment-focused process in a mixed-method, top-down (theory-driven) and bottom-up (participant-informed) approach. Prevalence of mental disorders amongst UASC is extremely high. They also represent a marginalised and hard-to-engage group with limited evidence for effective treatments.
Method:
Content and process adaptations followed four steps: (1) descriptive local group characterisation and theoretical formulation of problems; (2) initial adaptation of evidenced treatment, based on problem-to-component grid; (3) iterative adaptation using triangulated feedback; and (4) small-scale pilot evaluation.
Results:
Based on evidence and participant feedback, adaptations included minimising verbal demands, facilitating in-session inductive learning, fostering social connectedness via games, enhancing problem-solving skills, accounting for multi-traumatisation, uncertainty and deportation. Quantitative evaluation suggested improved feasibility, with increased attendance, low drop-out and symptom improvement on depression and trauma scores.
Conclusions:
By describing the principles under-pinning development of a group intervention for severely traumatised UASC, we contribute to the literature supporting dynamic adaptations of psychological interventions, without losing reference to evidence base. Complex and difficult-to-reach clinical groups are often those in most need of care, yet least researched and most affected by inequality of care. Pragmatic adaptations of proven programs are often necessary to increase feasibility.
Misophonia, a disorder of decreased sound tolerance, can cause significant distress and impairment. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) may be helpful for improving symptoms of misophonia, but the key mechanisms of the disorder are not yet known.
Aims:
This case series aimed to evaluate individual, formulation-driven CBT for patients with misophonia in a UK psychology service.
Method:
A service evaluation of one-to-one therapy for patients with misophonia (n=19) was conducted in a specialist psychology service. Patients completed an average of 13 hours of therapy with a focus on the meaning applied to their reactions to sounds and associated behaviours. Primary outcome measures were the Misophonia Questionnaire (MQ) and the Amsterdam Misophonia Scale (A-MISO-S). Repeated measures t-tests were used to compare scores from pre-treatment to follow-up, and reliable and clinically significant change on the MQ was calculated.
Results:
Scores significantly improved on both misophonia measures, with an average of 38% change on the MQ and 40% change on the A-MISO-S. From pre-treatment to follow-up, 78% of patients showed reliable improvement on the MQ and 61% made clinically significant change.
Conclusions:
Limitations included a lack of control group, small sample size, and the use of an outcome measure that had not been thoroughly validated for a treatment-seeking sample. These results suggest that one-to-one, formulation-driven CBT for misophonia is worth exploring further using experimental design. Potential mechanisms to explore further include feared consequences of escalating reactions, the role of safety-seeking behaviours and the impact of early memories associated with reactions to sounds.
Interpretation bias and safety behaviours (Safe-B) have been proposed as factors perpetuating social anxiety (SA). However, longitudinal research on how they contribute to SA in everyday life is scarce.
Aim:
The aim was to examine whether interpretation bias predicts daily Safe-B and SA. A mediated moderation was hypothesized, where the relationship between daily social stressors and Safe-B would be moderated by interpretation bias, and Safe-B, in turn, would mediate the association between stressors and SA levels. In addition, it was hypothesized that prior levels of SA would predict higher Safe-B use, especially in co-occurrence with stressors.
Method:
An intensive longitudinal design was employed, with 138 vocational training students (51% men, mean age 20.15 years). They completed initial measures of SA and interpretation bias and 7-day diaries with measures of social stressors, Safe-B, and SA. They reported SA levels two months later.
Results:
Both stressors and interpretation bias in ambiguous situations predicted Safe-B, which in turn predicted daily SA levels. However, neither interpretation bias nor Safe-B predicted SA levels at the follow-up, and interpretation bias did not moderate the association between stressors and daily SA. In addition, the relationship between stressors and Safe-B was stronger in people with higher initial SA levels.
Conclusions:
The results suggest that Safe-B are a mechanism through which earlier SA levels and interpretation bias contribute to higher SA levels in daily life.
Anxiety disorders are the most frequently diagnosed psychiatric conditions in children and adolescents. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a well-established and effective treatment for anxiety and related disorders across the lifespan. Expectations of psychotherapy have been demonstrated to affect outcomes, yet there is sparse existing literature on adolescent patient and parent perspectives of CBT prior to engagement with treatment.
Aims:
This study aimed to qualitatively explore the expectations and perceptions of CBT for anxiety and related disorders among adolescent patients and parents.
Method:
Fourteen adolescent patients and 16 parents participated in semi-structured individual interviews or focus groups consisting of 2–3 participants. Interview transcripts were analysed using inductive analysis.
Results:
Three themes were identified: worries about CBT, expectations and knowledge of the CBT process, and the role of parents and families. Overall, we found that adolescents and parents had generally positive views of CBT. The outset of CBT saw adolescents and parents express concern about stigma as well as the ambiguity of CBT. Parents continued to express a lack of understanding of what CBT entailed during their child’s treatment course.
Conclusion:
These results suggest that both adolescents and parents would benefit from early discussion and reinforcement of expectations for CBT treatment. Further research efforts are warranted and should be directed towards determining appropriate expectations for parental involvement in a child’s CBT course and effective communication of treatment expectations to both adolescents and parents.
Auditory verbal hallucinations (AVH), or voice-hearing, can be a prominent symptom during fluctuating mood states in bipolar disorder (BD).
Aims:
The current study aimed to: (i) compare AVH-related distress in BD relative to schizophrenia (SCZ), (ii) examine correlations between phenomenology and voice beliefs across each group, and (iii) explore how voice beliefs may uniquely contribute to distress in BD and SCZ.
Method:
Participants were recruited from two international sites in Australia (BD=31; SCZ=50) and the UK (BD=17). Basic demographic-clinical information was collected, and mood symptoms were assessed. To document AVH characteristics, a 4-factor model of the Psychotic Symptoms Rating Scale and the Beliefs about Voices Questionnaire-Revised were used. Statistical analyses consisted of group-wise comparisons, Pearson’s correlations and multiple hierarchical regressions.
Results:
It was found that AVH-related distress was not significantly higher in BD than SCZ, but those with BD made significantly more internal attributions for their voices. In the BD group, AVH-related distress was significantly positively correlated with malevolence, omnipotence and resistance, However, only resistance, alongside mania and depressive symptoms, significantly contributed to AVH-related distress in BD.
Discussion:
Our findings have several clinical implications, including identification of voice resistance as a potential therapeutic target to prioritise in BD. Factoring in the influence of mood symptoms on AVH-related distress as well as adopting more acceptance-oriented therapies may also be of benefit.
Many people achieve positive outcomes from psychological therapies for anxiety and depression. However, not everyone benefits and some may require additional support. Previous studies have examined the demographic and clinical characteristics of people starting treatment and identified a patient profile that is associated with poor clinical outcomes.
Aims:
To examine whether the addition of employment-related support alongside psychological therapy was associated with a greater chance of recovery for clients belonging to this patient profile.
Method:
We analysed 302 clients across three services, who were offered employment-related support alongside psychological therapy. The rate of clinical recovery (falling below clinical thresholds on measures of both anxiety and depression) was compared between individuals who accepted the offer and those who declined, while adjusting for potential confounders.
Results:
Logistic regression showed that receiving employment support was significantly associated with clinical recovery after controlling for baseline anxiety and depression scores, the number of psychological treatment sessions, and other clinical and demographic variables. The odds of recovery were 2.54 times greater if clients received employment support; 47% of clients who received employment support alongside psychological therapy were classified as recovered, compared with 27% of those receiving psychological therapy only.
Conclusions:
Providing employment support alongside therapy may be particularly helpful for clients belonging to this patient profile, who represent approximately 10% of referrals to NHS Talking Therapies for Anxiety and Depression services. Services could consider how to increase the provision and uptake of employment-focused support to enhance clients’ clinical outcomes.
Anxiety sensitivity (AS) and disgust sensitivity (DS) are transdiagnostic vulnerability factors for anxiety. Both correlate with blood-injection-injury (BII) phobia symptoms in several studies; however, there is ambiguity about their relative contributions, and studies investigating this have relied on unselected samples. Furthermore, although DS reliably predicts BII in studies that do not account for AS, this may be limited to domain-specific DS rather than DS more broadly.
Aims:
The aims of this study were to examine AS and DS as separate and simultaneous predictors of BII fears in a sample with a wide range of BII symptoms, and with attention to the specificity of DS to BII-relevant domains.
Method:
Fifty-three participants who scored above a clinical threshold on a validated measure of dental anxiety, and who represented a wide range of BII severity, completed measures of AS, DS and BII symptoms.
Results:
AS and DS were moderately to strongly correlated with BII severity (r = .40 and .47, p = .004 and <.001), and both independently predicted BII severity when entered as simultaneous predictors (β = .32 and .35, p = .045 and .015). Furthermore, after omitting DS about injections and blood draws, domain-general DS was still moderately correlated with BII severity (r = .33, p = .017). However, domain-general DS did not significantly predict BII severity after accounting for AS (β = .20, p = .164).
Conclusions:
AS and DS both predict BII symptoms, and prospective research is warranted to examine them as potential vulnerability factors.