IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v9y2017i3p216-224.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Individual psychodynamic therapy for psychosis: a Delphi study

Author

Listed:
  • Swapna Kongara
  • Chris Douglas
  • Brian Martindale
  • Alison Summers

Abstract

There is limited empirical evidence as to how psychodynamic therapy should be conducted when working with people who experience psychosis. We describe here a three stage Delphi study exploring the degree of consensus about this among an international group of experienced psychotherapists. Of the 52 participants who received the survey questionnaire, 41 (78.8%) responded in the first round and 30 (57.6%)responded in the second. The participants agreed on many aspects of therapy, including aspects of classical technique (e.g. requirement for consistent setting) and some supportive modifications (e.g. therapists not restricting themselves to remaining emotionally neutral), but consensus was not received for other supportive modifications (e.g. guiding the patients if they are unsure of what to talk about). Participants commented that the technique should be adapted to individual needs. We believe that the findings have implications for therapy and research.

Suggested Citation

  • Swapna Kongara & Chris Douglas & Brian Martindale & Alison Summers, 2017. "Individual psychodynamic therapy for psychosis: a Delphi study," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 216-224, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:9:y:2017:i:3:p:216-224
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2017.1300185
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2017.1300185
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2017.1300185?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:9:y:2017:i:3:p:216-224. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPSY20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.