Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

2 results

  • Cognitive-behavioral therapy for patients with post-COVID-19 condition (CBT-PCC): a feasibility trial

  • Daniel Huth, Anne-Kathrin Bräscher, Sarah Tholl, Johanna Fiess, Gunnar Birke, Christoph Herrmann, Michael Jöbges, Daniela Mier, Michael Witthöft
  • Journal:
    Psychological Medicine / Volume 54 / Issue 6 / April 2024
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    16 October 2023, pp. 1122-1132
    • Article
      • You have access
      • Open access
    • PDF
    • HTML
    • Export citation
  • Background

    The post-COVID-19 condition describes the persistence or onset of somatic symptoms (e.g. fatigue) after acute COVID-19. Based on an existing cognitive-behavioral treatment protocol, we developed a specialized group intervention for individuals with post-COVID-19 condition. The present study examines the feasibility, acceptance, and effectiveness of the program for inpatients in a neurological rehabilitation setting.

    Methods

    The treatment program comprises eight sessions and includes psychoeducational and experience-based interventions on common psychophysiological mechanisms of persistent somatic symptoms. A feasibility trial was conducted using a one-group design in a naturalistic setting. N = 64 inpatients with a history of mild COVID-19 that fulfilled WHO criteria for post-COVID-19 condition were enrolled. After each session, evaluation forms were completed and psychometric questionnaires on somatic and psychopathological symptom burden were collected pre- and post-intervention.

    Results

    The treatment program was well received by participants and therapists. Each session was rated as comprehensible and overall satisfaction with the sessions was high. Pre-post effect sizes (of standard rehabilitation incl. new treatment program; intention-to-treat) showed significantly reduced subjective fatigue (p < 0.05, dav = 0.33) and improved disease coping (ps < 0.05, dav = 0.33–0.49).

    Conclusions

    Our results support the feasibility and acceptance of the newly developed cognitive-behavioral group intervention for individuals with post-COVID-19 condition. Yet, findings have to be interpreted cautiously due to the lack of a control group and follow-up measurement, the small sample size, and a relatively high drop-out rate.

  • 22 - Evaluation of Behavior Change Interventions

  • from Part II - Methods and Processes of Behavior Change: Intervention Development, Application, and Translation
  • Edited by Martin S. Hagger, Linda D. Cameron, Kyra Hamilton, Griffith University, Nelli Hankonen, University of Helsinki, Taru Lintunen, University of Jyväskylä
  • Book:
    The Handbook of Behavior Change
    Published online:
    04 July 2020
    Print publication:
    23 July 2020, pp 318-332

  • Summary

    Rigorous evaluation of interventions is vital to advance the science of behavior change and identify effective interventions. Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are often considered the “gold standard”, other designs are also useful. Considerations when choosing intervention design are the research questions, the stage of evaluation, and different evaluation perspectives. Approaches to explore the utility of an intervention, include a focus on (1) efficacy; (2) “real-world” effectiveness; (3) how an intervention works to produce change; or (4) how the intervention interacts with context. Many evaluation designs are available: experimental, quasi-experimental, and nonexperimental. Each has strengths and limitations and choice of design should be driven by the research question. Choosing relevant outcomes is an important step in planning an evaluation. A typical approach is to identify one primary outcome and a narrow range of secondary outcomes. However, focus on one primary outcome means other important changes may be missed. A well-developed program theory helps identify a relevant outcomes. High-quality evaluation requires (1) involvement of relevant stakeholders; (2) evaluating and updating program theory; (3) consideration of the wider context; (4) addressing implementation issues; and (5) appropriate economics input. Addressing these can increase the quality, usefulness, and impact of behavior change interventions.