مجله دانشگاه علوم پزشکی سبزوار

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

اعضای هیات تحریریه

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پیوندهای مفید

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

اخبار و اعلانات

فرم های ضروری نشریه

راهنمای تنظیم مقاله

مقایسه اثربخشی آموزش تنظیم هیجان و درمان مبتنی بر پذیرش و تعهد بر نارسایی شناختی و اجتناب هیجانی در بیماران مبتلا به MS

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری روانشناسی تربیتی،گروه مشاوره وروانشناسی،واحد بجنورد،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی بجنورد،بجنورد،ایران

2 استادیارروانشناسی ،گروه مشاوره وروانشناسی،واحد بجنورد،دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی بجنورد،بجنورد،ایران

3 استادیار روانشناسی، گروه مشاوره و روانشناسی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، واحد سبزوار، ایران

چکیده

زمینه و هدف: مولتیپل اسکلروزیس یک بیماری مزمن پیشرونده سیستم اعصاب مرکزی است و از علائم نشانه‌های آن درد و کاهش ظرفیت عملکردی می‌باشد. این پژوهش با هدف مقایسه اثربخشی آموزش تنظیم هیجان و درمان مبتنی بر پذیرش و تعهد بر نارسایی شناختی و اجتناب هیجانی در بیماران مبتلا به MS انجام گرفت.

مواد وروش‌ها: پژوهش حاضر از نوع نیمه تجربی با طرح پیش‌آزمون- پس‌آزمون و پیگیری بود. آزمودنی‌ها با دامنه سنی 40-20 سال و با مقیاس ناتوانی جسمانی (EDSS) یک تا 5/5 و هدفمندانه و داوطلبانه انتخاب و به صورت تصادفی به گروه‌های تجربی و کنترل تقسیم شدند. هر دو گروه در مرحله پیش‌آزمون- پس‌آزمون و پیگیری 2 ماهه به پرسشنامه‌های نارسایی شناختی برادبنت و همکاران و اجتناب هیجانی کندی و همکاران پاسخ دادند. داده‌های جمع‌آوری شده با استفاده از نرم‌افزار SPSS نسخه 23 و روش تحلیل کوواریانس با اندازه‌گیری مکرر تحلیل شدند.

یافته‌ها: نتایج حاصل از تحلیل کوواریانس چندمتغیری با اندازه‌گیری مکرر نشان داد که آموزش راهبردهای تنظیم هیجانی و درمان مبتنی بر پذیرش و تعهد بر کاهش نارسایی شناختی و اجتناب هیجانی بیماران مولتیپل اسکلروزیس مؤثر است (001/0≥P). بازبینی دیداری نمودارهای اثربخشی و اندازه‌ی ضریب تأثیر نیز بیانگر ثبات مداخله‌ها در مرحله پیگیری بودند.

نتیجه‌گیری: براساس نتایج این پژوهش می‌توان از آموزش راهبردهای تنظیم هیجانی و درمان مبتنی بر پذیرش و تعهد در کنار مداخلات دارویی برای کاهش نارسایی شناختی و اجتناب هیجانی بیماران مولتیپل اسکلروزیس در مراکز درمانی استفاده نمود.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparison of the effectiveness of Emotion Regulation Training and Acceptance and Commitment Therapy on Cognitive Failures and Emotional Avoidance in Patients with M.S

نویسندگان [English]

  • Toktam Dehghani Bidgoli 1
  • Hossein Mahdian 2
  • Mehdi Ghasemi Motlagh 3

1 Phd Student In EducationalPsychology,Counseling and Psychology Department,Bojnourd Branch,Islamic Azad University of Bojnourd,Bojnourd,Iran.

2 Assistant Professor of Psychology,Counseling and Psychology Department ,Bojnourd Branch,Islamic Azad University of Bojnourd,Bojnourd,Iran.

3 Assistant Professor of Psychology, Counseling and Psychology, Farhangian University, Sabzevar Branch, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Abstract

Introduction: Multiple sclerosis is a chronic progressive disease of the central nervous system and is characterized by symptoms of pain and decreased functional capacity. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of emotion regulation skill training and acceptance and commitment therapy on cognitive failures and emotional avoidance in patients with MS.

Materials and Methods: The present study was a quasi-experimental with a pretest-posttest and follow-up design. Subjects with a age range of 20-20 years and expanded disability status scale (EDSS) of one to 5.5 were selected purposefully and voluntarily and randomly divided into experimental and control groups. In the pre-test-post-test phase and the 2-month follow-up, both groups answered Broadbent and et al. cognitive failure questionnaires and Kennedy et al. emotional avoidance. The collected data were analyzed using SPSS software version 23 and covariance analysis method with repeated measurements.

Results: The results of multivariate analysis of covariance with repeated measurements showed that emotion regulation skill training and acceptance and commitment therapy is effective in reducing cognitive Failures and emotional avoidance of multiple sclerosis patients (p

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Emotional Avoidance
  • Cognitive Failures
  • Emotion Regulation skill Training
  • Acceptance and Commitment Therapy
  • Multiple sclerosis
مراجع
  1. Berard JA, Smith A M, Walker L A S. Predictive Models of Cognitive Fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2019; 34(1):31-38.
  2. Solaro C, Cella M, Signori A, Martinelli V, Radaelli M, Centonze D, Bonavita S. Identifying neuropathic pain in patients with multiple sclerosis: a crosssectional multicenter study using highly specific criteria. Journal of Neurology, 2018; 265(4): 828-835.
  3. Briones-Buixassa L, Milà R, Aragonès J M, Bufill E, Olaya B, & Arrufat F X. Stress and multiple sclerosis: A systematic review considering potential moderating and mediating factors and methods of assessing stress. Health Psychology Open, 2015; 2, 1-16
  4. Sohrabi C, Alsafi Z, O'Neill N, Khan M, Kerwan A, Al-Jabir A, et al. World Health Organization declares global emergency: A review of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19). International journal of surgery. 2020;76:71-76.
  5. Rosenbaum L. Facing Covid-19 in Italy—ethics, logistics, and therapeutics on the epidemic’s front line. New England Journal of Medicine. 2020;382(20):1873-1875.
  6. Jalloh MF, Li W, Bunnell RE, Ethier KA, O’Leary A, Hageman KM, et al. Impact of Ebola experiences and risk perceptions on mental health in Sierra Leone, July 2015. BMJ global health. 2018;3(2):1-11.
  7. Bults M, Beaujean DJ, de Zwart O, Kok G, van Empelen P, van Steenbergen JE, et al. Perceived risk, anxiety, and behavioural responses of the general public during the early phase of the Influenza A (H1N1) pandemic in the Netherlands: results of three consecutive online surveys. BMC public health. 2011;11(1):2.
  8. Wang C, Pan R, Wan X, Tan Y, Xu L, Ho CS, et al. Immediate psychological responses and associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in China. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2020;17(5):17-29.
  9. Qiu J, Shen B, Zhao M, Wang Z, Xie B, Xu Y. A nationwide survey of psychological distress among Chinese people in the COVID-19 epidemic: implications and policy recommendations. General psychiatry. 2020;33(2):1-3.
  10. Wheaton MG, Abramowitz JS, Berman NC, Fabricant LE, Olatunji BO. Psychological predictors of anxiety in response to the H1N1 (swine flu) pandemic. Cognitive Therapy and Research. 2012;36(3):208-210.
  11. Yip PS, Cheung Y, Chau PH, Law Y. The impact of epidemic outbreak: the case of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and suicide among older adults in Hong Kong. Crisis: The Journal of Crisis Intervention and Suicide Prevention. 2010;31(2):86.
  12. Asmundson GJ, Taylor S. How health anxiety influences responses to viral outbreaks like COVID-19: What all decision-makers, health authorities, and health care professionals need to know. Journal of anxiety disorders. 2020;71:102-112.
  13. Jungmann SM, Witthöft M. Health anxiety, cyberchondria, and coping in the current COVID-19 pandemic: Which factors are related to coronavirus anxiety? Journal of anxiety disorders. 2020;73:102239.
  14. Bailer J, Kerstner T, Witthöft M, Diener C, Mier D, Rist F. Health anxiety and hypochondriasis in the light of DSM-5. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping. 2016;29(2):219-239.
  15. Asmundson GJ, Abramowitz JS, Richter AA, Whedon M. Health anxiety: current perspectives and future directions. Current psychiatry reports. 2010;12(4):306-312.
  16. Blakey SM, Abramowitz JS. Psychological predictors of health anxiety in response to the Zika virus. Journal of clinical psychology in medical settings. 2017;24(3-4):270-278.
  17. Wytykowska A, Fajkowska M, Domaradzka E. BIS-dependent cognitive strategies mediate the relationship between BIS and positive, negative affect. Personality and Individual Differences. 2020:110241.
  18. Lee SA, Jobe MC, Mathis AA, Gibbons JA. Incremental validity of coronaphobia: Coronavirus anxiety explains depression, generalized anxiety, and death anxiety. Journal of anxiety disorders. 2020;74:102268.
  19. Ahorsu DK, Lin C-Y, Imani V, Saffari M, Griffiths MD, Pakpour AH. The fear of COVID-19 scale: development and initial validation. International journal of mental health and addiction. 2020 Mar 27: 1-7.
  20. Che Q, Yang P, Gao H, Liu M, Zhang J, Cai T. Application of the Chinese Version of the BIS/BAS Scales in Participants With a Substance Use Disorder: An Analysis of Psychometric Properties and Comparison With Community Residents. Frontiers in Psychology. 2020 May 8: 911-912.
  21. Braddock KH, Dillard JP, Voigt DC, Stephenson MT, Sopory P, Anderson JW. Impulsivity partially mediates the relationship between BIS/BAS and risky health behaviors. Journal of personality. 2011;79(4):793-810.
  22. Kimbrel NA, Nelson-Gray RO, Mitchell JT. BIS, BAS, and bias: The role of personality and cognitive bias in social anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences. 2012;52(3):395-400.
  23. McKay D, Asmundson GJ. COVID-19 stress and substance use: Current issues and future preparations. Journal of Anxiety Disorders. 2020 Jul 2021:1-2.
  24. Beevers CG, Meyer B. Lack of positive experiences and positive expectancies mediate the relationship between BAS responsiveness and depression. Cognition & Emotion. 2002;16(4):549-564.
  25. Sadiković S, Branovački B, Oljača M, Mitrović D, Pajić D, Smederevac S. Daily monitoring of emotional responses to the coronavirus pandemic in Serbia: A citizen science approach. Frontiers in psychology. 2020 Aug 19: 21-33.
  26. Salkovskis PM, Warwick H. Meaning, misinterpretations, and medicine: A cognitive-behavioral approach to understanding health anxiety and hypochondriasis. 2001: 202-222.
  27. Nargesi F, Izadi F, Kariminejad K, Rezaei SA. The investigation of the reliability and validity of Persian version of Health anxiety questionnaire in students of Lorestan University of Medical Sciences. 2017;27(7):147-160. [Persian]
  28. Ahmadzadeh M, Ghamarani A, Samadi M, Shamsi A, Azizollah A. The investigation of validity and reliability of a scale of perceived vulnerability to disease in Iran. British Journal of Social Sciences. 2013;1(4):43-51. [Persian]
  29. Duncan LA, Schaller M, Park JH. Perceived vulnerability to disease: Development and validation of a 15-item self-report instrument. Personality and Individual differences. 2009;47(6):541-546.
  30. Carver CS, White TL. Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: the BIS/BAS scales. Journal of personality and social psychology. 1994;67(2):319.
  31. Mohammadi N. The Psychometric Properties of the Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS) and Behavioral Activation System (BAS) scales Among Students of Shiraz University. Journal of Daneshvar Behavior. 2008;15(28):61-68. [Persian]
  32. Jungmann SM, Witthöft M. Health anxiety, cyberchondria, and coping in the current COVID-19 pandemic: Which factors are related to coronavirus anxiety? Journal of Anxiety Disorders. 2020:102239.
  33. Markarian SA, Pickett SM, Deveson DF, Kanona BB. A model of BIS/BAS sensitivity, emotion regulation difficulties, and depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms in relation to sleep quality. Psychiatry research. 2013;210(1):281-286.
  34. Corr PJ. Erratum to “Reinforcement sensitivity theory and personality”[Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews (2004) 317–332]☆. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 2005;8(28):875.
  35. Sun J, Luo Y, Chang H, Zhang R, Liu R, Jiang Y, et al. The Mediating Role of Cognitive Emotion Regulation in BIS/BAS Sensitivities, Depression, and Anxiety Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults in China. Psychology Research and Behavior Management. 2020;13:939.
  36. Oguchi M, Takahashi F. Behavioral inhibition/approach systems constitute risk/protective pathways from ADHD symptoms to depression and anxiety in undergraduate students. Personality and individual differences. 2019;144:31-35.
  37. Harmon-Jones E, Winkielman P. Asymmetrical frontal cortical activity, affective valence, and motivational direction. Social neuroscience: Integrating biological and psychological explanations of social behavior. 2007:137-156.
  38. Yan C, Dillard JP. Emotion inductions cause changes in activation levels of the behavioural inhibition and approach systems. Personality and Individual Differences. 2010;48(5):676-680.
  39. Song K, Li T, Luo D, Hou F, Bi F, Stratton TD, et al. Psychological Stress and Gender Differences during COVID-19 Pandemic in Chinese Population. medRxiv. 2020 Jan 1:5-24.
مجله دانشگاه علوم پزشکی سبزوار
دوره 28، شماره 6
بهمن و اسفند 1400
صفحه 936-949
فایل ها
سابقه مقاله
  • تاریخ دریافت: 05 شهریور 1399
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 07 آذر 1399
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 08 آذر 1399
هم رسانی
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار