Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
There is growing evidence for the efficacy of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) interventions delivered through smartphones, but research has not yet focused on how to optimize such interventions. One benefit of mobile interventions is the ability to adapt content based on in-the-moment variables. The current randomized controlled trial evaluated whether an ACT app that tailored skill coaching based on in-the-moment ecological momentary assessments (EMAs) would be more efficacious than the same app where skill coaching was random or an EMA-only condition. A sample of 69 adults interested in using a self-help app were randomized to one of three app conditions and used the app for the following 4 weeks. Results indicated equivalently high user satisfaction with the tailored versus random apps. Participants used the EMA-only app the most and the tailored app the least, but overall adherence was adequate. Participants in the tailored app improved significantly more on psychological distress and positive mental health relative to the random app and EMA-only conditions. However, no differences were found between the random app and EMA-only conditions on outcomes. Between-group differences over time were also found on psychological inflexibility, but this appeared to be primarily due to a lower rate of improvement in the random app condition relative to both tailored and EMA-only. Overall, these results suggest that tailoring ACT skill coaching based on in-the-moment variables leads to greater efficacy.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T., & Miller, J. T. (2008). An empirical evaluation of the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human Computer Interaction, 24, 574–594. CrossRef
Bond, F. W., Hayes, S. C., Baer, R. A., Carpenter, K., Orcutt, H. K., Waltz, T., & Zettle, R. D. (2011). Preliminary psychometric properties of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II: a revised measure of psychological flexibility and acceptance. Behavior Therapy, 42, 676–688. CrossRef
Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: a “quick and dirty” usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester, & I. L. McClelland (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189–194). London: Taylor and Francis.
Francis, A. W., Dawson, D. L., & Golijani-Moghaddam, N. (2016). The development and validation of the Comprehensive Assessment of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Processes (CompACT). Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 5, 134–145. CrossRef
Hahn, E. A., DeVellis, R. F., Bode, R. K., Garcia, S. F., Castel, L. D., Eisen, S. V., … PROMIS Cooperative Group. (2010). Measuring social health in the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): item bank development and testing. Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care and Rehabilitation, 19(7), 1035–1044.
Hahn, E. A., Beaumont, J. L., Pilkonis, P. A., Garcia, S. F., Magasi, S., DeWalt, D. A., & Cella, D. (2016). The PROMIS satisfaction with social participation measures demonstrate responsiveness in diverse clinical populations. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 73, 135–141. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Hayes, S. C., Strosahl, K. D., & Wilson, K. G. (2011). Acceptance and commitment therapy: the process and practice of mindful change. New York: The Guilford Press.
Hayes, S. C., Pistorello, J., & Levin, M. E. (2012). Acceptance and commitment therapy as a unified model of behavior change. The Counseling Psychologist, 40, 976–1002. CrossRef
Henry, J. D., & Crawford, J. R. (2005). The short-form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21): construct validity and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 227–239. CrossRef
Levin, M. E., Herbert, J. D., & Forman, E. M. (2017). Acceptance and commitment therapy: a critical review to guide clinical decision making. In D. McKay, J. Abramowitz, & E. Storch (Eds.), Treatments for psychological problems and syndromes (pp. 413–432). Wiley-Blackwell.
Lovibond, S. H., & Lovibond, P. F. (1995). Manual for the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (2nd ed.). Sydney: Psychology Foundation of Australia.
Mattila, E., Lappalainen, R., Välkkynen, P., Sairanen, E., Lappalainen, P., Karhunen, L., et al. (2016). Usage and dose response of a mobile acceptance and commitment therapy app: secondary analysis of the intervention arm of a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research mHealth and uHealth, 4, e90. CrossRef
Nahum-Shani, I., Smith, S. N., Spring, B. J., Collins, L. M., Witkiewitz, K., Tewari, A., & Murphy, S. A. (2018). Just-in-time adaptive interventions (JITAIs) in mobile health: key components and design principles for ongoing health support. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 52, 446–462. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Pew Research Center. (2017). Mobile fact sheet. Retrieved June 26, 2017, from http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheet/mobile/.
Smyth, J. M. & Heron, K.E. (2016). Is providing mobile interventions “just-in-time” helpful? An experimental proof of concept study of just-in-time intervention for stress management. Proceedings of the IEEE Wireless Health Conference, 89–95.
Torous, J. B., Levin, M. E., Ahern, D., & Oser, M. (2017). Cognitive behavioral mobile applications: research literature, marketplace data, and evaluation guidelines. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 24, 215–225. CrossRef
Verbeke, G., & Molenberghs, G. (2000). Linear mixed models for longitudinal data. New York: Springer-Verlag.
Wackerly, D. D., Mendenhall, W., & Scheaffer, R. L. (2008). Mathematical statistics with applications. Belmont: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
- Tailoring Acceptance and Commitment Therapy Skill Coaching in the Moment Through Smartphones: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial
Michael E. Levin
Rick A. Cruz
- Springer US