1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 18th March 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Evaluating an interactive (ACT) workshop delivered to trained therapists working with cancer patients in UK 2022, Chalder et al

Discussion in 'Other psychosomatic news and research' started by Sly Saint, Nov 26, 2022.

  1. Sly Saint

    Sly Saint Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    9,574
    Location:
    UK
    Evaluating an interactive acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) workshop delivered to trained therapists working with cancer patients in the United Kingdom: a mixed methods approach

    Abstract
    Background

    SURECAN (SUrvivors’ Rehabilitation Evaluation after CANcer) is a multi-phase study developing and evaluating an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention integrated with exercise and work when highly valued (thus we called the intervention ACT+), for people who have completed treatment for cancer but who have low quality of life. We developed a training programme for therapists working in different psychological services to be delivered over 2–3 days. Our aim was to evaluate the extent to which the training could improve therapists’ knowledge and confidence to deliver ACT+ to cancer patients in a trial setting.

    Methods
    Three interactive workshops were delivered to 29 therapists from three clinical settings in London and in Sheffield. A mixed-methods approach was used. Questionnaires were designed to assess knowledge and confidence in using ACT+ with people who have low quality of life after cancer treatment. They were self-administered immediately prior to and after each workshop. Open text-based questions were used to elicit feedback about the workshops alongside a satisfaction scale. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of therapists (n = 12) to explore their views about the training more deeply, and how it might be optimised.

    Results
    Quantitative analysis showed that knowledge of ACT, as well as confidence in using the ACT+ intervention in this setting increased significantly after training (28.6 and 33.5% increase in the median score respectively). Qualitative analysis indicated that most therapists were satisfied with the content and structure of the programme, valued the rich resources provided and enjoyed the practice-based approach. Potential barriers/facilitators to participation in the trial and to the successful implementation of ACT+ were identified. For some therapists, delivering a manualised intervention, as well as supporting exercise- and work-related goals as non-specialists was seen as challenging. At the same time, therapists valued the opportunity to be involved in research, whilst training in a new therapy model.

    Conclusions
    Training can effectively improve the knowledge and confidence of therapists from different clinical backgrounds to deliver a modified ACT intervention to cancer patients in a trial setting.

    https://bmccancer.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12885-022-09745-4

    https://kclpure.kcl.ac.uk/portal/en...om(fea8e332-0e6a-4b28-ab66-b7135a58c55c).html

    in above kcl link
    link 'Peter White' actually takes you to 'Philippa White' (?)


     
    DokaGirl, Trish and Peter Trewhitt like this.
  2. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,296
    Location:
    Canada
    There is obviously no need to publish a paper out of a single workshop for 12 people where people are told some stuff and then it's concluded that when people are told stuff they can repeat some of it back.

    The all-quantity-no-quality model of publishing papers for the sake of having published many papers is becoming the death of academia, it serves little purpose anymore other than continuing to push out papers no one even cares about. Will a single person actually even read this thing? Why would anyone even do that?

    You could do the same about Tupperware, and it would be exactly as relevant. The whole BPS process has become simply about the performance of producing papers, there is no concern with substance or utility.
     
  3. NelliePledge

    NelliePledge Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    13,142
    Location:
    UK West Midlands
    Knowledge of x increased after a workshop on x and the participants felt more confident about their knowledge of x. Basic staff training happy sheet results for one small workshop is being passed off as academic research. One word. Risible. :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2022
    Starlight, EzzieD, obeat and 9 others like this.
  4. bobbler

    bobbler Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,313
    I hate that noone questions this anymore (I guess they hounded real psychologists out of the subject by ensuring their paradigm was only delivered by people who follow the script and making sure noone was qualified or brave enough to critique diagnoses, then leading to noone to write on the old paradigms). I think the claim of anti-mental health said at anyone who questions this anti-mental health paradigm of BPS (their classic trick) stops those outside the sector.

    You can tell noone dares question because fundamentally, if you were a cancer charity (who do have money and support) you'd be insisting that the secrecy inbuilt to the BPS 'treatments' was not OK

    ACT or 'acceptance therapy' along the lines of telling people 'to put up with their lot' is gaslighting and harmful, 'reducing expectations' is inappropriate if they should be asking for better support.

    But these people never tell what goes on in the detail of these things. SO people wishfully assume (and will parrot it) that 'they must be good and just trying to help people to deal with the shock of having such a different life' without questioning whether those people are disabilityists who expect as part of that they'll build in telling people to get used to what is less of a life than they could have, making people 'responsible for changing it if they want anything to be different' (inappropriate)

    And the fact these therapists are being given manuals and not taught about the medical issue itself pretty shocking to be frank.

    What on earth does their opinion on a training session mean? I'm guessing their job depends on the leader giving them the diploma or tick-box that they completed the course so......
     
  5. bobbler

    bobbler Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,313

    Indeed - we used to get loads of work courses, some compuslory for certain jobs or tasks within jobs, some might relate to being useful in future job applications (just to write you did it), some choose what you need or fancy learning more about or just to give you enough knowledge on a different area you can be up to speed with the broader organisational context.

    Because the dept that delivered these obviously had to use their team wisely to meet institutional strategies, HR strategies and skills needs and because of course any dept wants to sell themselves at any meeting where they are reporting upwards even an hrs lunchtime session would have a 7Q tickbox sheet with a few lines to write in.

    THis is what this woman has turned into an academic paper by the looks. Might as well have been a few people who were being introduced to how to make a podcast or create an interview panel inline with regs in a 45min lunchtime session spending 2mins filling it in and then at best putting it on a pile the presenter is watching (might look at you filling it in).

    If you think it was rubbish then you'd basically have to be someone very senior to think it was worth calling it out - and they'd know who they were when they booked and turned up. Otherwise you write it off as 'wouldn't bother' to others and forget about your wasted time, or be glad of the tickbox for the CV if you applied for a job it can be a 'extra learning' for. Such a merry-go-round - even worse many people might not know they are being taught nonsense if it was.
     
    Sean and alktipping like this.
  6. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member

    Messages:
    7,043
    Location:
    Australia
    SURECAN

    :facepalm:
     
    Trish and shak8 like this.
  7. inox

    inox Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    539
    Location:
    Norway
    Are they planning to do a get/cbt-style study on people with fatigue from cancer treatment…?

    Because this sounds like preparation to me.

    Also - way to go, asking people what they think about the training directly after, nice way to make sure you get positive response. Before anyone had the time to digest and reflect.
     
    bobbler, livinglighter and Trish like this.

Share This Page