Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

6023PSY ProPsych > Week 4 - Case Conceptualisation > Flashcards

Week 4 - Case Conceptualisation Flashcards

1
Q 
Case Conceptualisation
(what is it/why we do it)
A

What do you THINK IS GOING ON???

  • –A way of thinking about a case
  • –A way of communicating about a case
  • –A way of proceeding with a case

Guides the information-gathering of the intake interview

Organises information that can be complex and contradictory

Guides formulation of hypotheses of causes, precipitants and maintaining influences (Eells, 1997)

A psychological narrative or explanation for why the client has developed the presenting issues, and what keeps them going

Case formulation can be very powerful way of sharing information / perspectives with your client +> better understanding – both therapist and client

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Case Conceptualisation

- as per (Eells, 1997)

A

“…a Hypothesis about the Causes, Precipitants, and Maintaining influences of a person’s psychological, interpersonal and behavioral problems. A case formulation helps to Organize often complex and contradictory information about a person. It should serve as a blueprint Guiding Treatment, as a Marker for Change, and as a Structure enabling the therapist to Understand the patient better.” (Eells, 1997, p. 2)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Case Conceptualisation
Explains What?
(what does it lead to and what does it include)

A

Explains –

  • –Why symptoms emerge
  • –How various factors shape symptom patterns
  • –What relationship is between symptoms

is a broader clinical task than diagnosis

Leads to:
+> understanding
+> good treatment utility
+> has to be parsimonious – accounting for observed data with a relatively simple explanation

including diagnosis but also other factors & treatment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Tensions Inherent in Case Conceptualisation

A

Immediacy versus Comprehensiveness

Complexity versus Simplicity

Observation versus Organisation

Cultural sensitivity

—-Sim et al. (2005) – Case formulation in psychotherapy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Case conceptualisation

framework, dynamic, evidence

A

Conceptual framework yet allowing for flexibility

Dynamic and fluid => requiring generation and testing of hypotheses

Continual refinement and revision

Evidence-based - Therapy is not “a bag of tricks”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Case conceptualisation

Individual versus General Formulations

A

Formulation tailored to a specific individual’s life circumstances, needs, goals, thought patterns, etc

BUT must also rely on therapist’s knowledge about psychology and past experience with other individuals

Problematic if:

  • -Trying to make the client “fit” a generalised formulation that really doesn’t fit
  • –Over-individualise a formulation, neglecting knowledge of psychology and clinical experience
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Nomothetic

theories

A

general theories that apply to all individuals or group of individuals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Idiographic

theories

A

theories that are applicable to a particular/specific case

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Steps to Developing a Cognitive-Behavioural Conceptualisation

(Persons & Tompkins (2007) – Cognitive-behavioral case formulation)

A
  1. Develop a comprehensive problem list
    - —Needs to be manageable length
    - —Can group problems together
  2. Assign DSM diagnosis
    - —Provides a link to nomothetic formulation & empirically supported treatment
  3. Select an “anchoring” diagnosis
    - —Diagnosis that will be used to guide selection of a nomothetic template for the idiographic case conceptualisation
    - —Can be chosen based on what accounts for the most problems or treatment goals
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Steps to Developing a Cognitive-Behavioural Conceptualisation

(steps 4 & 5)

A
  1. Select a nomothetic formulation of the anchoring diagnosis
    - —Evidence-based formulations
    - —Select based on familiarity, acceptability to client, or what best fits the case
  2. Individualise the template
    - —Based on individual details of the client
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Steps to Developing a Cognitive-Behavioural Conceptualisation

(steps 6 & 7)

A
  1. Propose hypotheses about the origins of the mechanisms
    - —Based on details of client history
  2. Describe precipitants of the current episode of illness or symptom exacerbation
    - —Based on details of presenting problem
    - —Keep mechanisms in mind
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

The 4 Ps Model

A

Predisposing factors

Precipitating Factors

Perpetuating factors

protective factors

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Predisposing factors

A

Physical / psychosocial factors that may have affected the client in uterus / early life

Vulnerability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Precipitating factors

A

appear shortly before disorder & appear to have induced it

E.g., Psychological stressors; social changes; physical change

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Perpetuating factors

A

prolong or maintain disorder after it has started

E.g., cognitions, behaviours, social circumstances

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Protective Factors

A

Coping factors / strengths

17
Q

Introduction to Treatment

Roles of the Scientist-Practitioner

A

As consumers of research findings
“How can I best assess/treat my clients”

As evaluators of their own interventions
“Am I effectively assessing/treating my clients?”

As researchers, producing new data
“How can I best assist you to effectively assess/treat your clients?”

18
Q

Introduction to Treatment

The Scientist-Practitioner Gap

A

Clinicans as poor consumers of research vs Researchers as inept salespeople…?

Attempts to shift focus “real world” e.g., what works in clinical setting

Identification of empirically supported treatments; relationships & principles of change

Payoffs for clinicans & researchers in collaboration

19
Q

Some Suggestions on being a Good Scientist-Practitioner

A

Adopt a “hypothesis-testing approach” - consider alternative hypotheses

Try to rely less on memory

Try to recognize personal biases

Try to get good quality information (e.g., assessment / questionnaires etc.)

Become an informed consumer of research literature

20
Q

Methods of scientist practioner approach?

A

Methods

  • Interviews
  • Self-reports
  • –Watch the psychometrics!
  • Ratings by others
  • Self-monitoring
  • Direct observations
21
Q

Approaches to Treatment Planning

A

Client Data (problem,context, history, etc)

  • Theoretical & Emprical Literature
  • Clinical Training & Experience

–Assessment & Case Formulation

  • –Treatment Planning
  • —–choosing an empirically supported treatment or set of empirically-supported therapeutic principles

—-Treatment Implementation and Monitoring

—–Evaluation and Accountability

22
Q

Treatment Planning: Determining Appropriate Treatments

A

Client problem and treatment literature

  • -Empirical research (particularly randomised controlled trials) outlining effective treatment approaches
  • -Case studies
  • -Theoretical discussions regarding treatment choice

Therapist skill or expertise
–Training, experience, current/previous supervision

Therapist preference
–Theoretical orientation

Client preference
–Impact on cooperation or compliance

23
Q

Treatment Planning: Common Elements

A

Problem selection
–Effective treatment plan deals with only a few selected problems

Problem definition

  • -How the problem exhibits itself in the patient
  • -Helps maintain focus and provides a measurable outcome
24
Q

Treatment Planning:

Prioritising Problems

A

Consider:
–What the patient identifies as most troublesome/primary reason for seeking help

–Degree and extent of impact on patient’s life

–Which problem/s must be dealt with first to resolve the central problem (identified in the case formulation)

–Ease and speed of problem resolution

25
Q

Treatment Planning: Common Elements - Goal Development

A

Goal development

  • -Can be global and long-term
  • —Overall desired outcome of treatment
  • -Can be more specific and short-term
  • —Required to reach more global goal
  • —Sometimes referred to as objectives

Characteristics:

  • -Achievable/Realistic
  • -Measurable
  • -Stated in the positive (wherever possible)
26
Q

Prioritising Goals/Objectives

A

Priorities of goals/objectives should mirror priorities assigned to problems

Might focus on a single goal/objective

OR

Can work toward achievement of two or more goals/objectives simultaneously

27
Q

Treatment Planning: Common Elements

Intervention techniques and Flexibility

A

Intervention techniques
–Strategies that will move the client towards goal/objective

Flexibility

  • -Changes in case formulation:
  • –Evaluation of treatment plan
  • –Possible modification of treatment plan
28
Q

DUGAS model of GAD

see slide 57 for visual

A

Mood State & life events + intolerance of uncertainty

"What if?"
Positive Beliefs About Worry
Worry
Anxiety
Negative Problem Orientation
Cognitive Avoidance
29
Q

Definitions of Worry

A

“…a chain of thoughts and images, negatively affect-laden and relatively uncontrollable; it represents an attempt to engage in mental problem-solving on an issue whose outcome is uncertain but contains the possibility of one or more negative outcomes; consequently, worry relates closely to the fear process” (Borkevic, Robinson, Pruzinsky & DePree, 1983; p.10).

“…an anticipatory cognitive process involving repetitive, primarily verbal thoughts related to possible threatening outcomes and their potential consequences” Vasey & Daleiden, 1994; p.186).

30
Q

Intolerance of uncertainty

definitions

A

Defined as a dispositional characteristic that stems from negative beliefs about uncertainty and its repercussions (Dugas & Robichaud, 2007)

Find uncertain situations stressful and upsetting, which then impacts on their ability to effectively cope (Laugesen, Dugan & Bukowski, 2003; Dugas & Robichaud, 2007).

31
Q

Negative problem orientation

definitions

A

A set of dysfunctional cognitive beliefs whereby individuals appraise problems as threatening and unsolvable (D’zurilla & Nezu, 1999)

Individuals with an NPO frequently doubt their problem solving abilities and tend to become easily frustrated or pessimistic (Robichaud & Dugas, 2005).

32
Q

Positive beliefs about worry

definitions

A

Revolve around the utility of worry as an important coping strategy (Wells, 1997)

Believe that worry may circumvent bad things from happening, help them to cope (Wells, 1997), minimize negative outcomes, and allow for the identification of solutions to problems (Freeston et al., 1994).

33
Q

Cognitive avoidance

definitions

A

Refers to a number of automatic or purposeful strategies that lead to the avoidance or suppression of unwanted cognitive content

Although individuals engage in CA in an attempt to dampen unpleasant physiological arousal, it tends to result in the opposite effect, increasing worry and arousal (Dugas & Robichaud, 2007)

Prevents exposure and therefore habituation to unpleasant intrusions

34
Q

Wells’ (cognitive) Model of GAD

see slide 63 for visual

A 
Trigger
       |
 positive meta-beliefs activated (strategy section)
       |
  Type 1 Worry (eg, about something)
       |
 Negative meta-beliefs activated
       |
Type 2 Worry (meta-worry)
(behaviour, thought control, emotion)

emotion feeds into and is fed by Type 1 worry as well.

35
Q

Negative beliefs about worry

definition

A

Negative beliefs about worry revolve around the perceived negative impact and consequences of uncontrollable worry

Concern about the mental or physical harm associated with uncontrollable worry (Wells, 1995) and believe that their worry is dangerous (Penney, Mazmanian & Rudanycz, 2013).

6023PSY ProPsych (9 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions