The article by Orsillo, Roemer and Salters-Pedneult (2008) involves a study on the effectiveness of an acceptance-based behavioral therapy (ABBT) designed to enhance the reception of internal experiences. The study was also aimed at encouraging action in significant areas of Generalized Anxiety disorder (GAD).
The study involved 31 participants selected from a list of patients who sought CARD treatment at different times between 2003 and 2005. The treatment was randomly administered to 15 of the 31 clients while the remaining 16 clients formed the waiting list control.
During the procedure, two participants left the therapy while another four left the waiting list. Participants in the waiting list received delayed treatment. The participants were required to be over 18 years old.
Assessments were based on both primary and secondary measures. Primary measures involved the analysis of anxiety and worry while secondary measures accessed the level of depression, quality of life and suggested techniques of change. Current and lifetime DSM–IV diagnostic status was checked using the Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule for DSM–IV—
Lifetime Version. Each diagnosis was accessed according to the clinical severity rating (CSR), which ranged from 0 to 8. The indicators of anxiety used in the study included an anxiety subscale of 0.79, and a stress subscale of 0.87.
Secondary outcomes were measured using a Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) of 0.87, and a measure of life satisfaction of 0.836. The 9-item scale was used in the test due to its sensitivity to change, as well as enhanced internal consistency.
Treatment for the waiting list was administered 14 weeks after the consent meeting. Individual assessments of the clients were conducted by a CARD assessor immediately after the treatment was administered, and again after 3 and 9 months.
The first four sessions took 90 minutes while the following 12 sessions took 60 minutes. The treatment process was aimed at enhancing various characteristics of clients including alertness to typical anxious responses, the function of emotions and the objective of judgment and pragmatic evasion in cases of absurdly worsening grief.
Assessments were also made using psycho education, pragmatic demonstrations and between-session self monitoring. The clients were also encouraged to develop mindful awareness to actions and avoid valued activities.
The analysis of results was carried out using Hierarchical Linear and Nonlinear Modeling software program (HLM). The results were observed to be consistent. The next measure involved the analysis of uncontrolled effects, as well as the evaluation of treatment gains for all clients.
The pretreatment assessments of the waiting list participants were based on their post treatment assessments. Various clients missed different follow-up assessments, as well as self-report measures.
The results of the study showed that the treatment administered had a considerable effect on both Generalized Anxiety specific outcomes and depressive symptoms. Effects that reached level four were found to be significant.
These effects comprised symptoms of self-reported anxious arousal, quality of life and clinician-rated additional diagnoses. The changes identified due to ABBT after 9 months of the study were identified to clinically significant and durable.
Some limitations were noted during the study. For instance, the waiting list control was flawed since it did not eliminate the possibility of affecting nonspecific factors. It was also noted that longer follow-up periods were necessary in order to evaluate the durability of the effect of the treatment.
The CARD assessors were also considered to be biased due to their involvement with some of the clients. Future research should incorporate competency ratings to identify the degree of treatment based on the efficacy of delivery of the intervention. In addition to this, the study should include participants from a wide racial and ethnical background.