depression
Conditions
Interventions
Experimental group (n = 16) x Wait-list control group (n = 18).
Experimental - Couples in the experimental group underwent 8-sessions of psychotherapy based on the cognitive-behavioral model combined
55384
Sponsors
Universidade Metodista de São Paulo
Universidade Metodista de São Paulo
Eligibility
Age
18 Years to 60 Years
Inclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: age between 18 and 60 years; being in a heterosexual relationship; Portuguese as their mother tongue; literate and having education level up to complete higher education; having one or more year of marriage or cohabitation; to present conflict in the relationship related to communication difficulties (we used the Romantic Partner Conflict Scale adapted); naive practitioner in the Mindfulness meditation exercise; monthly income per family up to R$6,000,00; having consent of both spouses to participate in the study.
Exclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria: Having any severe clinical psychological disorder; being drug addict or taking psychiatric medication (we used the interview, the Alcohol, Smoking, and Substance Involvement Screening Test - ASSIST, and the General Health Questionnaire - GHQ-12).
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Presentation of expected outcome: Effect of intervention on dyadic adjustment, assessed by the Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale; mindful attention, measured with the Mindful Attention Awareness Scale; quality of marital social skills, assessed by the Marital Social Skills Inventory; and depressive symptoms, by the Beck Depression Inventory. For all variables, means, standard deviation and 95% confidence intervals were analyzed at the three times (pre-intervention, post-intervention and 3-months follow-up). In addition, we performed Analysis of Variances for Within and Between-Subjects effects by variables (experimental group vs. control group - wait-list). It was expected that the intervention would improve the means' levels for the aforementioned variables. In the statistical analysis, p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant;Presentation of findings: There was a significant intra-group effect on the time for dyadic adjustment, conscious attention, depressive symptoms (< .000) and social skills (< .01); and significant difference between groups (experimental vs. control) for all variables. Thus, the intervention effect was statistically significant. | — |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame |
|---|---|
| Secondary outcomes are not expected | — |
Countries
Brazil
Contacts
Public ContactRicardo Durães
Outcome results
None listed