Esta página foi traduzida automaticamente e a precisão da tradução não é garantida. Por favor, consulte o versão em inglês para um texto fonte.

Testing the Effectiveness of Process Based Therapy in Routine Patient Care and Assessing Its Influence on Therapist Decision Making (PBACE)

9 de julho de 2026 atualizado por: Prof. Dr. Ulrich Stangier, Goethe University

Process Based Therapy Applicability, Effectiveness and Compatibility (PBACE). A Within Therapist Randomized Controlled Trial Testing the Effectiveness of Process Based Therapy in Routine Patient Care and Assessing Its Influence on Therapist Decision Making

Background: Process Based Therapy (PBT) is a novel approach for a more personalized psychotherapy by integrating patient's ecological momentary assessment (EMA) data into treatment planning and focusing on empirically measured maladaptive processes. Previous pilot studies have examined the efficacy and feasibility of PBT in different settings. However, the effectiveness of this approach as well as the influence of providing EMA data on therapist's decision-making as well as treatment planning is yet unexplored.

Objective: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of PBT in a naturalistic setting as well examine the influence of the provision of EMA data on therapists' decision-making.

Methods: Thiry therapists as well as 60 patients will be recruited. Therapists will each treat two patients which are randomly allocated to either an intervention group receiving PBT or an active control group receiving routine psychotherapy. Treatment outcomes will be measured pre and post treatment as well as a 6-month follow-up. Therapists' decision making will be measured before training in PBT as well as during the treatment process using think aloud protocols (TAP) as well as quantitative measurements for decision making styles and self efficacy in decision making.

Discussion: This study could add insights into the ongoing research about the efficacy and effectiveness of PBT as well as provide insights into therapists' treatment decisions. While PBT holds theoretical promise for a more personalized and effective treatment, empirical data is still needed to assess its theoretical merit, which this study could provide. Expanding on the thus far scarce literature on decision-making in the therapeutic process, valuable information about processes guiding therapists' treatment decisions could be gained.

Visão geral do estudo

Status

Recrutamento

Condições

Intervenção / Tratamento

Tipo de estudo

Intervencional

Inscrição (Estimado)

60

Estágio

  • Não aplicável

Contactos e Locais

Esta seção fornece os detalhes de contato para aqueles que conduzem o estudo e informações sobre onde este estudo está sendo realizado.

Contato de estudo

Locais de estudo

  • Alemanha
    • Hesse
      • Frankfurt am Main, Hesse, Alemanha, 60486
        • Recrutamento
        • JWGUniversity
        • Contato:
        • Investigador principal:
          • Ulrich Stangier, PhD

Critérios de participação

Os pesquisadores procuram pessoas que se encaixem em uma determinada descrição, chamada de critérios de elegibilidade. Alguns exemplos desses critérios são a condição geral de saúde de uma pessoa ou tratamentos anteriores.

Critérios de elegibilidade

Idades elegíveis para estudo

  • Adulto
  • Adulto mais velho

Aceita Voluntários Saudáveis

Não

Descrição

Inclusion Criteria:

  • A primary ICD-11 diagnosis of a depressive or anxiety disorder
  • Age 18-65 years
  • Sufficient knowledge of the German language
  • Participating patients are not required to discontinue medication, but to keep medication constant over the treatment period

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Increased suicidality
  • Substance abuse or dependency
  • diagnosis of a cluster A or B (DSM-5) personality disorder
  • pervasive developmental disorder, psychotic disorder, eating disorder, bipolar disorder, or severe physical illness.

Plano de estudo

Esta seção fornece detalhes do plano de estudo, incluindo como o estudo é projetado e o que o estudo está medindo.

Como o estudo é projetado?

Detalhes do projeto

  • Finalidade Principal: Tratamento
  • Alocação: Randomizado
  • Modelo Intervencional: Atribuição Paralela
  • Mascaramento: Nenhum (rótulo aberto)

Armas e Intervenções

Grupo de Participantes / Braço
Intervenção / Tratamento
Experimental: Process Based Psychotherapy (PBT)
In PBT, treatment planning is based on a dynamic network analysis of EMA data collected during the baseline phase. Therapists identify the central node, significant edges, self-loops, and feedback loops between the nodes. Using this information, interventions are selected based on empirical evidence for mechanisms of change that correspond to the network characteristics. These interventions are framed within an evolutionary framework as the variation, selection, and retention of an adaptive mode of the central node in relation to the specific context of the problem. The change in this key variable is monitored through daily judgments based on EMA. Treatment also focuses on additional targets to establish adaptive modes of the dimensions as defined in the positive network model. Concomitant medication is allowed and will be controlled by the study design.
Outro: Process Based Psychotherapy (PBT)
Intervention planning based on the use of EMA data, feedback of dynamic network analysis and matching of interventions to central nodes of the network.
Outros nomes:
  • Terapia Baseada em Processos com Avaliação Momentânea Ecológica
Medicamento: Psychiatric medication kept constant over study duration
Psychiatric medication is kept constant during the trial. Participants are not required to take medication. If participants enlisting in the trial are on medication however, they will be asked to keep medication constant over the study duration
Comparador Ativo: Routine practice (r-PT)
In r-PT, as opposed to PBT, a naturalistic setting is retained for treatment decisions. Treatment planning follows traditional theories about the factors maintaining the disorder and interventions changing them, e.g. avoidance and exposure in anxiety disorders or reduced reinforcement of activities and behavioral activation in depression. Interventions are based on common treatment manuals related to diagnoses, e.g. CBT for depression. Individual data from the behavioral analysis are used to tailor the techniques to the individual problems of the patients. Treatment process is largely structured by personal preferences of the therapist due to experience, knowledge or recommendations of the National guidelines for the mental health problem.Concomitant medication is allowed and will be controlled by the study design.
Medicamento: Psychiatric medication kept constant over study duration
Psychiatric medication is kept constant during the trial. Participants are not required to take medication. If participants enlisting in the trial are on medication however, they will be asked to keep medication constant over the study duration
Outro: Routine practice
Intervention planning as usual.
Outros nomes:
  • Routine psychotherapy

O que o estudo está medindo?

Medidas de resultados primários

Medida de resultado
Descrição da medida
Prazo
Depressive and anxiety symptom severity
Prazo: Assessed after randomization (Day 1), after completion of the EMA baseline phase (6-Week intermediate), assessed at post-treatment (week 28) and assessed at a six-month follow-up.
To assess Psychopathological Stress , the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale 21 (DASS-21) is used. The DASS-21 is a validated and reliable 21 item self-report instrument for the measurement of depressive and anxiety symptoms. Additionally, stress as a negative affective state is measured on an additional subscale. The scale ranges from 1-4 with higher mean values reflecting higher symptom severity in the respective subscale as well as an overall score of Psychopathological Stress.
Assessed after randomization (Day 1), after completion of the EMA baseline phase (6-Week intermediate), assessed at post-treatment (week 28) and assessed at a six-month follow-up.
Positive Mental Health and Quality of Life
Prazo: Assessed after randomization (Day 1), after completion of the EMA baseline phase (6-Week intermediate), assessed at post-treatment (week 28) and assessed at a six-month follow-up.
Positive mental health and quality of Life will be measured using the positive mental health scale (PMH). The PMH is a validated nine-item self-report scale for the measurement of the presence of positive mental health. Scores range form 1-4 with higher mean scores reflecting a more positive mental health.
Assessed after randomization (Day 1), after completion of the EMA baseline phase (6-Week intermediate), assessed at post-treatment (week 28) and assessed at a six-month follow-up.
Therapist Decision Making
Prazo: Assessed pre-training in PBT (Day 0), at Day 1 of treatment, after diagnosis (Day 2), after a hypothetical model is developed (Day 3), after EMA-Assessment is complete (Week-6) and every four weeks during the treatment phase (Weeks 10, 14, 18 and 22).
Therapist Decision Making regarding treatment planning will be measured using think-aloud protocols (TAP). The think-aloud method is usually used to measure decision making in cognitive tasks such as problem solving, where participants are instructed to "think-aloud" meaning to verbalize their thoughts during a cognitive task. In this study, therapists will be instructed to verbalize their treatment planning at nine measurement points.
Assessed pre-training in PBT (Day 0), at Day 1 of treatment, after diagnosis (Day 2), after a hypothetical model is developed (Day 3), after EMA-Assessment is complete (Week-6) and every four weeks during the treatment phase (Weeks 10, 14, 18 and 22).

Medidas de resultados secundários

Medida de resultado
Descrição da medida
Prazo
Client satisfaction
Prazo: Assessed at post-treatment (week 28).
Patient satisfaction at the end of treatment, measured with the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ). The CSQ uses 8 items with a range of 1-4 with higher mean values reflecting higher satisfaction with the recieved treatment.
Assessed at post-treatment (week 28).
Patient and Therapist Attitude Towards EMA-Assessment
Prazo: Assessed at intermediate (week 6) and post-treatment (week 28) (PAUEN). Assessed at intermediate (week 6) and every four weeks in Treatment Phase (Weeks 10, 14, 18 and 22) (TAUEN)
the therapist attitudes toward the utility of the EMA and networks scale (TAUEN) and the patient attitudes toward the utility of the EMA and networks scale (PAUEN) are modified versions of the Therapist and Client Attitudes Measures. minimum value= 8, maximum value= 40, higher scores mean a higher attitude toward EMA and networks regarding their utility.
Assessed at intermediate (week 6) and post-treatment (week 28) (PAUEN). Assessed at intermediate (week 6) and every four weeks in Treatment Phase (Weeks 10, 14, 18 and 22) (TAUEN)
Therapist Treatment Evaluation
Prazo: Assessed at intermediate (week 6) and every four weeks in the treatment phase (Weeks 10, 14, 18 and 22).
The Treatment Evaluation Inventory will be used to assess therapists' perceptions of treatment. It consists of 14 statements that are evaluated on a 7-point Likert scale, with response options spanning from -3 (strongly disagree) to +3 (strongly agree). A higher mean score reflects a higher attitude towards the given treatment (e.g. PBT or routine care)
Assessed at intermediate (week 6) and every four weeks in the treatment phase (Weeks 10, 14, 18 and 22).
Self-Efficacy
Prazo: Assessed after randomization (Day 1), after completion of the EMA baseline phase (6-Week intermediate), assessed at post-treatment (week 28) and assessed at a six-month follow-up.
Perceived general self-efficacy, meaning an optimistic self-belief that one can perform difficult or novel tasks or cope with adversity is measured by the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). The GSE is a 10-item self-report questionnaire with a validated one factor structure. The GSE ranges from 1-4 with a higher mean score reflecting higher self-efficacy.
Assessed after randomization (Day 1), after completion of the EMA baseline phase (6-Week intermediate), assessed at post-treatment (week 28) and assessed at a six-month follow-up.
Decisional Self-Efficacy
Prazo: Assessed after randomization (Day 1), after completion of the EMA baseline phase (6-Week intermediate), assessed at post-treatment (week 28) and assessed at a six-month follow-up.
Decision making self-efficacy is measured using the Decision Self-Efficacy Scale. The DSE is an 11-item self-report instrument measuring self-efficacy in the domain of treatment decisions. The DSE ranges from 0-4 with higher mean scores reflecting a higher confidence and self-efficacy in treatment decisions.
Assessed after randomization (Day 1), after completion of the EMA baseline phase (6-Week intermediate), assessed at post-treatment (week 28) and assessed at a six-month follow-up.
Therapeutic Alliance
Prazo: Assessed after randomization (Day 1), after completion of the EMA baseline phase (6-Week intermediate) and assessed at post-treatment (week 28).
Therapeutic Alliance is measured at patient level using the Working Alliance Inventory Short Revised Patient Version (WAI-SR-P). The WAI-SR-P measures therapeutic alliance from the patient's perspective using 12 items as a self report ranging from 1-5 with higher mean scores reflecting a stronger and more positive working alliance as perceived by the patient.
Assessed after randomization (Day 1), after completion of the EMA baseline phase (6-Week intermediate) and assessed at post-treatment (week 28).
Therapist Decision Making Style
Prazo: Assessed pre-training in PBT (Day 0), at Day 1 of treatment, after diagnosis (Day 2), after a hypothetical model is developed (Day 3), after EMA-Assessment is complete (Week-6) and every four weeks during the treatment phase (Weeks 10, 14, 18 and 22).
Therapists' Decision Making Styles will be measured using the therapist decision making questionnaire (TDMQ). The TDMQ is a self-report scale measuring therapists' decision-making style using 23 items on a scale from 1 to 5. Higher mean scores on a specific subscale reflect a decision style that puts a higher emphasis on the sources of information belonging to that specific decision making style.
Assessed pre-training in PBT (Day 0), at Day 1 of treatment, after diagnosis (Day 2), after a hypothetical model is developed (Day 3), after EMA-Assessment is complete (Week-6) and every four weeks during the treatment phase (Weeks 10, 14, 18 and 22).

Colaboradores e Investigadores

É aqui que você encontrará pessoas e organizações envolvidas com este estudo.

Patrocinador

Goethe University

Investigadores

  • Investigador principal: Ulrich Stangier, PhD, Goethe Universität Frankfurt

Publicações e links úteis

A pessoa responsável por inserir informações sobre o estudo fornece voluntariamente essas publicações. Estes podem ser sobre qualquer coisa relacionada ao estudo.

Publicações Gerais

Links úteis

Datas de registro do estudo

Essas datas acompanham o progresso do registro do estudo e os envios de resumo dos resultados para ClinicalTrials.gov. Os registros do estudo e os resultados relatados são revisados ​​pela National Library of Medicine (NLM) para garantir que atendam aos padrões específicos de controle de qualidade antes de serem publicados no site público.

Datas Principais do Estudo

Início do estudo (Estimado)

27 de junho de 2026

Conclusão Primária (Estimado)

1 de janeiro de 2029

Conclusão do estudo (Estimado)

1 de janeiro de 2029

Datas de inscrição no estudo

Enviado pela primeira vez

22 de junho de 2026

Enviado pela primeira vez que atendeu aos critérios de CQ

9 de julho de 2026

Primeira postagem (Real)

15 de julho de 2026

Atualizações de registro de estudo

Última Atualização Postada (Real)

15 de julho de 2026

Última atualização enviada que atendeu aos critérios de controle de qualidade

9 de julho de 2026

Última verificação

1 de julho de 2026

Mais Informações

Termos relacionados a este estudo

Palavras-chave

Termos MeSH relevantes adicionais

Outros números de identificação do estudo

  • 2026-00-PBACE

Plano para dados de participantes individuais (IPD)

Planeja compartilhar dados de participantes individuais (IPD)?

SIM

Descrição do plano IPD

Individual participant data that underlie the results reported in the main publication of outcomes, after deidentification (text, tables, figures, and appendices) will be shared. Further Study Protocol, Analysis Plan, Informed Consent Form and Analytic Code will be shared to researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal.

Prazo de Compartilhamento de IPD

Beginning 3 months and ending 5 years following article publication. Data are available for 5 years at the Open Science Forum under: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/TVKMQ

Critérios de acesso de compartilhamento IPD

Proposals should be directed to stangier@psych.uni-frankfurt.de. To gain access, data requestors will need to sign a data access agreement.

Tipo de informação de suporte de compartilhamento de IPD

  • PROTOCOLO DE ESTUDO
  • SEIVA
  • CIF
  • ANALYTIC_CODE

Informações sobre medicamentos e dispositivos, documentos de estudo

Estuda um medicamento regulamentado pela FDA dos EUA

Não

Estuda um produto de dispositivo regulamentado pela FDA dos EUA

Não

Essas informações foram obtidas diretamente do site clinicaltrials.gov sem nenhuma alteração. Se você tiver alguma solicitação para alterar, remover ou atualizar os detalhes do seu estudo, entre em contato com register@clinicaltrials.gov. Assim que uma alteração for implementada em clinicaltrials.gov, ela também será atualizada automaticamente em nosso site .

Se inscrever