Behandlungsverlauf bei depressiven Störungen

Dyadic coping and mental health in couples: A systematic review

Globally, one out of three people suffer from a mental health issue during their lifetime. In romantic relationships, impaired mental health does not only affect the individual but also their partner and therefore needs to be coped with dyadically. In this systematic review, we summarize research examining dyadic coping (DC) in the context of mental health and individual and relational outcomes. We searched for peer-reviewed articles published between January 1990 and April 2023 on PsycInfo, Medline, and PSYNDEX on DC and mental health within romantic relationships. A total of 60 qualitative, quantitative, and intervention studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting on 16,394 individuals and 4,945 dyads. To synthesize the studies, we used a narrative synthesis approach. Overall, stress expression and positive DC yielded beneficial individual and relational outcomes, whereas, for negative DC, the opposite was true. Results differed between mental health clusters and context played an important role (e.g., symptom severity, life phase). Due to the great diversity of studies and variables, further research should focus on understudied mental health clusters (e.g., anxiety disorders). Clinicians are advised to view mental health issues as a dyadic rather than an individual phenomenon ("we-disease") and develop tailored couple-centered interventions.

Dyadic Coping in Couples: A Conceptual Integration and a Review of the Empirical Literature

The present review on dyadic coping (DC) aims at providing a critical integration of both the conceptual and empirical DC literature and overcoming the limitations of past reviews by (a) describing, comparing, and integrating all the DC models, (b) presenting and integrating findings from studies based on DC models, and (c) suggesting directions for further research. The DC models identified and compared include: The congruence model (Revenson, 1994), the relationship-focused model (Coyne and Smith, 1991; O'Brien and DeLongis, 1996), the communal coping model (Lyons et al., 1998), the systemic-transactional model (Bodenmann, 1995, 1997), the relational-cultural model (Kayser et al., 2007), and the developmental-contextual coping model (Berg and Upchurch, 2007). After discussing each DC model, we advance a conceptual integration of all models, which serves as the framework to organize the review of the empirical literature. This integration includes the following DC dimensions: (a) Stress Communication, (b) Positive DC by One Partner (supportive DC, empathic responding, delegated DC, active engagement), (c) Positive Conjoint DC (common, collaborative, communal, mutual responsiveness); (d) Negative DC by One Partner (protective buffering, overprotection, and hostility/ambivalence), and (e) Negative Conjoint DC (common negative DC, disengaged avoidance). Developmental, relational, and contextual variables are included as factors shaping DC. To be included in the empirical review, articles had to be published in or a peer-reviewed journal in English and/or German before 2017 and include an original empirical study guided by one of the DC models. The review included 139 studies and, with the exception of the congruence model whose findings were discussed separately, findings were presented for overall DC and each of the dimensions identified in the conceptual integration. Findings were grouped also according to whether the stressor related or not to a medical or mental health condition. Demographic and cultural factors affecting DC were discussed. Overall, the empirical review suggests that in Western couples, positive individual, and conjoint DC forms, taken together or separately, have individual and relational benefits for couples coping with stress in general and/or mental health or medical stressors. Research on DC can be expanded to include other populations and stressors and use improved designs.