Treatment-as-Usual for Couples: Trajectories Before and After Beginning Couple Therapy

Perceived overlap and therapy outcomes among couple clients

This article explores couples' perceptions and expectations of closeness in a clinical setting, and how relationship perceptions and expectations are associated with treatment outcomes. Bowen's theory of differentiation suggests that healthy relationships require a balance of autonomy and connection. However, some research suggests that contemporary societal expectations are pushing couples to expect greater degrees of closeness and less autonomy. Utilizing a clinical sample of 185 couples from an on-campus Couple and Family Therapy training clinic, this article explores couples' perceptions and expectations of relationship closeness utilizing graphics of overlapping circles. Latent profile analysis was conducted to identify three different profile groups based on perceptions and expectations. Wald tests for significant mean differences among the profiles were performed. Results identified significant differences between the three groups for satisfaction and separateness and connectedness variables, number of sessions and termination.

Measuring successful conversations in couples with and without aphasia: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Aphasia impacts communication and relationships. While counselling is increasingly recognised as a component of the speech-language therapy role, the success of conversation partner training is typically measured in terms of communication alone. This scoping review aimed to describe how successful conversation is currently measured with couples-with and without aphasia, to inform the development of an ecologically valid measure for couples with aphasia.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

The scoping review was reported in alignment with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extensions for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-SCR). MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO databases were searched for conversation treatment studies for couples with and without aphasia. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were extracted from included studies and screened against the three-tier model of situated language to shortlist those that measure everyday communication. Items within shortlisted PROMs were further described using the refined International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health linking rules.

RESULTS

Following screening and full-text review, 46 studies were included, consisting of 24 studies conducted with couples with aphasia and 22 studies conducted with couples without aphasia. For couples with aphasia, 13 PROMs were identified that measured everyday communication. Of these, 23% were dyadic (i.e., measured from the perspectives of both members of the couple); however, they usually only appraised the communication behaviours of the person with aphasia. For couples without aphasia, eight PROMs were identified that measured everyday communication; all were dyadic and measured both attitudes and communication behaviours of both partners.

CONCLUSION

Conversation relies on the interaction of two people, and success in conversation is best rated by those having the conversation. The use of PROMs is recommended as part of person and relationship-centred practice; however, there is currently no validated PROM for conversation in aphasia that considers the perspectives and behaviours of both the person with aphasia and their communication partner. The PROM items identified in this study will form the basis of future research to develop a PROM for couples' conversations in aphasia.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on the subject Communication partner training (CPT) for couples, where one person has aphasia, can improve conversation skills and enhance relationships. Clinician-rated measures, such as conversation analysis, have been used to measure the outcomes of CPT. However, there is a lack of person-centred or self-rated outcome measurement instruments. that is, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for couples' conversations in aphasia. What this paper adds to existing knowledge We have identified outcome measurement instruments used in conversation treatment studies for couples with and without aphasia. We found that most PROMs used in aphasia treatment studies were not dyadic, that is, they did not include the self-report of both communication partners. In contrast, the PROMs used with couples without aphasia were dyadic and contained items that measured a more complex range of both partners' emotions, behaviours and attitudes. What are the potential or actual clinical implications of this work? This study provides insights into the content and characteristics of PROMs for couples' conversation therapy and may assist clinicians in selecting outcome measurement instruments in their practice.

Trajectories of relationship and individual functioning among waitlisted couples for an online relationship intervention

To inform research and practice with distressed couples, the current study was designed to examine patterns of change among distressed, help-seeking couples prior to receiving an intervention. Data from this study originate from 221 couples assigned to the waitlist control condition of a randomized controlled trial for couples seeking online help for their relationship. All couples self-selected into the online program and agreed to withhold seeking additional services for their relationship during the waitlist period. In contrast with prior findings, results from the current study indicated a general pattern of mean improvement in both self-reported relationship functioning (e.g., increased relationship satisfaction, partner emotional support) and self-reported individual functioning (i.e., decreased psychological distress, anger) over the six-month waitlist period. Nonetheless, the majority of couples continued to remain relationally distressed despite these improvements. Findings from the study indicate that distressed couples can, in fact, exhibit some degree of improvement absent of intervention. At the same time, overall levels of distress remained elevated, indicating that these improvements are not sufficient to result in high levels of functioning and suggesting that many distressed couples may benefit from empirically supported programs to realize greater gains. These results also highlight and underscore the importance of including control conditions in studies examining the efficacy of relationship interventions with distressed couples to ensure that any observed improvements in relationship functioning are attributable to the intervention rather than to naturally occurring changes.

Therapy outcomes for neurodiverse couples: Exploring a solution-focused approach

The need for clinical approaches that address romantic relationship concerns of adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has been essentially overlooked. There are a growing number of recommendations in the available literature to increase the availability and evaluation of treatment approaches that are appropriate for couples that include an adult with ASD. The aim of the present study was to explore clinical outcomes of a neurodiverse couple who participated in twelve sessions of solution-focused brief therapy. Our findings indicated both partners experienced improvement in the target complaints, communication and emotional awareness. On the other hand, each partner had a different trajectory of change in relationship satisfaction over the course of treatment. Directions for future research and implications for couple therapy with adults diagnosed with ASD are discussed.

Interventions for Couples

Because relationship discord and dissolution are common and costly, interventions are needed to treat distressed couples and to prevent distress among vulnerable couples. We review meta-analytic evidence showing that 60-80% of distressed couples benefit from behavioral and emotion-focused approaches to couple therapy, but we also note that treatment effects are weaker in actual clinical practice than in controlled studies, dissipate following treatment for about half of all couples, and may be explained by factors that are common across models. Meta-analyses of prevention programs reveal reliable but smaller effects, reflecting a need to know more about whether and how communication mediates effects, about how risk and diversity moderate effects, and about how technology-enabled interventions can reduce attrition in vulnerable populations. Interventions for couples are improving and expanding, but critical questions remain about how and for whom they work.