1. What was the purpose of the Monson, C. M., Fredman, S. J., Macdonald, A., Pukay-Martin, N. D., Resick, P. A., & Schnurr, P. P. (2012) study?
The purpose of the study was to further examine and compare cognitive-behavioral conjoint therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with a wait-list condition (Monson, Fredman, Macdonald, Pukay-Martin, Resick, & Schnurr, 2012). The therapy that was chosen was described as focusing on couples where one partner has been diagnosed with PTSD. Cognitive-behavioral conjoint therapy aimed at treating both the PTSD symptoms and enhancing relationship satisfaction (Monson et al., 2012). Monson et al. (2012) defined posttraumatic stress disorder as a condition that affects the well-being of the individual and creates intimate relationship problems. Intimate relationship factors have been shown to affect individual PTSD treatment outcomes, which is the reason that the researchers focus on this important study (Monson et al., 2012).
Monson et al. (2012) used randomized controlled trial method to explore this issue having heterosexual and same-sex couples with one partner meeting the criteria for PTSD. Couples who were randomly assigned to the intervention took part in 15-sessions of cognitive-behavioral conjoint therapy for PTSD (Monson et al., 2012).
The researchers used the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale, identified patient and partner rated PTSD symptoms from 2008 to 2012 in a Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient hospital setting in Boston, Massachusetts, and a university-based research center in Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Monson et al., 2012). In addition, the study had participants evaluate their intimate relationship satisfaction, by assessing it with the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (Monson et al., 2012).
The study collected data on symptoms of PTSD, comorbid conditions, and relationship satisfaction (Monson et al., 2012). In addition, the researchers made sure to keep the assessors, who were collecting outcome data, unaware of the assigned study, so that they will not be influenced by that knowledge throughout the course of the research (i.e. baseline, at 8 weeks, 15.86 weeks, and at an uncontrolled 3-month follow-up) (Monson et al., 2012).
2. Discuss the pros and cons of the authors’ procedures for obtaining subjects.
The authors used participants from two different areas geographical regions the Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient hospital setting in Boston, Massachusetts, and a university research center in Toronto, Canada (Monson et al., 2012). This is strategically difficult that the locations are in two different countries and not all “one roof.” However, the researchers identify their population of interest and where recruitment would occur. They considered the eligibility by assessing diagnosis criteria.
This type of study could have difficulty recruiting a control group willing to commit to the months of treatment, and this could be expensive (Monson et al., 2012). ...