Practice recommendations and referrals, perceptions of efficacy and risk, and self-rated knowledge regarding complementary medicine: a survey of Australian psychologists.

BACKGROUND: Many people with mental health problems use a range of complementary medicine (CM), including over the counter products, practices, and utilise the services of CM practitioners. Psychologists are likely to consult with clients using CM, in some form, as part of their broader mental health care. The aim of this research was to determine the number of types of CM products, practices, and practitioners are recommended and/or referred by Australian psychologists as part of their clinical practice, as well as explore the relationship between psychologists' perspectives on the risk and relevance of engaging with CM in psychology. METHODS: Survey data was collected from psychologists in clinical practice who self-selected to participate in the study via an online 79-item questionnaire exploring core aspects of CM engagement in psychology clinical practice. RESULTS: Amongst the 201 psychologists, 5% reported not recommending any type of CM, with 63% recommending four or more types of CM. Further, 25% had not referred to a CM practitioner, while 33% had referred to four or more types of CM practitioner. Psychologists are recommending and referring to CM even when they perceive their knowledge of CM to be poor, and that engaging with CM was a risk. CONCLUSION: This study provides insights into psychologist perceptions of CM within psychology practice and how these perceptions are associated with rates of recommending and referring to CM as part of their clinical practice. These findings may inform the development of CM relevant education and guidelines for psychologists.

The relationship between psychology practice and complementary medicine in Australia: Psychologists' demographics and practice characteristics regarding type of engagement across a range of complementary medicine modalities.

INTRODUCTION: Many people with mental health problems utilise a range of complementary medicine (CM) practitioners, products, and practices. Psychologists are likely to consult with clients who are seeking and using CM, in some form, as part of their wider mental health treatment. The aim of this research is to determine how much, and in what ways, Australian psychologists recommend CM products and/or practices, and/or initiate referrals to CM practitioners as part of their clinical practice and to explore if these behaviours have any association with the characteristics of the psychologist or their wider practice. METHODS: Survey data was collected from psychologists in clinical practice who self-selected to participate between February and April 2021. Participation in the study was via an online 79-item questionnaire exploring core aspects of CM engagement in psychology clinical practice. RESULTS: Amongst the 202 psychologists who completed the survey, mind/body approaches (90.5%) were the most recommended CM and cultural/spiritual approaches the least recommended CM (7.5%). Participants also reported referring to CM practitioners with naturopaths the most common focus of their referrals (57.9%) and cultural and spiritual practitioners the least common focus of their referrals (6.69%). Our analysis shows the demographic and practice characteristics of a psychologist are generally not predictors of a psychologist's engagement with CM in their clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial numbers of psychologists recommend CM products and practices and/or refer clients to CM practitioners. Alongside subjecting CM interventions for mental health to an evidence-base assessment, the broader discipline of psychology needs to also consider psychologist engagement with CM in clinical practice in order to help ensure cultural-sensitivity, client safety and client choice.

A single case series of imagery rescripting of intrusive autobiographical memories in depression.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Intrusive memories are a common feature of depression, thought to be related to the onset and maintenance of the disorder. Intrusive memories have been successfully targeted in posttraumatic stress disorder through imagery rescripting. Yet there is limited evidence for the effectiveness of this technique in depression. We examined whether 12 weekly sessions of imagery rescripting was associated with reductions in depression, rumination and intrusive memories in a sample of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Fifteen clinically depressed participants completed 12 weeks of imagery rescripting treatment while completing daily measures of depression symptoms, rumination and intrusive memory frequency. RESULTS: There were significant reductions on pre-post treatment and daily assessment measures of depression symptoms, rumination and intrusive memories. Reductions in depression symptoms represented a large effect size, while 13 participants (87%) showed reliable improvement and 12 participants (80%) demonstrated clinically significant improvement and no longer met diagnostic criteria for MDD. LIMITATIONS: The sample size was small, however the intensive daily assessment protocol ensured the viability of within-person analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Imagery rescripting as a stand-alone intervention appears to be effective at reducing depression symptoms. Additionally, the treatment was well tolerated by clients and observed to overcome several traditional treatment barriers in this population.