Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: Group Settings Versus Family Settings

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy: Group Settings Versus Family Settings

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) helps in the treatment of broad and varieties of psychological problems and it has been proven to be effective in different kinds of mental problems including depression, anxiety disorders, alcohol and drug use problem, marital problem, eating disorder and severe mental illness. CBT is also well proven to improve a patients quality of life with an individual, families or group setting. (American Psychological Association, 2019). Individual CBT can be too intensive to comprehend for some patient, whereas Group cognitive behavioral therapy (GCBT) is proven effective in delivering CBT, especially to patients that seems challenging GCBT is proven to be more efficient treatment that adequately treats behavioral problems (Naik et al. 2013). In other to recommend GCBT more work needs: such as establishing patients perception, in the ongoing treatment, whether or not symptoms are been reduced in real clinical setting. Even though CBT has been said to be effective in the treatment of some mental issues the effectiveness depends on the disorder presented by the patient (Naik et al. 2013).  CBT is highly effective in the treatment of adult unipolar depression, adolescent unipolar depression, bulimia nervosa, childhood depressive and anxiety disorders, generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, post-traumatic stress disorder, schizophrenia, and social phobia (Naik et al. 2013).

Group cognitive behavioral therapy has also been shown to be more cost-effective because Group treatment has been presented as a more cost-effective method of treating a large number of children and adolescents especially in children or adolescent with anxiety disorders, depression, bulimia nervosa to mention but a few. Group CBT result in reduced medical and nonmedical costs, thereby contributing to a societal cost offset, but in a family setting, there is the scarcity of properly trained therapists and high costs (Hedman et al.2010). However, CBT is not readily available in healthcare settings. Therefore, it is essential to develop and evaluate methods of therapy that are more time- and cost-efficient. Because health care resources are limited, there has been an increasing demand for cost-effective treatments that reduce the societal costs of sick leave and health care consumption (Hedman et al.2010).

An example of comparing CBT and GCBT is a patient that presented to my clinical site diagnosed with Agoraphobia, she won’t come for individual therapy or come very late and leave early, she wont talk to the therapist during session, but she enjoys coming to the female group and is committed to coming, because she feels the support of the group, she opens a little more then when she’s in individual therapy, she’s thriving better.