Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Thinking hats: 7 mins What are the key assumptions of each approach? What are the benefits of each approach? What are the weaknesses of each approach? This is basically what you did for your exit task, last lesson so we will skip it. What applications, in terms of therapy, could each approach have? Management role: walk round and chat to people (about their Q!) Biological Treatment Biological treatments generally include the administering of medication. This is controversial. Why do you think that is? Biological therapy Drugs are the most common form of biological therapy and are often the first thing administered to patients The assumption is that there is an underlying biological cause for abnormal behaviour This could be due to brain structure, genetics or hormones What might the positive side of this be? Rapid treatment, quick and cheap to administer, can put the patient in a better position to respond to therapy What might be the negative? Medicalising emotions, ‘quick fix’, doesn’t tackle the cause (masks the problem), don’t work for everyone, side effects. Phenelzine Read: http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases- conditions/depression/in-depth/maois/art20043992 In pairs discuss how this drug works? Using the information from the website complete the diagram on the next slide to fully understand how MAOI’s work. Phenelzine A form of antidepressant MAOI – monoamine oxidase inhibitor Monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) are chemicals which inhibit the activity of the monoamine oxidase (MAO) enzyme family. MAO enzyme degrades and removes neurotransmitters such as dopamine and serotonin from the brain MAOI inhibit this action which makes more of these brain chemicals available. Boosting mood by improving brain cell communication. Has quite a few side effects, generally used when other medicines have not been effective There is now a new generation of MAOIs with fewer side effects Presynaptic neuron Synaptic Cleft Postsynaptic neuron MAO – Monoamine Oxidase S – Serotonin MAOI – Inhibitor Presynaptic neuron Synaptic Cleft Postsynaptic neuron MAO – Monoamine Oxidase S – Serotonin I – Inhibitor Neurobiology of Social Anxiety Disorder: Neurobiology of Social Anxiety Disorder: Dysregulation of neurotransmitter function in the brain is thought to play a key role in Social Phobia (SP). Specifically, dopamine (DA), serotonin (SE) are hypothosised in most cases of SP. in varying degrees depending on the individual. So how does phenelzine work to treat social phobia? The MAOI antidepressant "phenelzine" boosts the levels of dopamine and serotonin There is strong evidence for dopamine dysfunction in Social Phobia Physiology of Anxiety Fearful Stimuli Sympathetic nervous system (brain and spinal cord) releases hormones (i.e. adrenaline) Fight or flight response: Increased heart rate, enlarged pupil's, sweat Increased anxiety helps a person to prepare for an appropriate course of action Atenolol Beta-Blocker Work by blocking the transmission of nerve impulses They blocking the effects of the hormone epinephrine, also known as adrenaline. When you take beta blockers, the heart beats more slowly and with less force, thereby reducing blood pressure Read: http://patient.info/health/beta-blockers Beta-blockers – How do they work? Using the information from the website complete the diagram by adding in the labels. Tissue cell Beta-blocker Receptor on cell surface Nerve ending Adrenaline Complete the table How do they work Side effects MAOI • • • • • • • Beta-blockers • • • • • • Leibowitz (1988): Treatment of Social Phobia with Phenelzine Potential pitfalls? Biological treatment Key study: Leibowitz (1988) Aim To see if the drug phenelzine can help treat patients with social phobia. To see if phenelzine is more effective than a placebo and atenolol in treating social phobia. Why use a placebo group? Method A controlled experiment where patients were allocated to one of three conditions, and treated over 8 weeks. They were assessed for social phobia on several tests such as: The Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety Leibowitz Social Phobia Scale. This had common manifestations of social phobia and patients rated 1-4 for the fear produced and 1-4 for the steps taken to avoid the phobic situation. Participants 80 patients meeting DSM criteria for social phobia aged 18–50 years. They were medically healthy and had not received phenelzine for at least two weeks before the trial. Each was assessed to see that there were no other disorders. Each signed a consent form before the research. Design An independent design with patients being allocated randomly to one of four groups: one group was treated with phenelzine one group was given a matching placebo a second treatment group was given atenolol another group was given a matching placebo. Procedure Patients were assessed at the beginning, and then given their drug or placebo, with gradual increases in dosage of phenelzine or atenolol in the treatment groups. Each patient was then reassessed. Independent evaluators were used to carry out clinical assessments in a double blind situation. Findings After eight weeks significant differences were noted for the phenelzine groups, with better scores on the tests for anxiety compared to the placebo groups. There was no significant difference between the patients taking atenolol and those taking a placebo. Conclusions Phenelzine but not atenolol is effective in treating social phobia after eight weeks of treatment. Plenary Outline 2 advantages to drug therapy 2 disadvantages Extension: Suggest a solution Activity: 12 mins Evaluate the Leibowitz study Pair 1 Sample, generalisability, ethics Pair 2- reliability, methodology Pair 3 – usefulness, validity Pair 4 – nature/nurture, reductionism/holism, Evaluation of Liebowitz Method Controls – inc. placebo group and 2 comparison groups Controlled IV – could measure cause and effect Scale used – quantitative data – comparable Issues with this: could be misinterpreted, may still be subjective i.e. what constitutes a ‘5’ on the scale? – validity and reliability Design Independent design Necessary in order to establish cause and effect in this case Random allocation – no bias in sample, everyone had an equal chance of being allocated to each group Sample Wide age range – generalisable across age ranges Medically healthy and had not had phenelzine for 2 weeks before – control of possible confounding variables Data collection Likert scale – 1 to 5 rating system Used a scale that is commonly used in psychiatry Used two different scales – one psychiatrists report and the other self-report (validity) Independent evaluators, double blind – no experimenter bias Reliability Standardised procedure – easily replicable Good controls – clear IV (i.e. which group they were placed in) so effect on DV could be measured Validity Independent evaluators – double-blind, did not know what the study was about so could not be responding to demand characteristics Participants were going about their daily lives – it was longitudinal so presumably the results are ecologically valid Two different types of scale LSPS (self-report, patients subejctive experience) plus assessed with Hamilton Rating Scale. If the results are in agreement, it suggests they are both measuring what they are supposed to measure. Bias Could be some bias in interpreting the rating scales, particularly initially However, the patients were independently evaluated in a double-blind procedure and therefore they could not be subject to demand characteristics The above were not the researchers so no experimenter bias Ethics Consent given Two groups given a placebo – is this ethical? They may not receive the benefits of the treatment Wider benefits for society if an effective treatment for social phobia is evidenced Reductionist it is, it assumes that social phobia can be treated with drugs alone and does not take into account the reasons behind the social phobia However, patients who took phenelzine showed greater improvement, so in some ways this is actually a strength as it led to improved recovery. Determinist Determinist – it takes control out of the hands of the patient and places it with the psychiatrist and medical staff Ethnocentric Ethnocentric N vs N Nature Vs Nurture – supports the role of biological factors in social anxiety. Doesn’t take into account the environmental triggers. Strengths and weaknesses of Biological Treatment Strengths Weaknesses Strengths and weaknesses of Biological Treatment Strengths Weaknesses • Psychology as a science – treatments use knowledge about physiological mechanisms • Easy to use - Little effort and quick response • • • • Reductionist Determinist Side effects Treats the symptoms not the cause