Exploring patient experiences of Cognitive Analytic Therapy

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    Exploring the collaborative development of Cognitive Analytic Therapy (CAT) Sequential Diagrammatic Reformulations (SDRs) with patients in a High Secure Hospital: Implications for insight and risk

  • IRAS ID

    118880

  • Contact name

    James P Reilly

  • Contact email

    j.reilly@liverpool.ac.uk

  • Research summary

    Cognitive Analytic Therapy (CAT) is widely used across secure forensic services in the UK, however has been the subject of little research. It is used in direct therapeutic work, systemically with patients and staff, and to compliment risk assessments. These all involve the development of a CAT formulation. The term ‘formulation’ refers to the process of describing a problem (e.g. offending behaviour) drawing upon theory (in this case CAT theory) to provide an individualised understanding of the person and their behaviour. In CAT formulations take the form of a diagram, showing how the person relates to other people. With forensic patients formulations seek to understand the meaning and function of their offending behaviour, identifying actual and perceived triggers which position the person in a state of mind likely to result in offending.

    Studies of non-forensic patients have found the collaborative development of a CAT formulation helped individuals to develop awareness of behaviours, the ability to question behaviours and do things differently, as well as providing a practical tool for future coping. This suggests that CAT formulations can help offenders develop insight and control over their risk behaviours. However to date no studies have explored the utility of this process from the perspective of offenders.

    This study will use a qualitative design to explore patient views on the development of CAT formulations, their understandings of insight and risk, and their views on future risk management. Patients recruited from Ashworth Hospital will be interviewed using a semi-structured interview schedule.

    The study is funded by the University of Liverpool Doctorate of Clinical Psychology program.

  • REC name

    North West - Preston Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    13/NW/0515

  • Date of REC Opinion

    16 Jul 2013

  • REC opinion

    Favourable Opinion