|
Abstract
|
OBJECTIVE: To explore the views of UK-based recipients of Morita Therapy (MT) on the acceptability of MT.
DESIGN: Qualitative study nested within a pilot randomised controlled trial of MT (a Japanese psychological therapy largely unknown in the UK) versus treatment as usual, using post-treatment semistructured interviews analysed with a framework approach. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants who received MT as part of the Morita Trial, recruited for the trial from General Practice record searches in Devon, UK. Data from 16 participants were purposively sampled for analysis.
RESULTS: We identified five themes which, together, form a model of how different participants viewed and experienced MT. Overall, MT was perceived as acceptable by many participants who emphasised the value of the approach, often in comparison to other treatments they had tried. These participants highlighted how accepting and allowing difficulties as natural phenomena and shifting attention from symptoms to external factors had facilitated symptom reduction and a sense of empowerment. We found that how participants understood and related to the principles of MT, in light of their expectations of treatment, was significantly tied to the extent to which MT was perceived as acceptable. Our findings also highlighted the distinction between MT in principle and practice, with participants noting challenges of engaging with the process of therapy such as fear and discomfort around rest, needing sufficient support from the therapist and others, and the commitment of treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: People in the UK can accept the premise of MT, and consider the approach beneficial and novel. Therefore, proceeding to a large-scale trial of MT is appropriate with minor modifications to our clinical protocol. Participants' expectations and understandings of treatment play a key role in acceptability, and future research may investigate these potential moderators of acceptability in MT. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERC: ISRCTN17544090; Pre-results.
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Language: en |