University-church partnerships: A mechanism to enhance relationship health.

Romantic relationship distress leads to decreased satisfaction and dissolution. While therapy is effective for helping distressed couples, it is often inaccessible due to cost, time, and childcare barriers. Churches are often able to offer lower-cost services and provide childcare. In partnership with a network of local churches, university staff trained lay leaders to deliver an evidence-based relationship education program and collected data from 97 couples to evaluate pre- to post-workshop changes in couple functioning. Multilevel modeling was used to examine changes from pre- to post-workshop and thematic analysis was used to analyze open-ended feedback responses. Results showed improvements in communication, relationship satisfaction, commitment, and intimacy safety, with the largest effect found for communication. Participants also reported improved communication skills were one of the most beneficial parts of the program. Through the partnership with a university, churches can offer and rigorously evaluate evidence-based programs to strengthen couple relationships in their communities.

Is mindfulness one-size-fits-all?: Consulting community members and stakeholders to adapt mindfulness for communities with low-income and economic marginalization.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Although stress is pertinent to all people, individuals with low-income and economic marginalization (LIEM) tend to experience greater psychosocial stressors as well as different relationship stressors than individuals with higher income. While mindfulness may be a particularly useful tool for individuals with LIEM, it has yet to be adapted for this community. Using a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach, the present study conducted focus groups with community members with LIEM to identify effective dissemination strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirteen individuals with LIEM were recruited to participate in one of two focus groups. The focus groups collected information on how individuals with LIEM cope with stress, how these individuals perceive mindfulness, and how to reduce barriers to participating in a brief mindfulness intervention for stress. Focus groups were transcribed and coded by four coders using thematic analysis within a grounded theory framework. RESULTS: Twelve themes were identified: movement-based coping, behavioral/tactile coping, interest in mindfulness, familiarity with mindfulness, tangible mindfulness, narrow understanding of practicing mindfulness, relaxing, affiliation, alliance with healthcare facility, storytelling, breaking bread, and mental health treatment stigma. CONCLUSION: Themes derived from the focus groups were discussed with community stakeholders. Findings from this study informed clinical considerations for using mindfulness with individuals with LIEM.

Couple variables predicting retention in a brief intervention and research.

Therapy is an effective form of treatment for couple distress; yet, research shows that 20%-60% of couples terminate treatment prematurely. Predictors of couple retention in therapy and research are unclear, particularly for couples from marginalized populations, which has important implications for the quality and generalizability of research results, and the benefits derived from therapy are limited when participants are not retained. The purpose of this study (N = 1310) was to identify couple-level variables that predict (1) retention in a brief, two-session couple intervention (The Relationship Checkup) delivered as a home visitation program and (2) retention in research participation at 1- and 6-month follow-up. Hypotheses were tested using a two-level multi-level model. Couples are significantly less likely to be retained in the brief intervention if (1) at least one partner identifies as Asian, Pacific Islander, or Native American, (2) at least one partner identifies as Hispanic/Latinx, or (3) both partners report mental or emotional health as a concern in their relationship. Couples are significantly less likely to be retained in research if (1) at least one partner identifies as Asian, Pacific Islander, or Native American (1 month only), (2) at least one partner identifies as Hispanic/Latinx (1 and 6 months), (3) if either partner reports clinically significant relationship distress at baseline (1 and 6 months), or (4) if either partner reports relationship aggression at baseline (6 months only). These findings are discussed with relevance to clinicians and researchers to recruit and retain more diverse and marginalized participants in couple interventions and follow-up research.

Stigma toward healthcare providers from patients during COVID-19 era in Jordan.

AIM: This study aimed to explore healthcare providers' (HCP) stigmatization from patients during the COVID-19 outbreak in Jordan. METHOD: A cross-sectional design was used. Data collection was conducted between May and July 2021. The research questionnaire included demographic information about participants and multiple statements that reflect stigma of participants toward HCPs. Regression analysis was conducted to assess the association between stigma and explanatory variables. RESULTS: A total of 777 surveys were included in the study. Many people show high stigma toward HCPs during COVID-19 pandemic. Various factors including hearing news all time (p<.001), having children (p<.024), and smoking (p<.001) were significant in prediction stigma toward HCPs. CONCLUSION: This one of few studies conducted in Jordan regarding the stigma toward HCP from other people with chronic diseases. Our study found that many people showed some stigma toward HCP during COVID-19. Stigmatization of HCP related to a pandemic is a lesson most people have not learned. It is not enough to cheer HCPs. A clear, sensible public education campaign about the public's risks by interacting with HCP is necessary.

Your place or mine?: Examining the accessibility and efficacy of a brief, home-based, couple intervention.

Interventions for couples that can be flexibly delivered (e.g., home) are gaining traction in the field of couple therapy, particularly for underserved couples who experience barriers to accessing traditional methods of care. However, questions remain regarding what types of couples prefer the home over traditional clinic settings and whether there are differences in treatment effectiveness in the home versus a clinic setting. The present study sought to address these gaps in the literature. Using a secondary data analysis approach, data from 339 couples who participated in a brief, relationship intervention were examined. Couples were able to select where they wanted to participate (i.e., their home or a local clinic). Logistic regression analyses revealed that parents were significantly more likely to choose to participate in the intervention at their home relative to nonparents. No differences in intervention setting emerged as a function of marital status, racial/ethnic minority status, or poverty status. Three 2-level multilevel models indicated that, at baseline, couples presented with similar attitudes toward relationship help seeking and relationship satisfaction across settings as well as established a similar alliance with the facilitator at 1 month after the intervention. Additionally, a series of 3-level multilevel models found that rates of change did not significantly differ between groups on attitudes toward relationship help seeking and relationship satisfaction across the intervention. Thus, despite the potential chaos of the home, home settings appear to be an equally effective delivery setting relative to traditional settings for this brief relationship intervention and may be particularly useful for reaching parents. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).