The Columbia Academy for Psychoanalytic Educators: A Pilot Program for Developing Analysts and Supervisors of Analytic Candidates.

The Columbia Academy for Psychoanalytic Educators supports graduate analysts' professional development at the Columbia University Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research. In 2018, a pilot program was launched for faculty interested in analyzing and supervising candidates, whose aim is to support and educate those interested in taking on these essential training functions. The focus is on educating the educators, which is a significant departure from the historical focus on evaluation, vetting, and faculty hierarchies. In the process of developing and piloting the program, complex and long debated issues in psychoanalytic education and development were considered that are relevant to many institutes, including training of supervisors and analysts of candidates, addressing problematic faculty hierarchies, creating safety for those presenting clinical work to colleagues, building professional peer relationships, and engagement of faculty in time consuming and nonremunerative activities. The authors report on their experience developing and evaluating this pilot program.

EMPOWER: A Multi-Site Pilot Trial to Reduce Distress in Surrogate Decision-Makers in the ICU.

CONTEXT: Efforts to reduce the psychological distress of surrogate decision-makers of critically ill patients have had limited success, and some have even exacerbated distress. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of EMPOWER (Enhancing and Mobilizing the POtential for Wellness and Resilience), an ultra-brief (∼2-hour), 6-module manualized psychological intervention for surrogates. METHODS: Surrogates who reported significant anxiety and/or an emotionally close relationship with the patient (n=60) were randomized to receive EMPOWER or enhanced usual care (EUC) at one of three metropolitan hospitals. Participants completed evaluations of EMPOWER's acceptability and measures of psychological distress pre-intervention, immediately post-intervention, and at 1- and 3-month follow-up assessments. RESULTS: Delivery of EMPOWER appeared feasible, with 89% of participants completing all 6 modules, and acceptable, with high ratings of satisfaction (mean=4.5/5, SD = .90). Compared to EUC, intent-to-treat analyses showed EMPOWER was superior at reducing peritraumatic distress (Cohen's d = -0.21, small effect) immediately post-intervention and grief intensity (d = -0.70, medium-large effect), posttraumatic stress (d = -0.74, medium-large effect), experiential avoidance (d = -0.46, medium effect), and depression (d = -0.34, small effect) 3 months post-intervention. Surrogate satisfaction with overall critical care (d = 0.27, small effect) was higher among surrogates randomized to EMPOWER. CONCLUSIONS: EMPOWER appeared feasible and acceptable, increased surrogates' satisfaction with critical care, and prevented escalation of posttraumatic stress, grief, and depression 3 months later.

Development and preliminary evaluation of EMPOWER for surrogate decision-makers of critically ill patients.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to develop and refine EMPOWER (Enhancing and Mobilizing the POtential for Wellness and Resilience), a brief manualized cognitive-behavioral, acceptance-based intervention for surrogate decision-makers of critically ill patients and to evaluate its preliminary feasibility, acceptability, and promise in improving surrogates' mental health and patient outcomes. METHOD: Part 1 involved obtaining qualitative stakeholder feedback from 5 bereaved surrogates and 10 critical care and mental health clinicians. Stakeholders were provided with the manual and prompted for feedback on its content, format, and language. Feedback was organized and incorporated into the manual, which was then re-circulated until consensus. In Part 2, surrogates of critically ill patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) reporting moderate anxiety or close attachment were enrolled in an open trial of EMPOWER. Surrogates completed six, 15-20 min modules, totaling 1.5-2 h. Surrogates were administered measures of peritraumatic distress, experiential avoidance, prolonged grief, distress tolerance, anxiety, and depression at pre-intervention, post-intervention, and at 1-month and 3-month follow-up assessments. RESULTS: Part 1 resulted in changes to the EMPOWER manual, including reducing jargon, improving navigability, making EMPOWER applicable for a range of illness scenarios, rearranging the modules, and adding further instructions and psychoeducation. Part 2 findings suggested that EMPOWER is feasible, with 100% of participants completing all modules. The acceptability of EMPOWER appeared strong, with high ratings of effectiveness and helpfulness (M = 8/10). Results showed immediate post-intervention improvements in anxiety (d = -0.41), peritraumatic distress (d = -0.24), and experiential avoidance (d = -0.23). At the 3-month follow-up assessments, surrogates exhibited improvements in prolonged grief symptoms (d = -0.94), depression (d = -0.23), anxiety (d = -0.29), and experiential avoidance (d = -0.30). SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Preliminary data suggest that EMPOWER is feasible, acceptable, and associated with notable improvements in psychological symptoms among surrogates. Future research should examine EMPOWER with a larger sample in a randomized controlled trial.

Beyond Progression: Devising a New Training Model for Candidate Assessment, Advancement, and Advising at Columbia.

Research over several decades has identified significant problems with the progression model-the traditional approach to assessment and advancement of psychoanalytic candidates-including candidates' anxiety and uncertainty about the methods and fairness of their assessment, avoidance of conflictual issues with patients in order to keep cases, and reluctance to share their challenges with supervisors and advisors. In light of these findings, the Columbia Center for Psychoanalytic Training and Research restructured its psychoanalytic training programs. The progression committee, the progression advisor role, candidate application to advance through the program, and routine committee discussion of candidates were eliminated and replaced by confidential mentorship and a clear and predictable system of trainee advancement. Analytic competency-a requirement for graduation-is now determined solely from detailed written feedback regarding the candidate's achievement of the Center's learning objectives. The number of months of supervised analysis required for graduation has been reduced, as has the required length of the candidate's longest case; in addition, three-times-weekly analyses are now accepted for credit. These changes are meant to increase the transparency, objectivity, and predictability of the training experience and reduce the pressure on clinical decision making and communication between trainees and faculty. An extensive evaluation of the impact of these innovations is currently under way.