Examining the comparative effectiveness of virtual reality and in-vivo exposure therapy on social anxiety and specific phobia: A systematic review & meta-analysis

Damla Kuleli , Philip Tyson , Nyle H. Davies , Biao Zeng
{"title":"Examining the comparative effectiveness of virtual reality and in-vivo exposure therapy on social anxiety and specific phobia: A systematic review & meta-analysis","authors":"Damla Kuleli ,&nbsp;Philip Tyson ,&nbsp;Nyle H. Davies ,&nbsp;Biao Zeng","doi":"10.1016/j.jbct.2025.100524","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy (VRET) is the most widely used Virtual Reality psychotherapeutic intervention. There is empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of VRET on Specific Phobia and Social Anxiety Disorder. Since it has an advantage over in-vivo Exposure Therapy (IVET) in being cost-effective, adaptable and controllable, previous studies suggest it is a suitable alternative psychotherapeutic intervention for IVET. However, there is a need for a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of VRET and IVET.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>The present meta-analysis aimed to examine the effectiveness of VRET and IVET in the treatment of social anxiety disorder and specific phobia.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Eligible studies needed to be randomised controlled trials which included adults diagnosed with social anxiety or specific phobia according to the DSM-4 and DSM-5 or ICD 10. Studies needed to include two treatment conditions, VRET (using a head-mounted display) and IVET, and these should be accompanied by an additional control condition. Studies also needed to include pre-and post-assessment measures to allow for the calculation of effect size estimates. The electronic databases, PubMed, PsycNet, ProQuest and ScienceDirect were systematically searched for the relevant randomised controlled studies.</div></div><div><h3>Data collection and results</h3><div>A random effects meta-analysis was conducted to examine the comparable effectiveness of VRET and IVET on symptomology. The analysis suggested that both are equally effective at reducing social phobia and anxiety symptoms with both approaches reporting moderate effect sizes.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Results of the meta-analysis demonstrate that VRET generates positive outcomes in the treatment of Specific Phobia and Social Anxiety Disorders which are comparable to IVET. However, due to the limited nature of the literature examined it is not possible to identify which approach is optimal.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36022,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy","volume":"35 2","pages":"Article 100524"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589979125000046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy (VRET) is the most widely used Virtual Reality psychotherapeutic intervention. There is empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of VRET on Specific Phobia and Social Anxiety Disorder. Since it has an advantage over in-vivo Exposure Therapy (IVET) in being cost-effective, adaptable and controllable, previous studies suggest it is a suitable alternative psychotherapeutic intervention for IVET. However, there is a need for a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of VRET and IVET.

Aim

The present meta-analysis aimed to examine the effectiveness of VRET and IVET in the treatment of social anxiety disorder and specific phobia.

Methods

Eligible studies needed to be randomised controlled trials which included adults diagnosed with social anxiety or specific phobia according to the DSM-4 and DSM-5 or ICD 10. Studies needed to include two treatment conditions, VRET (using a head-mounted display) and IVET, and these should be accompanied by an additional control condition. Studies also needed to include pre-and post-assessment measures to allow for the calculation of effect size estimates. The electronic databases, PubMed, PsycNet, ProQuest and ScienceDirect were systematically searched for the relevant randomised controlled studies.

Data collection and results

A random effects meta-analysis was conducted to examine the comparable effectiveness of VRET and IVET on symptomology. The analysis suggested that both are equally effective at reducing social phobia and anxiety symptoms with both approaches reporting moderate effect sizes.

Conclusions

Results of the meta-analysis demonstrate that VRET generates positive outcomes in the treatment of Specific Phobia and Social Anxiety Disorders which are comparable to IVET. However, due to the limited nature of the literature examined it is not possible to identify which approach is optimal.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy
Journal of Behavioral and Cognitive Therapy Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
60 days
期刊最新文献
Examining the comparative effectiveness of virtual reality and in-vivo exposure therapy on social anxiety and specific phobia: A systematic review & meta-analysis Acceptability and feasibility of a Taekwondo mindful movement intervention in Dialectical Behavior Therapy Healthier and earlier through digital technology: Towards a transdiagnostic staging model of eating and sleep disorders in adolescence (S.A.N.A.): A study protocol Usability testing of CalmSoul: A digital cognitive behaviour therapy platform for adolescents with social anxiety disorder Bibliometric insights into pica: A psychological perspective on evolving research trends
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1