Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral group therapy, psychodrama, and their integration for treatment of social anxiety disorder: A randomized controlled trial.
Hanieh Abeditehrani, Corine Dijk, Mohsen Dehghani Neyshabouri, A. Arntz
{"title":"Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral group therapy, psychodrama, and their integration for treatment of social anxiety disorder: A randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Hanieh Abeditehrani, Corine Dijk, Mohsen Dehghani Neyshabouri, A. Arntz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3985128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES\nAlthough cognitive behavioral group therapy (CBGT) is an effective treatment for social anxiety disorder, many socially anxious patients are still symptomatic after treatment. A possible improvement for CBGT could come from the more experiential group psychotherapy, psychodrama (PD). The integration of CBGT and PD (labeled CBPT) might offer an even more effective treatment than CBGT or PD alone. With the present study, we investigated first whether three kinds of group therapy (CBGT, PD, and CBPT) are superior to a waitlist (WL). Second, we investigated whether CBPT is more effective than CBGT or PD alone.\n\n\nMETHODS\nOne hundred and forty-four social anxiety patients were randomly assigned to three active conditions or a WL. After wait, WL-participants were randomized over the active treatment conditions.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe results of a multilevel analysis showed that all treatments were superior to WL in reducing social anxiety complaints. Only CBGT and CBPT differed significantly from WL in reducing fear of negative evaluations. There were no significant differences between active conditions in any of the variables after treatment and after six-month follow up, neither were there significant differences in treatment dropout.\n\n\nLIMITATIONS\nFirst there is the lack of a long-term follow-up. Second, because of loss of participants, we did not reach the planned numbers in the active treatment groups in comparison to WL. Moreover, this study was not designed as a non-inferiority or equivalence trial.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nAlthough the integrative CBPT showed good results, it was not more effective than the other treatments.","PeriodicalId":48198,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry","volume":"1 1","pages":"101908"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3985128","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Although cognitive behavioral group therapy (CBGT) is an effective treatment for social anxiety disorder, many socially anxious patients are still symptomatic after treatment. A possible improvement for CBGT could come from the more experiential group psychotherapy, psychodrama (PD). The integration of CBGT and PD (labeled CBPT) might offer an even more effective treatment than CBGT or PD alone. With the present study, we investigated first whether three kinds of group therapy (CBGT, PD, and CBPT) are superior to a waitlist (WL). Second, we investigated whether CBPT is more effective than CBGT or PD alone.
METHODS
One hundred and forty-four social anxiety patients were randomly assigned to three active conditions or a WL. After wait, WL-participants were randomized over the active treatment conditions.
RESULTS
The results of a multilevel analysis showed that all treatments were superior to WL in reducing social anxiety complaints. Only CBGT and CBPT differed significantly from WL in reducing fear of negative evaluations. There were no significant differences between active conditions in any of the variables after treatment and after six-month follow up, neither were there significant differences in treatment dropout.
LIMITATIONS
First there is the lack of a long-term follow-up. Second, because of loss of participants, we did not reach the planned numbers in the active treatment groups in comparison to WL. Moreover, this study was not designed as a non-inferiority or equivalence trial.
CONCLUSIONS
Although the integrative CBPT showed good results, it was not more effective than the other treatments.
期刊介绍:
The publication of the book Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition (1958) by the co-founding editor of this Journal, Joseph Wolpe, marked a major change in the understanding and treatment of mental disorders. The book used principles from empirical behavioral science to explain psychopathological phenomena and the resulting explanations were critically tested and used to derive effective treatments. The second half of the 20th century saw this rigorous scientific approach come to fruition. Experimental approaches to psychopathology, in particular those used to test conditioning theories and cognitive theories, have steadily expanded, and experimental analysis of processes characterising and maintaining mental disorders have become an established research area.