Comparing the effectiveness of CBT and low-frequency rTMS in reducing symptom severity and depression and improving working memory in adults with OCD: a clinical trial.
{"title":"Comparing the effectiveness of CBT and low-frequency rTMS in reducing symptom severity and depression and improving working memory in adults with OCD: a clinical trial.","authors":"Arash Fazeli, Ahmad Zolghadriha, Reza Pirzeh, Atefeh Fatehi Chenar, Mohsen Dadashi","doi":"10.1080/00207454.2023.2279500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aims to compare the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and low-frequency (LF) repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in reducing symptom severity and depression and improving working memory in adults with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a randomized clinical trial conducted on 24 adults with OCD, randomly assigned into two groups of CBT (<i>n</i> = 12, received CBT with exposure and response prevention (ERP) individually at 20 sessions) and rTMS (<i>n</i> = 12, received LF (1-Hz) rTMS over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) at 10 sessions). They completed the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and two N-Back tasks before, immediately, and 1 month after interventions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Results showed a significant difference between the two methods in reducing the severity of OCD symptoms (<i>p</i> < 0.05) and depression (<i>p</i> = 0.002) immediately after interventions where the CBT with ERP was more effective, but no significant difference was found in terms of working memory (<i>p</i> > 0.05). No significant difference was found between groups in any study variables 1 month after interventions.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Individual CBT with ERP is superior to LF rTMS for reducing the severity of symptoms and depression in OCD patients. However, there is no difference between them in improving working memory.</p>","PeriodicalId":14161,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":"1635-1646"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00207454.2023.2279500","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to compare the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and low-frequency (LF) repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in reducing symptom severity and depression and improving working memory in adults with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).
Methods: This is a randomized clinical trial conducted on 24 adults with OCD, randomly assigned into two groups of CBT (n = 12, received CBT with exposure and response prevention (ERP) individually at 20 sessions) and rTMS (n = 12, received LF (1-Hz) rTMS over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) at 10 sessions). They completed the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and two N-Back tasks before, immediately, and 1 month after interventions.
Results: Results showed a significant difference between the two methods in reducing the severity of OCD symptoms (p < 0.05) and depression (p = 0.002) immediately after interventions where the CBT with ERP was more effective, but no significant difference was found in terms of working memory (p > 0.05). No significant difference was found between groups in any study variables 1 month after interventions.
Conclusion: Individual CBT with ERP is superior to LF rTMS for reducing the severity of symptoms and depression in OCD patients. However, there is no difference between them in improving working memory.
期刊介绍：
The International Journal of Neuroscience publishes original research articles, reviews, brief scientific reports, case studies, letters to the editor and book reviews concerned with problems of the nervous system and related clinical studies, epidemiology, neuropathology, medical and surgical treatment options and outcomes, neuropsychology and other topics related to the research and care of persons with neurologic disorders. The focus of the journal is clinical and transitional research. Topics covered include but are not limited to: ALS, ataxia, autism, brain tumors, child neurology, demyelinating diseases, epilepsy, genetics, headache, lysosomal storage disease, mitochondrial dysfunction, movement disorders, multiple sclerosis, myopathy, neurodegenerative diseases, neuromuscular disorders, neuropharmacology, neuropsychiatry, neuropsychology, pain, sleep disorders, stroke, and other areas related to the neurosciences.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
