元认知疗法与暴露和反应预防法治疗强迫症--非劣效性随机对照试验

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY Journal of Anxiety Disorders Pub Date : 2024-05-05 DOI:10.1016/j.janxdis.2024.102873
Cornelia Exner , Alexandra Kleiman , Anke Haberkamp , Jana Hansmeier , Christopher Milde , Julia Anna Glombiewski
{"title":"元认知疗法与暴露和反应预防法治疗强迫症--非劣效性随机对照试验","authors":"Cornelia Exner ,&nbsp;Alexandra Kleiman ,&nbsp;Anke Haberkamp ,&nbsp;Jana Hansmeier ,&nbsp;Christopher Milde ,&nbsp;Julia Anna Glombiewski","doi":"10.1016/j.janxdis.2024.102873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Exposure with response prevention (ERP) is the first-line treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, refusals, dropouts and the required high time and logistic effort constitute barriers to the use of ERP. In a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, we compared metacognitive therapy (MCT) to exposure with response prevention (ERP) as treatments for OCD.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>74 outpatients received 12 weekly sessions of either manualized MCT or ERP, with primary outcomes assessed by blinded assessors using the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) at pre-treatment, mid-treatment, post-treatment, and 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included measures of depression and anxiety. Non-inferiority margin was specified at no less than <em>d</em> = 0.38 below the improvement reached by ERP, corresponding to a difference of about 3 points on the Y-BOCS.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Drop-out rates were low (&lt;14%) and similar in both groups. Linear models indicated non-inferiority of MCT to ERP at post-treatment, but not at 6-month follow-up. While both groups showed comparable Y-BOCS improvements, the MCT group demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in state anxiety scores at post-treatment and follow-up.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Overall, MCT was not inferior to ERP, especially at post-treatment, suggesting it could be a treatment alternative. However, further research is needed to explore differential treatment indications.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48390,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anxiety Disorders","volume":"104 ","pages":"Article 102873"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887618524000495/pdfft?md5=caef3d97c88fe64eb485ebf0e8c8e2b1&pid=1-s2.0-S0887618524000495-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Metacognitive therapy versus exposure and response prevention for obsessive-compulsive disorder – A non-inferiority randomized controlled trial\",\"authors\":\"Cornelia Exner ,&nbsp;Alexandra Kleiman ,&nbsp;Anke Haberkamp ,&nbsp;Jana Hansmeier ,&nbsp;Christopher Milde ,&nbsp;Julia Anna Glombiewski\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.janxdis.2024.102873\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Exposure with response prevention (ERP) is the first-line treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, refusals, dropouts and the required high time and logistic effort constitute barriers to the use of ERP. In a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, we compared metacognitive therapy (MCT) to exposure with response prevention (ERP) as treatments for OCD.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>74 outpatients received 12 weekly sessions of either manualized MCT or ERP, with primary outcomes assessed by blinded assessors using the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) at pre-treatment, mid-treatment, post-treatment, and 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included measures of depression and anxiety. Non-inferiority margin was specified at no less than <em>d</em> = 0.38 below the improvement reached by ERP, corresponding to a difference of about 3 points on the Y-BOCS.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Drop-out rates were low (&lt;14%) and similar in both groups. Linear models indicated non-inferiority of MCT to ERP at post-treatment, but not at 6-month follow-up. While both groups showed comparable Y-BOCS improvements, the MCT group demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in state anxiety scores at post-treatment and follow-up.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Overall, MCT was not inferior to ERP, especially at post-treatment, suggesting it could be a treatment alternative. However, further research is needed to explore differential treatment indications.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48390,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Anxiety Disorders\",\"volume\":\"104 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102873\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887618524000495/pdfft?md5=caef3d97c88fe64eb485ebf0e8c8e2b1&pid=1-s2.0-S0887618524000495-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Anxiety Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887618524000495\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anxiety Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887618524000495","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标:反应预防暴露疗法(ERP)是治疗强迫症(OCD)的一线疗法。然而,拒绝治疗、辍学以及所需的大量时间和后勤工作构成了使用ERP的障碍。在一项非劣效性随机对照试验中,我们比较了元认知疗法(MCT)和暴露加反应预防疗法(ERP)作为强迫症的治疗方法。方法74名门诊患者接受了每周12次的手册化MCT或ERP治疗,由盲人评估员使用耶鲁-布朗强迫症量表(Y-BOCS)在治疗前、治疗中、治疗后和6个月随访时评估主要结果。次要结果包括抑郁和焦虑测量。非劣效边距规定为不低于 d = 0.38,低于 ERP 所达到的改善程度,相当于 Y-BOCS 上大约 3 分的差异。线性模型显示,在治疗后,MCT 的疗效不优于 ERP,但在 6 个月的随访中,MCT 的疗效不优于 ERP。虽然两组的Y-BOCS改善程度相当,但在治疗后和随访中,MCT组的状态焦虑评分下降幅度明显更大。结论总体而言,MCT并不逊色于ERP,尤其是在治疗后,这表明它可以作为一种治疗选择。然而,还需要进一步的研究来探索不同的治疗适应症。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Metacognitive therapy versus exposure and response prevention for obsessive-compulsive disorder – A non-inferiority randomized controlled trial

Objective

Exposure with response prevention (ERP) is the first-line treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, refusals, dropouts and the required high time and logistic effort constitute barriers to the use of ERP. In a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial, we compared metacognitive therapy (MCT) to exposure with response prevention (ERP) as treatments for OCD.

Method

74 outpatients received 12 weekly sessions of either manualized MCT or ERP, with primary outcomes assessed by blinded assessors using the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) at pre-treatment, mid-treatment, post-treatment, and 6-month follow-up. Secondary outcomes included measures of depression and anxiety. Non-inferiority margin was specified at no less than d = 0.38 below the improvement reached by ERP, corresponding to a difference of about 3 points on the Y-BOCS.

Results

Drop-out rates were low (<14%) and similar in both groups. Linear models indicated non-inferiority of MCT to ERP at post-treatment, but not at 6-month follow-up. While both groups showed comparable Y-BOCS improvements, the MCT group demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in state anxiety scores at post-treatment and follow-up.

Conclusions

Overall, MCT was not inferior to ERP, especially at post-treatment, suggesting it could be a treatment alternative. However, further research is needed to explore differential treatment indications.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.60
自引率
2.90%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: The Journal of Anxiety Disorders is an interdisciplinary journal that publishes research papers on all aspects of anxiety disorders for individuals of all age groups, including children, adolescents, adults, and the elderly. Manuscripts that focus on disorders previously classified as anxiety disorders such as obsessive-compulsive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder, as well as the new category of illness anxiety disorder, are also within the scope of the journal. The research areas of focus include traditional, behavioral, cognitive, and biological assessment; diagnosis and classification; psychosocial and psychopharmacological treatment; genetics; epidemiology; and prevention. The journal welcomes theoretical and review articles that significantly contribute to current knowledge in the field. It is abstracted and indexed in various databases such as Elsevier, BIOBASE, PubMed/Medline, PsycINFO, BIOSIS Citation Index, BRS Data, Current Contents - Social & Behavioral Sciences, Pascal Francis, Scopus, and Google Scholar.
期刊最新文献
Corrigendum to “Metacognitive therapy versus exposure and response prevention for obsessive-compulsive disorder – a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial” Journal of Anxiety Disorders (2024), Volume 104, June 2024, 102873 Excessive avoidance bias towards uncertain faces in non-clinical social anxiety individuals Interplay of serum BDNF levels and childhood adversity in predicting earlier-onset post-traumatic stress disorder: A two-year longitudinal study Negative emotion differentiation buffers against intergenerational risk for social anxiety in at-risk adolescent girls Intensive treatments for children and adolescents with anxiety or obsessive-compulsive disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis
×
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