成人 广场恐怖症（伴惊恐障碍） 团体治疗

BackgroundTransdiagnostic Cognitive Behavior Therapy (TCBT) manuals delivered in individual format have been reported to be just as effective as traditional diagnosis specific CBT manuals. We have translated and modified the “The Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders” (UP-CBT) for group delivery in Mental Health Service (MHS), and shown effects comparable to traditional CBT in a naturalistic study. As the use of one manual instead of several diagnosis-specific manuals could simplify logistics, reduce waiting time, and increase therapist expertise compared to diagnosis specific CBT, we aim to test the relative efficacy of group UP-CBT and diagnosis specific group CBT.Methods/designThe study is a partially blinded, pragmatic, non-inferiority, parallel, multi-center randomized controlled trial (RCT) of UP-CBT vs diagnosis specific CBT for Unipolar Depression, Social Anxiety Disorder and Agoraphobia/Panic Disorder. In total, 248 patients are recruited from three regional MHS centers across Denmark and included in two intervention arms.The primary outcome is patient-ratings of well-being (WHO Well-being Index, WHO-5), secondary outcomes include level of depressive and anxious symptoms, personality variables, emotion regulation, reflective functioning, and social adjustment. Assessments are conducted before and after therapy and at 6 months follow-up. Weekly patient-rated outcomes and group evaluations are collected for every session. Outcome assessors, blind to treatment allocation, will perform the observer-based symptom ratings, and fidelity assessors will monitor manual adherence.DiscussionThe current study will be the first RCT investigating the dissemination of the UP in a MHS setting, the UP delivered in groups, and with depressive patients included. Hence the results are expected to add substantially to the evidence base for rational group psychotherapy in MHS. The planned moderator and mediator analyses could spur new hypotheses about mechanisms of change in psychotherapy and the association between patient characteristics and treatment effect.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02954731. Registered 25 October 2016

Background The long-term prognosis after cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in outpatient groups for panic disorder and agoraphobia is not well known. The purpose of this study was to assess long-term outcomes in terms of psychological health, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), quality of life (QoL) and treatment satisfaction after CBT for panic disorder and agoraphobia. Methods The sample consisted of 68 patients (61% response rate), who were assessed at pretreatment; at the start and end of treatment; and after 3 months, after 1 year, and over the long term (M = 24 years; SD = 5.3; range: 12 to 31 years). The main outcome was the total score on the Phobic Avoidance Rating Scale (PARS-total). At long-term follow-up, HRQoL was measured with the RAND-12 questionnaire, and QoL was measured with two questions from the “Study on European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions”. Patient experiences and treatment satisfaction were assessed by the Generic Short Patient Experiences Questionnaire. A marginal longitudinal model was applied to study the main outcome. Results The effect size of the long-term change (mean change/ pooled SD) in the PARS-total score was (− 1.6, p  < 0.001) and was stable over time. A PARS-total score reduction of 50% was found in 98% of patients at the long-term follow-up. The patients’ HRQoL and QoL were similar to the expected scores for the general Norwegian population. Of the patients, 95% reported high to very high satisfaction with the CBT, and 93% reported large treatment benefits. Conclusions To the best of our knowledge, this study has the longest follow-up after group CBT for panic disorder and agoraphobia, showing a good prognosis in ≥93% of the participating patients.

OBJECTIVE Although numerous studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of both individual and group cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy (CBT), many authors have questioned the translation of these interventions into routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of group CBT in patients diagnosed with panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in routine clinical practice. METHODS The study involved 96 patients diagnosed according to the DSM-IV criteria. Treatment consisted of 10 psychotherapy sessions of 2 hours each in a local health authority. A battery of psychometric instruments was used to assess variables including psychological symptoms, subjective well-being and psychosocial functioning before and after therapy. In addition to the evaluation of treatment outcome, final scores were compared to population norms and benchmarked against similar studies. RESULT Almost all scores of the clinical scales used improved significantly. Only 42% of patients who were initially above the clinical cut-off on the CORE-OM showed clinically significant changes, and 20% of patients were below the clinical cut-off after treatment. Post-treatment CORE-OM scores were not significantly different from the values observed in the general population. These findings are consistent with those of comparable studies. DISCUSSION Group CBT is effective in routine clinical practice. In addition to reducing anxiety symptoms, treatment also results in an improvement of other related variables such as subjective well-being. Owing to its better patient-therapist ratio, group CBT should be considered as an alternative to individual CBT in routine clinical care in public services.

Background A relevant proportion of patients with panic disorder (PD) does not improve even though they receive state of the art treatment for anxiety disorders such as cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT). At the same time, it is known, that from a neurobiological point of view, PD patients are often characterised by prefrontal hypoactivation. Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation (iTBS) is a non-invasive type of neurostimulation which can modulate cortical activity and thus has the potential to normalise prefrontal hypoactivity found in PD. We therefore aimed at investigating the effects of iTBS as an innovative add-on to CBT in the treatment for PD. Methods In this double-blind, bicentric study, 44 PD patients, randomised to sham or verum stimulation, received 15 sessions of iTBS over the left prefrontal cortex (PFC) in addition to 9 weeks of group CBT. Cortical activity during a cognitive as well as an emotional (Emotional Stroop) paradigm was assessed both at baseline and post-iTBS treatment using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) and compared to healthy controls. Results In this manuscript we only report the results of the emotional paradigm; for the results of the cognitive paradigm please refer to Deppermann et al. (2014). During the Emotional Stroop test, PD patients showed significantly reduced activation to panic-related compared to neutral stimuli for the left PFC at baseline. Bilateral prefrontal activation for panic-related stimuli significantly increased after verum iTBS only. Clinical ratings significantly improved during CBT and remained stable at follow-up. However, no clinical differences between the verum- and sham-stimulated group were identified, except for a more stable reduction of agoraphobic avoidance during follow-up in the verum iTBS group. Limitations Limitations include insufficient blinding, the missing control for possible state-dependent iTBS effects, and the timing of iTBS application during CBT. Conclusion Prefrontal hypoactivity in PD patients was normalised by add-on iTBS. Clinical improvement of anxiety symptoms was not affected by iTBS.

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

Background: Previous studies have suggested that physical exercise can reduce symptoms for subjects suffering from panic disorder (PD). The efficacy of this intervention has so far not been compared to an established psychotherapy, such as cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). Assessment of controlled long-term effects and the clinical significance of the treatment are also lacking. Aim: To compare physical exercise to CBT as treatment for PD, and assess controlled long-term and clinically significant effects. Method: PD-patients were randomized to either three weekly sessions of physical exercise (n = 17), or one weekly session of CBT (n = 19). Both treatments ran for 12 weeks, were manualized and administered in groups. Patients were assessed twice before the start of treatment, at post-treatment and at 6 and 12 months thereafter. Primary outcome-measures consisted of the Mobility Inventory (MI), the Agoraphobia Cognitions Questionnaire (ACQ) and the Body Sensations Questionnaire (BSQ). Results: A two-way repeated measures MANOVA of these measures demonstrated a significant effect of time, F(16, 544) = 7.28, p < .01, as well as a significant interaction effect, F(16, 544) = 1.71, p < .05, in favour of CBT. This finding was supported by the assessment of clinically significant changes of avoidant behaviour and of treatment-seeking one year later. Conclusion: Group CBT is more effective than group physical exercise as treatment of panic disorder, both immediately following treatment and at follow-up assessments.

ABSTRACT CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Cognitive-behavioral therapy is frequently indicated for panic disorder. The aim here was to evaluate the efficacy of a model for cognitive-behavioral therapy for treating panic disorder with agoraphobia. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized clinical trial at Instituto de Psiquiatria da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. METHODS: A group of 50 patients with a diagnosis of panic disorder with agoraphobia was randomized into two groups to receive: a) cognitive-behavioral therapy with medication; or b) medication (tricyclic antidepressants or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors). RESULTS: Although there was no difference between the groups after the treatment in relation to almost all variables with the exception of some items of the Sheehan disability scale and the psychosocial and environmental problems scale, the patients who received the specific therapy presented significant reductions in panic attacks, anticipatory anxiety, agoraphobia avoidance and fear of body sensations at the end of the study, in relation to the group without the therapy. On the overall functioning assessment scale, overall wellbeing increased from 60.8% to 72.5% among the patients in the group with therapy, thus differing from the group without therapy. CONCLUSION: Although both groups responded to the treatment and improved, we only observed significant differences between the interventions on some scales. The association between specific cognitive-behavioral therapy focusing on somatic complaints and pharmacological treatment was effective among this sample of patients with panic disorder and the response was similar in the group with pharmacological treatment alone. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT 01025908

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

Abstract Background Social anxiety disorder (SAD) and agoraphobia are common, impairing conditions often treated with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) conducted in groups. In CBT, exposure therapy is a core element. However, in-vivo exposure therapy is logistically challenging and aversive for both patient and therapist, especially in a group context, often leading to exposure being skipped altogether in clinical practice. Virtual reality exposure (VRE), in which phobic stimuli are presented through immersive virtual reality technology, has shown promise as a flexible alternative to in-vivo exposure. We thus hypothesized that using VRE would result in more overall exposure and more individualized exposure, resulting in statistically significant symptom reduction compared with a group using in-vivo exposure. Objective This trial evaluated the efficacy of group CBT with VRE (VR-CBT) versus CBT with in-vivo exposure for treating SAD and agoraphobia in clinical settings. Methods In this randomized, parallel-group, assessor-blinded trial, 177 participants with SAD (n=150) or agoraphobia (n=27) as a primary diagnosis were assigned to either VR-CBT (n=81) or traditional CBT (n=96) across 5 Danish mental health outpatient clinics. Both groups received 14 weekly group sessions. The difference between the 2 treatments was that the VR-CBT group received exposure therapy via head-mounted displays (HMDs) displaying 360° videos of anxiogenic situations for individuals with SAD (eg, presenting at work) and agoraphobia (eg, faulty elevator), while the CBT group conducted traditional in-vivo exposure exercises (eg, presenting to the group, using the clinic elevator). Primary outcomes were phobic anxiety reductions, measured by the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale and the Mobility Inventory for Agoraphobia at baseline, posttreatment, and 1-year follow-up (from baseline). Secondary outcomes included work and social functioning, depressive symptoms, and quality of life. Results Both groups showed significant reductions in primary, secondary, and exploratory outcomes, with no significant differences between groups at posttreatment (d=−0.026) and 1-year follow-up (d=0.097). Baseline characteristics and attrition rates were balanced across the groups. Conclusions Due to insufficient recruitment and substantial missing data, no definitive conclusions can be drawn regarding group differences between VR-CBT and traditional CBT in group settings. The feasibility issues encountered suggest that careful consideration of the benefits and limitations of VR technology is essential before implementation in clinical practice.

No abstract available

Homework is integral to cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) treatment programs. Previous research has reported mostly positive findings regarding the effect of homework adherence on CBT outcomes, but only limited research has evaluated the effect in transdiagnostic CBT (tCBT). This secondary study used data from 164 patients with major depressive disorder, social phobia, agoraphobia, or panic disorder, randomized to 14 sessions of diagnosis-specific CBT (dCBT) in groups or group tCBT (Unified Protocol). The number of times patients engaged in homework assignments was measured with a single-item homework engagement assessment. We evaluated the effects of total mean homework engagement on symptom outcomes using the Hopkins Symptom Checklist at the end of therapy, and the effect of intervention arm and diagnosis on homework engagement across three periods with repeated measures analysis of variance. Finally, we used cross-lagged panel modeling (CLPM), with the inclusion of baseline covariates and interaction variables, to investigate whether homework engagement predicted next-session symptom severity as measured with the Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale and the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale. Patients’ general homework engagement significantly affected their symptoms at end of treatment (F1,162: 3.944, p = 0.05), and had a significant cross-lagged effect on next-week symptoms (coefficient = − 0.23, se = 0.11, z = -2.16, p = 0.03, 95% CI [-0.44, − 0.02]). Initial analysis indicated that homework engagement was higher in dCBT than in the UP, and patients with depression in dCBT conditions were more engaged in homework assignments in the first period of therapy. However, these differences did not affect the overall treatment outcome in repeated measures or CLPM analyses. This is the first study to examine the effects of homework engagement on symptoms in group UP and also adds to the limited literature using such methods to isolate the unique effects of treatment engagement on symptom outcomes. Future studies should confirm these results and investigate other relevant aspects of homework engagement, such as the quality of said engagement and process variables such as therapist factors, group cohesion, and negative effects of homework assignments.

No abstract available

INTRODUCTION The Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders (UP) delivered in a group format could facilitate the implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments. OBJECTIVE This study compared the efficacy of group UP and diagnosis-specific cognitive behavioral therapy (dCBT) for anxiety and depression in outpatient mental health services. METHODS In this pragmatic, multi-center, single-blinded, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial (RCT), we assigned 291 patients with major depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, or agoraphobia to 14 weekly sessions in mixed-diagnosis UP or single-diagnosis dCBT groups. The primary test was non-inferiority, using a priori criteria, on the World Health Organisation 5 Well-Being Index (WHO-5) at the end of the treatment. Secondary outcomes were functioning and symptoms. We assessed outcomes at baseline, end-of-treatment, and at a 6-month follow-up. A modified per-protocol analysis was performed. RESULTS At end-of-treatment, WHO-5 mean scores for patients in UP (n = 148) were non-inferior to those of patients in dCBT (n = 143; mean difference -2.94; 95% CI -8.10 to 2.21). Results were inconclusive for the WHO-5 at the 6-month follow-up. Results for secondary outcomes were non-inferior at end-of-treatment and the 6-month follow-up. Client satisfaction and rates of attrition, response, remission, and deterioration were similar across conditions. CONCLUSIONS This RCT demonstrated non-inferior acute-phase outcomes of group-delivered UP compared with dCBT for major depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and agoraphobia in outpatient mental health services. The long-term effects of UP on well-being need further investigation. If study findings are replicated, UP should be considered a viable alternative to dCBT for common anxiety disorders and depression in outpatient mental health services.

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

No abstract available

Abstract Background Transdiagnostic group cognitive-behavioral therapy (tCBT) is a delivery model that could help overcome barriers to large-scale implementation of evidence-based psychotherapy for anxiety disorders. The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of combining group tCBT with treatment-as-usual (TAU), compared to TAU, for the treatment of anxiety disorders in community-based mental health care. Methods In a multicenter single-blind, two-arm pragmatic superiority randomized trial, we recruited participants aged 18–65 who met DSM-5 criteria for principal diagnoses of generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, or agoraphobia. Group tCBT consisted of 12 weekly 2 h sessions. There were no restrictions for TAU. The primary outcome measures were the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) and clinician severity rating from the Anxiety and Related Disorders Interview Schedule for DSM-5 (ADIS-5) for the principal anxiety disorder at post-treatment, with intention-to-treat analysis. Results A total of 231 participants were randomized to either tCBT + TAU (117) or TAU (114), with outcome data available for, respectively, 95 and 106. Results of the mixed-effects regression models showed superior improvement at post-treatment for participants in tCBT + TAU, compared to TAU, for BAI [p < 0.001; unadjusted post-treatment mean (s.d.): 13.20 (9.13) v. 20.85 (10.96), Cohen's d = 0.76] and ADIS-5 [p < 0.001; 3.27 (2.19) v. 4.93 (2.00), Cohen's d = 0.79]. Conclusions Our findings suggest that the addition of group tCBT into usual care can reduce symptom severity in patients with anxiety disorders, and support tCBT dissemination in routine community-based care.

No abstract available

No abstract available

ABSTRACT Within group psychotherapy, previous meta-analyses have shown that the client-therapist relationship (alliance) and group relationships (cohesion) both predict client improvement. Accounting for the inherent connection between alliance and cohesion, we meta-analyzed studies (k = 14) that individually measured alliance, cohesion, and an outcome among group therapy participants. A random-effects, two-stage structural equation model found that alliance (b = .12) and cohesion (b = .12) uniquely predicted outcome and were statistically indistinguishable. Findings replicate past meta-analyses. Alliance and cohesion are highly related, and both uniquely predict outcome. Minimal studies and large heterogeneity limit generalizability, but we encourage clinicians to foster all therapeutic relationships and we provide researchers with suggestions for future work.

No abstract available

No abstract available

Introduction Anxiety disorders have a high lifetime prevalence, early-onset and long duration or chronicity. Exposure therapy is considered one of the most effective elements in cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for anxiety, but in vivo exposure can be challenging to access and control, and is sometimes rejected by patients because they consider it too aversive. Virtual reality allows flexible and controlled exposure to challenging situations in an immersive and protected environment. Aim The SoREAL-trial aims to investigate the effect of group cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT-in vivo) versus group CBT with virtual reality exposure (CBT-in virtuo) for patients diagnosed with social anxiety disorder and/or agoraphobia, in mixed groups. Methods and analysis The design is an investigator-initiated randomised, assessor-blinded, parallel-group and superiority-designed clinical trial. Three hundred two patients diagnosed with social anxiety disorder and/or agoraphobia will be included from the regional mental health centres of Copenhagen and North Sealand and the Northern Region of Denmark. All patients will be offered a manual-based 14-week cognitive behavioural group treatment programme, including eight sessions with exposure therapy. Therapy groups will be centrally randomised with concealed allocation sequence to either CBT-in virtuo or CBT-in vivo. Patients will be assessed at baseline, post-treatment and 1-year follow-up by treatment blinded researchers and research assistants. The primary outcome will be diagnosis-specific symptoms measured with the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale for patients with social anxiety disorder and the Mobility Inventory for Agoraphobia for patients with agoraphobia. Secondary outcome measures will include depression symptoms, social functioning and patient satisfaction. Exploratory outcomes will be substance and alcohol use, working alliance and quality of life. Ethics and dissemination The trial has been approved by the research ethics committee in the Capital Region of Denmark. All results, positive, negative as well as inconclusive, will be published as quickly as possible and still in concordance with Danish law on the protection of confidentially and personal information. Results will be presented at national and international scientific conferences. The trial has obtained approval by the Regional Ethics Committee of Zealand (H-6-2013-015) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (RHP-2014-009-02670). The trial is registered at ClinicalTrial.gov as NCT03845101. The patients will receive information on the trial both verbally and in written form. Written informed consent will be obtained from each patient before inclusion in the trial. The consent form will be scanned and stored in the database system and the physical copy will be destroyed. It is emphasised that participation in the trial is voluntary and that the patient can withdraw his or her consent at any time without consequences for further and continued treatment. Trial registration number NCT03845101.

Background Anxiety disorders are common and debilitating which is why treatment is so important. According to the guidelines, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) has the highest level of effectiveness among psychotherapeutic treatments and is the recommended procedure. However, not everyone responds well or at all to CBT which makes a wider range of therapy options valuable. Positive Psychotherapy (PPT) comes to mind as an alternative with its strength-based approach focusing on enhancing well-being and life satisfaction. Additionally, it has not yet been extensively studied how the processes that occur during treatment sessions and between treatment sessions effect treatment outcome. Thus, to lessen the lack of evidence regarding the efficacy of PPT as an anxiety treatment the planned study examines and compares the effectiveness of CBT and PPT as well as the effect of intrasession and intersession processes of the two therapy approaches. Method The study is in the planning stage and consists of an efficacy and a process study. The efficacy study is a randomized controlled comparative study of patients with anxiety disorders (generalized anxiety disorder and/or panic disorder with or without agoraphobia) with two active treatment conditions (PPT and CBT) and a control group (CG; positive psychotherapy with minimal therapeutic supervision) in an online group setting. There are three measurement time points: before treatment begins (T0), at the end of the ten-week treatment (T1), and a follow-up after three months (T2). The aim of the study is to evaluate the efficacy of PPT and CBT in the treatment of anxiety disorders, and to compare the efficacy of online-based PPT with minimal therapeutic supervision and online-based PPT with intensive therapeutic supervision in the treatment of anxiety disorders. The process study will be used to evaluate both the intrasession processes and the intersession processes of the therapy in the two intervention groups. In addition, the process variables that predict the success of the therapy and the extent to which PPT and CBT differ in the therapy processes will be tested. The study is registered at the German Clinical Trial Register (№ DRKS00027521). Discussion To our knowledge, this is the first randomized controlled comparative study to examine the effectiveness of CBT and PPT for anxiety disorders in an online group setting.

BackgroundPsychodynamic and cognitive-behavioral group therapies are frequently applied in day hospitals for the treatment of anxiety disorders and comorbid depressive or personality disorders in Poland and other Eastern European countries. Yet there is not enough evidence as to their effectiveness in this environment; this study addresses this gap. The aim of the study is to determine the effectiveness of these two kinds of day treatment care consisting of intensive, short-term group psychodynamic and cognitive-behavioral therapy, for patients with anxiety disorders and/or comorbid depressive or personality disorders. Our objectives are to: 1) show the effectiveness of each treatment in a day-care setting relative to the wait-list control group; 2) demonstrate the relative short- and long-term effectiveness of the two active treatments; 3) carry out a preliminary examination of the predictors and moderators of treatment response; 4) carry out a preliminary examination of the mediators of therapeutic change; and 5) compare the impact of both methods of treatment on the outcome of the measures used in this study.Methods/DesignIn this randomized controlled trial, a total of 199 patients with anxiety disorders and comorbid depressive and/or personality disorders will be assigned to one of three conditions: 1) psychodynamic group therapy; 2) cognitive-behavioral group therapy; or 3) wait-list control group. The therapy will last 12 weeks. Both treatments will be manualized (the manuals will address comorbidity). Primary outcome measures will include self-reported symptoms of anxiety, observer-rated symptoms of anxiety, global improvement, and recovery rate. Secondary outcome measures will include the number of pathological personality traits, depression, self-esteem, defense mechanisms, beliefs about self and others, interpersonal problems, object relations, parental bonding, meta-cognition, and quality of life. Measures will be taken at baseline, post-treatment, and at six months following the end of therapy.DiscussionThe rationale is to investigate how effectively anxiety disorders and/or comorbid depressive or personality disorders can be treated in a day hospital setting, typical of the Polish health care system, during a three-month treatment period.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02126787, registered on 28 April 2014.

There is evidence for non-specific factors impacting treatment outcomes, with pragmatic concerns regarding the need to popularize briefer formats of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). The need to have more culturally suitable and acceptable forms of CBT is also indicated. We evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of a brief 5 session CBT (bCBT) in participants (N = 4) with panic disorder (PD) and agoraphobia, using a non-concurrent multiple baseline design. In this case series, efforts were made to maximize non-specific factors of psychotherapy in bringing about treatment outcomes. Reliable and significant treatment effects were observed at post-intervention and follow-up assessments. The present study offers preliminary evidence of a bCBT protocol that comprises the efforts to maximize the non-specific factors in psychotherapy such as credibility, expectancy, and the therapeutic alliance in bringing treatment outcomes; however, further controlled evaluation is warranted. We also discuss the mechanisms contributing to these treatment outcomes in the present protocol.

BACKGROUND Although resilience and coping are important factors associated with mental health, they are rarely investigated in the treatment of patients with panic disorder (PD). OBJECTIVE To evaluate the response to four resilience and coping strategy sessions added to the standard cognitive behavioral group therapy (CBGT) protocol for PD. DESIGN Controlled clinical trial. METHODS The control group (n = 50) attended 12 CBGT sessions, while the intervention group (n = 50) received four additional resilience and coping strategy sessions, i.e., 16 in total. Symptom severity, resilience, coping strategies, and quality of life were assessed at baseline and post-CBGT. RESULTS Symptom severity and maladaptive coping strategies decreased significantly in both groups. However, the intervention group had increased resilience and improvement in the environment domain of quality of life. CONCLUSIONS Additional sessions have potential benefits for coping skills and resilience in PD patients, but these benefits should be evaluated in further long-term studies.

Objective: Individual patient characteristics are important in trying to understand why people respond differently to group CBT. Only a few studies have explored therapists’ perceptions of within-patient attributes that may be hindering in group CBT in a mental health setting. Method: We explored the perception of individual patient characteristics and related obstacles in 12 psychotherapists in Danish Mental Health Services through semi-structured interviews. The interviews were analyzed using a descriptive qualitative framework. Results: The results revealed four distinct themes that the therapists pointed to as important for the outcome of a 14-week group CBT intervention for social phobia, panic disorder, agoraphobia and major depressive disorder. The four themes were Complexity & severity, External circumstances, Attitudes & coping and Cognitive ability & reflection level. The therapists explained how they perceived higher complexity and severity in the patients as an obstacle, they highlighted that a calm and stable outside environment aided therapeutic change, whilst stressors were hindering. They perceived active coping mechanisms, positive attitudes and high readiness to change as positive factors, whilst dependent and hostile coping mechanisms and negative attitudes were seen as obstacles. Finally, the therapists pointed to cognitive abilities and reflection level, explaining how it could be difficult to obtain good outcomes for patients who’s cognitive abilities were debilitated due to psychopathological factors or for patients with a generally low reflection level. Conclusions: The results indicated that the therapists experience group CBT as an intervention that requires certain prerequisites of the patients, and that the four themes should be considered when deciding on treatment options for any given patient. The clinical utility and theoretical implications of the results are discussed.

No abstract available

Few studies have compared the effects of Metacognitive therapy (MCT) and Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for comorbid anxiety disorders. In the current study we compared CBT and MCT for heterogeneous anxiety disorders in a residential setting. Ninety patients with a primary diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, Social Phobia or Panic disorder, with and without Agoraphobia, were randomized to either CBT or MCT. Patients were assessed at pre-treatment, post-treatment and one-year follow-up. Primary outcome measures were Beck Anxiety Inventory and ADIS IV and secondary outcome measures were SCID II, Beck Depression Inventory, Penn State Worry Questionnaire, The Symptom Checklist-90 and the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems-64. Treatment fidelity was satisfactory and therapist credibility was equal in both treatments. There was a significant difference in the level of anxiety favouring MCT at post-treatment (d=0.7), but there were no differences at one-year follow-up, mainly due to a further improvement in the CBT group during the follow-up period. Both treatments were efficacious. No differences in effect on comorbid diagnoses and symptoms were found, but MCT produced larger change in personality problems. MCT seems to have a more rapid effect on anxiety symptoms, but there were no significant differences in the long term for patients with comorbid anxiety disorders.

BackgroundInternet administered cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is a promising new way to deliver psychological treatment, but its effectiveness in regular care settings and in relation to more traditional CBT group treatment has not yet been determined. The primary aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of Internet-and group administered CBT for panic disorder (with or without agoraphobia) in a randomised trial within a regular psychiatric care setting. The second aim of the study was to establish the cost-effectiveness of these interventions.MethodsPatients referred for treatment by their physician, or self-referred, were telephone-screened by a psychiatric nurse. Patients fulfilling screening criteria underwent an in-person structured clinical interview carried out by a psychiatrist. A total of 113 consecutive patients were then randomly assigned to 10 weeks of either guided Internet delivered CBT (n = 53) or group CBT (n = 60). After treatment, and at a 6-month follow-up, patients were again assessed by the psychiatrist, blind to treatment condition.ResultsImmediately after randomization 9 patients dropped out, leaving 104 patients who started treatment. Patients in both treatment conditions showed significant improvement on the main outcome measure, the Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) after treatment. For the Internet treatment the within-group effect size (pre-post) on the PDSS was Cohen's d = 1.73, and for the group treatment it was d = 1.63. Between group effect sizes were low and treatment effects were maintained at 6-months follow-up. We found no statistically significant differences between the two treatment conditions using a mixed models approach to account for missing data. Group CBT utilised considerably more therapist time than did Internet CBT. Defining effect as proportion of PDSS responders, the cost-effectiveness analysis concerning therapist time showed that Internet treatment had superior cost-effectiveness ratios in relation to group treatment both at post-treatment and follow-up.ConclusionsThis study provides support for the effectiveness of Internet CBT in a psychiatric setting for patients with panic disorder, and suggests that it is equally effective as the more widely used group administered CBT in reducing panic-and agoraphobic symptoms, as well as being more cost effective with respect to therapist time.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00845260

Personality traits underlying both anxiety disorders and depression are more malleable than previously presumed. This study examined associations between changes in personality traits (i.e. negative affectivity and detachment) and alleviation of anxiety and depression symptoms following cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT). We hypothesized that decreases in negative affectivity would predict alleviation of depression and anxiety symptoms and decreases in detachment would predict decreases in depression and, to a lesser degree, anxiety symptoms. Data (N = 156) were collected in a randomized controlled trial comparing transdiagnostic and diagnosis-specific group CBT for patients with major depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder or agoraphobia. We assessed personality traits using the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) and symptoms with the Hopkins Symptom Checklist 25-item scale (SCL). Prediction was based on regression analyses. We found that decreases in negative affectivity predicted lower levels of depression and anxiety symptoms while decreases in detachment only predicted lower levels of depression symptoms. The findings substantiate current efforts to explicate the dynamic interplay between personality traits and symptoms and support the existing focus on targeting negative affectivity and detachment in therapy for anxiety disorders and depression. The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (ID NCT02954731).