Parent-coached exposure therapy versus cognitive behavior therapy for childhood anxiety disorders

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Stephen P.H. Whiteside , Bridget K. Biggs , Jennifer R. Geske , Lilianne M. Gloe , Stephanie T. Reneson-Feeder , Megan Cunningham , Julie E. Dammann , Elle Brennan , Mian Li Ong , Mark W. Olsen , Deanna R. Hofschulte
{"title":"Parent-coached exposure therapy versus cognitive behavior therapy for childhood anxiety disorders","authors":"Stephen P.H. Whiteside ,&nbsp;Bridget K. Biggs ,&nbsp;Jennifer R. Geske ,&nbsp;Lilianne M. Gloe ,&nbsp;Stephanie T. Reneson-Feeder ,&nbsp;Megan Cunningham ,&nbsp;Julie E. Dammann ,&nbsp;Elle Brennan ,&nbsp;Mian Li Ong ,&nbsp;Mark W. Olsen ,&nbsp;Deanna R. Hofschulte","doi":"10.1016/j.janxdis.2024.102877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is the strongest evidenced-based therapy for childhood anxiety disorders (CADs). However, CBT’s impact is limited by its lack of clear superiority over treatment as usual, excessive length, and greater than 50% of patients remaining symptomatic. Parent-coached exposure therapy (PCET) is designed to treat CADs more effectively and efficiently through a focus on exposure and working with parents and youth together. In a randomized controlled trial, 78 patients (78% female) aged 7 to 17 with CADs were assigned to PCET or the gold-standard CBT. The primary outcome was independent evaluator ratings of anxiety severity at mid- and post-treatment. Secondary outcomes were parent- and child-reported symptoms. Patients receiving PCET had significantly lower mean scores than those receiving CBT on the primary outcome measure at mid-treatment (3.03 ± 0.14, 95% CI, 2.75–3.32 vs. 3.77 ± 0.16 95% CI, 3.45–4.08, p = 0.0010) and post-treatment (2.79 ± 0.14, 95% CI, 2.50–3.07 vs. 3.33 ± 0.16, 95% CI, 2.02–3.64, p = 0.0153). Similar significant results were found with the secondary parent- and child-reported outcomes. These superior results were achieved in PCET with fewer sessions (6.62, SD = 2.8) than those in CBT (8.00, SD = 3.1), <em>p</em> = 0.041. The superior effectiveness and efficiency of PCET likely results from the greater focus on implementing exposure exercises compared to traditional CBT.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48390,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anxiety Disorders","volume":"104 ","pages":"Article 102877"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anxiety Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0887618524000537","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

Abstract

Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is the strongest evidenced-based therapy for childhood anxiety disorders (CADs). However, CBT’s impact is limited by its lack of clear superiority over treatment as usual, excessive length, and greater than 50% of patients remaining symptomatic. Parent-coached exposure therapy (PCET) is designed to treat CADs more effectively and efficiently through a focus on exposure and working with parents and youth together. In a randomized controlled trial, 78 patients (78% female) aged 7 to 17 with CADs were assigned to PCET or the gold-standard CBT. The primary outcome was independent evaluator ratings of anxiety severity at mid- and post-treatment. Secondary outcomes were parent- and child-reported symptoms. Patients receiving PCET had significantly lower mean scores than those receiving CBT on the primary outcome measure at mid-treatment (3.03 ± 0.14, 95% CI, 2.75–3.32 vs. 3.77 ± 0.16 95% CI, 3.45–4.08, p = 0.0010) and post-treatment (2.79 ± 0.14, 95% CI, 2.50–3.07 vs. 3.33 ± 0.16, 95% CI, 2.02–3.64, p = 0.0153). Similar significant results were found with the secondary parent- and child-reported outcomes. These superior results were achieved in PCET with fewer sessions (6.62, SD = 2.8) than those in CBT (8.00, SD = 3.1), p = 0.041. The superior effectiveness and efficiency of PCET likely results from the greater focus on implementing exposure exercises compared to traditional CBT.

家长指导暴露疗法与认知行为疗法治疗儿童焦虑症的比较
认知行为疗法(CBT)是治疗儿童焦虑症(CAD)最有效的循证疗法。然而,由于认知行为疗法与常规疗法相比缺乏明显的优越性、疗程过长以及超过 50% 的患者仍有症状等原因,认知行为疗法的影响力受到了限制。家长指导暴露疗法(PCET)旨在通过关注暴露,并与家长和青少年共同合作,更有效、更高效地治疗儿童焦虑症。在一项随机对照试验中,78 名年龄在 7 至 17 岁之间的儿童多动症患者(78% 为女性)被分配接受 PCET 或黄金标准的 CBT 治疗。主要结果是独立评估者在治疗中期和后期对焦虑严重程度的评分。次要结果是家长和儿童报告的症状。在治疗中期(3.03 ± 0.14,95% CI,2.75-3.32 vs. 3.77 ± 0.16,95% CI,3.45-4.08,p = 0.0010)和治疗后(2.79 ± 0.14,95% CI,2.50-3.07 vs. 3.33 ± 0.16,95% CI,2.02-3.64,p = 0.0153),接受 PCET 治疗的患者在主要结果指标上的平均得分明显低于接受 CBT 治疗的患者。在家长和儿童报告的次要结果中也发现了类似的显着结果。与 CBT(8.00,SD = 3.1)相比,PCET 以较少的疗程(6.62,SD = 2.8)取得了这些优异的结果,p = 0.041。与传统的 CBT 相比,PCET 更注重暴露练习的实施,这可能是 PCET 效果和效率更佳的原因。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
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.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信