Molly H Nadel, Kate Rogers, Sandra Hadlock, Eric R Schuler, David A F Haaga
{"title":"Impact of Switching to an Inhibitory Learning Approach to Exposure Therapy on Outcomes of an Intensive Outpatient Program.","authors":"Molly H Nadel, Kate Rogers, Sandra Hadlock, Eric R Schuler, David A F Haaga","doi":"10.1002/jclp.70032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Exposure therapy is a commonly used, efficacious treatment for reducing symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder and anxiety disorders. Though exposure therapy has primarily been conducted using principles derived from emotional processing theory, many researchers are now suggesting that it would be more successful if it was conducted in accordance with learning research (i.e., the inhibitory learning approach). There is a strong conceptual rationale for conducting exposure therapy in accordance with the inhibitory learning approach but a paucity of direct empirical comparisons of the two methods, particularly in a naturalistic setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The current study includes 1968 participants seeking treatment for OCD and anxiety disorders. An interrupted time series analysis was used to compare treatment outcomes after participation in an intensive outpatient program for individuals who received exposure therapy based on emotional processing versus inhibitory learning.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Symptom reduction following exposure therapy using the inhibitory learning approach was not significantly different than exposure therapy using emotional processing.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>One possible interpretation for these findings is that in practice, the exposure approaches share significant overlap and therefore lead to comparable outcomes. Future research should assess the comparative efficacy of these treatment approaches using randomized controlled trials with standardized outcome measures to increase internal validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":15395,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.70032","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Exposure therapy is a commonly used, efficacious treatment for reducing symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder and anxiety disorders. Though exposure therapy has primarily been conducted using principles derived from emotional processing theory, many researchers are now suggesting that it would be more successful if it was conducted in accordance with learning research (i.e., the inhibitory learning approach). There is a strong conceptual rationale for conducting exposure therapy in accordance with the inhibitory learning approach but a paucity of direct empirical comparisons of the two methods, particularly in a naturalistic setting.
Methods: The current study includes 1968 participants seeking treatment for OCD and anxiety disorders. An interrupted time series analysis was used to compare treatment outcomes after participation in an intensive outpatient program for individuals who received exposure therapy based on emotional processing versus inhibitory learning.
Results: Symptom reduction following exposure therapy using the inhibitory learning approach was not significantly different than exposure therapy using emotional processing.
Conclusion: One possible interpretation for these findings is that in practice, the exposure approaches share significant overlap and therefore lead to comparable outcomes. Future research should assess the comparative efficacy of these treatment approaches using randomized controlled trials with standardized outcome measures to increase internal validity.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1945, the Journal of Clinical Psychology is a peer-reviewed forum devoted to research, assessment, and practice. Published eight times a year, the Journal includes research studies; articles on contemporary professional issues, single case research; brief reports (including dissertations in brief); notes from the field; and news and notes. In addition to papers on psychopathology, psychodiagnostics, and the psychotherapeutic process, the journal welcomes articles focusing on psychotherapy effectiveness research, psychological assessment and treatment matching, clinical outcomes, clinical health psychology, and behavioral medicine.