治疗小儿强迫症的潜在危害:陷阱与最佳实践》。

IF 2.9 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Erika S Trent, Elizabeth C Lanzillo, Andrew D Wiese, Samuel D Spencer, Dean McKay, Eric A Storch
{"title":"治疗小儿强迫症的潜在危害:陷阱与最佳实践》。","authors":"Erika S Trent, Elizabeth C Lanzillo, Andrew D Wiese, Samuel D Spencer, Dean McKay, Eric A Storch","doi":"10.1007/s10802-024-01258-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) can be debilitating and chronic unless treated early with efficacious intervention. The past several decades of intervention research have identified cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) with exposure and response/ritual prevention (ERP) as the first-line, evidence-based psychological intervention for pediatric OCD. Yet, many youths with OCD unfortunately remain inadequately treated. In well-meaning but misguided efforts to treat this complex disorder, clinicians holding misconceptions about ERP may fail to apply evidence-based treatments, misapply generic CBT techniques and ERP principles, or turn to non-evidence-based interventions. Potentially harmful treatments may worsen symptoms, while ineffective treatments can waste resources, impede patient access to efficacious treatment, and weaken public confidence in psychotherapy. The overarching goals of this review paper are to describe potentially harmful and ineffective practices in the treatment of pediatric OCD and to offer recommendations aligned with evidence-based practice. First, we dispel common misconceptions about ERP that may underlie its underuse among clinicians. We then describe potentially harmful and ineffective interventions for pediatric OCD, starting with misapplication of generic CBT techniques and ERP principles. We also identify non-evidence-based treatments for pediatric OCD that have limited conceptual or empirical foundations. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for clinicians who treat pediatric OCD, intervention researchers, training programs across mental health-related disciplines, and policymakers.</p>","PeriodicalId":36218,"journal":{"name":"Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Potential for Harm in the Treatment of Pediatric Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Pitfalls and Best Practices.\",\"authors\":\"Erika S Trent, Elizabeth C Lanzillo, Andrew D Wiese, Samuel D Spencer, Dean McKay, Eric A Storch\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10802-024-01258-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) can be debilitating and chronic unless treated early with efficacious intervention. The past several decades of intervention research have identified cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) with exposure and response/ritual prevention (ERP) as the first-line, evidence-based psychological intervention for pediatric OCD. Yet, many youths with OCD unfortunately remain inadequately treated. In well-meaning but misguided efforts to treat this complex disorder, clinicians holding misconceptions about ERP may fail to apply evidence-based treatments, misapply generic CBT techniques and ERP principles, or turn to non-evidence-based interventions. Potentially harmful treatments may worsen symptoms, while ineffective treatments can waste resources, impede patient access to efficacious treatment, and weaken public confidence in psychotherapy. The overarching goals of this review paper are to describe potentially harmful and ineffective practices in the treatment of pediatric OCD and to offer recommendations aligned with evidence-based practice. First, we dispel common misconceptions about ERP that may underlie its underuse among clinicians. We then describe potentially harmful and ineffective interventions for pediatric OCD, starting with misapplication of generic CBT techniques and ERP principles. We also identify non-evidence-based treatments for pediatric OCD that have limited conceptual or empirical foundations. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for clinicians who treat pediatric OCD, intervention researchers, training programs across mental health-related disciplines, and policymakers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36218,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-024-01258-x\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-024-01258-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

小儿强迫症(OCD)如果不及早采取有效的干预措施进行治疗,可能会使患者衰弱并形成慢性强迫症。在过去几十年的干预研究中,认知行为疗法(CBT)与暴露和反应/程序性预防(ERP)被确定为治疗小儿强迫症的一线循证心理干预措施。然而,不幸的是,许多患有强迫症的青少年仍然没有得到适当的治疗。在治疗这种复杂疾病的过程中,对ERP抱有误解的临床医生可能无法应用循证治疗,错误地应用一般的CBT技术和ERP原则,或者转向非循证干预。潜在的有害治疗可能会加重症状,而无效治疗则会浪费资源,阻碍患者获得有效治疗,并削弱公众对心理治疗的信心。本综述论文的总体目标是描述治疗小儿强迫症的潜在有害和无效方法,并提出与循证实践相一致的建议。首先,我们消除了临床医生对ERP的常见误解,这些误解可能是导致ERP使用不足的原因。然后,我们描述了治疗小儿强迫症的潜在有害和无效干预措施,首先是对一般 CBT 技术和 ERP 原则的错误应用。我们还指出了对小儿强迫症的非循证疗法,这些疗法的概念或经验基础有限。最后,我们对治疗小儿强迫症的临床医生、干预研究人员、精神健康相关学科的培训项目以及政策制定者提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Potential for Harm in the Treatment of Pediatric Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Pitfalls and Best Practices.

Pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) can be debilitating and chronic unless treated early with efficacious intervention. The past several decades of intervention research have identified cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) with exposure and response/ritual prevention (ERP) as the first-line, evidence-based psychological intervention for pediatric OCD. Yet, many youths with OCD unfortunately remain inadequately treated. In well-meaning but misguided efforts to treat this complex disorder, clinicians holding misconceptions about ERP may fail to apply evidence-based treatments, misapply generic CBT techniques and ERP principles, or turn to non-evidence-based interventions. Potentially harmful treatments may worsen symptoms, while ineffective treatments can waste resources, impede patient access to efficacious treatment, and weaken public confidence in psychotherapy. The overarching goals of this review paper are to describe potentially harmful and ineffective practices in the treatment of pediatric OCD and to offer recommendations aligned with evidence-based practice. First, we dispel common misconceptions about ERP that may underlie its underuse among clinicians. We then describe potentially harmful and ineffective interventions for pediatric OCD, starting with misapplication of generic CBT techniques and ERP principles. We also identify non-evidence-based treatments for pediatric OCD that have limited conceptual or empirical foundations. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for clinicians who treat pediatric OCD, intervention researchers, training programs across mental health-related disciplines, and policymakers.

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
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology
Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology Psychology-Developmental and Educational Psychology
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
4.00%
发文量
107
×
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