Elin Olsson, Per Andrén, Emma Claesdotter-Knutsson, Kajsa Dellgran, Oscar Cardona Castro, Annika Möttus, David Mataix-Cols, Sabina Gušić, Sean Perrin, Eva Serlachius, Matti Cervin
{"title":"青少年焦虑症分步治疗与分层治疗:一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Elin Olsson, Per Andrén, Emma Claesdotter-Knutsson, Kajsa Dellgran, Oscar Cardona Castro, Annika Möttus, David Mataix-Cols, Sabina Gušić, Sean Perrin, Eva Serlachius, Matti Cervin","doi":"10.1007/s10578-025-01908-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Anxiety disorders are common in children and adolescents, but access to evidence-based treatment is limited. Most clinical guidelines recommend stratified care, where less complex patients are offered low intensity interventions and complex patients more intensive options. Stepped care, where all patients initially receive low-intensity treatment, has gained traction due to its potential cost-effectiveness. Research on care models for youth with anxiety disorders is very limited. In this pre-registered (NCT06016907) pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT), we examined the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of a trial comparing stepped and stratified care for youth with anxiety disorders. In stepped care, all began with internet-delivered CBT. In stratified care, complex cases (based on a baseline risk score incorporating symptom severity, co-existing disorders, functional impairment, and family conflict) started with in-person CBT. Non-responders in both groups were offered in-person CBT. Over six months, 51 youth with anxiety disorders were enrolled (mean age = 14.18 years, range = 9.25-17.50; 71% girls), with 80% meeting criteria for more than one mental disorder. Treatment adherence (≥ 50% completion) was 78-84% across interventions. Masked outcome assessments were attended by 96% of participants. No serious adverse effects were reported. At the primary endpoint, 40% of participants in stepped care and 75% in stratified care were classified as treatment responders. However, the trial was not powered to detect efficacy differences, and no between-group comparisons were conducted. Results indicate that a definitive trial comparing stepped and stratified care for youth anxiety disorders is feasible.</p>","PeriodicalId":10024,"journal":{"name":"Child Psychiatry & Human Development","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stepped Care Versus Stratified Care for Youth with Anxiety Disorders: a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.\",\"authors\":\"Elin Olsson, Per Andrén, Emma Claesdotter-Knutsson, Kajsa Dellgran, Oscar Cardona Castro, Annika Möttus, David Mataix-Cols, Sabina Gušić, Sean Perrin, Eva Serlachius, Matti Cervin\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10578-025-01908-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Anxiety disorders are common in children and adolescents, but access to evidence-based treatment is limited. Most clinical guidelines recommend stratified care, where less complex patients are offered low intensity interventions and complex patients more intensive options. Stepped care, where all patients initially receive low-intensity treatment, has gained traction due to its potential cost-effectiveness. Research on care models for youth with anxiety disorders is very limited. In this pre-registered (NCT06016907) pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT), we examined the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of a trial comparing stepped and stratified care for youth with anxiety disorders. In stepped care, all began with internet-delivered CBT. In stratified care, complex cases (based on a baseline risk score incorporating symptom severity, co-existing disorders, functional impairment, and family conflict) started with in-person CBT. Non-responders in both groups were offered in-person CBT. Over six months, 51 youth with anxiety disorders were enrolled (mean age = 14.18 years, range = 9.25-17.50; 71% girls), with 80% meeting criteria for more than one mental disorder. Treatment adherence (≥ 50% completion) was 78-84% across interventions. Masked outcome assessments were attended by 96% of participants. No serious adverse effects were reported. At the primary endpoint, 40% of participants in stepped care and 75% in stratified care were classified as treatment responders. However, the trial was not powered to detect efficacy differences, and no between-group comparisons were conducted. Results indicate that a definitive trial comparing stepped and stratified care for youth anxiety disorders is feasible.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Child Psychiatry & Human Development\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Child Psychiatry & Human Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-025-01908-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child Psychiatry & Human Development","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10578-025-01908-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Stepped Care Versus Stratified Care for Youth with Anxiety Disorders: a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
Anxiety disorders are common in children and adolescents, but access to evidence-based treatment is limited. Most clinical guidelines recommend stratified care, where less complex patients are offered low intensity interventions and complex patients more intensive options. Stepped care, where all patients initially receive low-intensity treatment, has gained traction due to its potential cost-effectiveness. Research on care models for youth with anxiety disorders is very limited. In this pre-registered (NCT06016907) pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT), we examined the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of a trial comparing stepped and stratified care for youth with anxiety disorders. In stepped care, all began with internet-delivered CBT. In stratified care, complex cases (based on a baseline risk score incorporating symptom severity, co-existing disorders, functional impairment, and family conflict) started with in-person CBT. Non-responders in both groups were offered in-person CBT. Over six months, 51 youth with anxiety disorders were enrolled (mean age = 14.18 years, range = 9.25-17.50; 71% girls), with 80% meeting criteria for more than one mental disorder. Treatment adherence (≥ 50% completion) was 78-84% across interventions. Masked outcome assessments were attended by 96% of participants. No serious adverse effects were reported. At the primary endpoint, 40% of participants in stepped care and 75% in stratified care were classified as treatment responders. However, the trial was not powered to detect efficacy differences, and no between-group comparisons were conducted. Results indicate that a definitive trial comparing stepped and stratified care for youth anxiety disorders is feasible.
期刊介绍:
Child Psychiatry & Human Development is an interdisciplinary international journal serving the groups represented by child and adolescent psychiatry, clinical child/pediatric/family psychology, pediatrics, social science, and human development. The journal publishes research on diagnosis, assessment, treatment, epidemiology, development, advocacy, training, cultural factors, ethics, policy, and professional issues as related to clinical disorders in children, adolescents, and families. The journal publishes peer-reviewed original empirical research in addition to substantive and theoretical reviews.