FLORE (FLOrence REsearch) è il repository istituzionale ad accesso pieno e aperto dell'Università degli Studi di Firenze.
Raccoglie, documenta e conserva le informazioni sulla produzione scientifica dell'Università e costituisce l'Anagrafe della ricerca dell'Ateneo.
EnglishAbstract. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a well-established treatment for obsessivecompulsive disorder (OCD). However, few patients receive CBT, due to factors such as geographic limitations, perceived stigmatization, and lack of CBT services. Technology-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (T-CBT) could be an effective strategy to improve patients’ access to CBT. To date, a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of T-CBT for OCD has not been conducted. This study used meta-analytic techniques to summarize evidence on the efficacy of T-CBT for OCD versus control conditions and therapist-administered CBT. A meta-analysis according to Prisma guidelines was conducted on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of T-CBT for OCD. Treatment was classified as T-CBT if evidence-based CBT active ingredients for OCD were included (psychoeducation, ERP, and cognitive restructuring), delivered through health technologies (e.g. self-help books, leaflets, and other forms of bibliotherapy) or remote communication technologies (e.g. the Internet, web-cameras, telephones, telephone-interactive voice response systems, and CD-ROMS). Studies using validated outcomes for OCD or depression were included. Eight trials were included (N ¼ 420). Two trials were classified as at high risk of bias. T-CBT seemed to be superior to control conditions on OCD symptom outcomes at post-treatment (d ¼ 0.82, 99% CI ¼ 0.55–1.08, p ¼ 0.001), but not on comorbid depression (d ¼ 0.33, 99% CI ¼ 20.01–0.67, p ¼ 0.020). Difference in the efficacy on OCD symptoms between T-CBT and therapist-administered CBT was not significant, despite a trend favouring therapist-administered CBT emerged (d ¼ 0.45, 95% CI ¼ 0.03–0.87, p ¼ 0.033). Directions for research are discussed. Further RCTs are warranted to examine the efficacy of TCBT for OCD.
| Titolo: | Efficacy of Technology-delivered Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for OCD Versus Control Conditions, and in Comparison with Therapist-Administered CBT: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials | |
| Autori di Ateneo: | ||
| Autori: | DETTORE, DAVIDE; POZZA, ANDREA; Andersson G. | |
| Anno di registrazione: | 2015 | |
| Rivista: | ||
| Volume: | 44 | |
| Pagina iniziale: | 190 | |
| Pagina finale: | 211 | |
| Abstract: | Abstract. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a well-established treatment for obsessivecompulsive disorder (OCD). However, few patients receive CBT, due to factors such as geographic limitations, perceived stigmatization, and lack of CBT services. Technology-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (T-CBT) could be an effective strategy to improve patients’ access to CBT. To date, a meta-analysis on the effectiveness of T-CBT for OCD has not been conducted. This study used meta-analytic techniques to summarize evidence on the efficacy of T-CBT for OCD versus control conditions and therapist-administered CBT. A meta-analysis according to Prisma guidelines was conducted on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of T-CBT for OCD. Treatment was classified as T-CBT if evidence-based CBT active ingredients for OCD were included (psychoeducation, ERP, and cognitive restructuring), delivered through health technologies (e.g. self-help books, leaflets, and other forms of bibliotherapy) or remote communication technologies (e.g. the Internet, web-cameras, telephones, telephone-interactive voice response systems, and CD-ROMS). Studies using validated outcomes for OCD or depression were included. Eight trials were included (N ¼ 420). Two trials were classified as at high risk of bias. T-CBT seemed to be superior to control conditions on OCD symptom outcomes at post-treatment (d ¼ 0.82, 99% CI ¼ 0.55–1.08, p ¼ 0.001), but not on comorbid depression (d ¼ 0.33, 99% CI ¼ 20.01–0.67, p ¼ 0.020). Difference in the efficacy on OCD symptoms between T-CBT and therapist-administered CBT was not significant, despite a trend favouring therapist-administered CBT emerged (d ¼ 0.45, 95% CI ¼ 0.03–0.87, p ¼ 0.033). Directions for research are discussed. Further RCTs are warranted to examine the efficacy of TCBT for OCD. | |
| Handle: | http://hdl.handle.net/2158/982203 | |
| Appare nelle tipologie: | 1a - Articolo su rivista |
File in questo prodotto:
| File | Descrizione | Tipologia | Licenza | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dettore, Pozza & Andersson 2014.pdf | PDF editoriale | DRM non definito | Administrator |
http://hdl.handle.net/2158/982203
Copyright © 2021