Behavioral Therapy Teams for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Lessons Learned From a Pilot Randomized Trial in a Community Mental Health Center

The effectiveness of psychological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorders: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published over last 30 years

BACKGROUND

Although numerous studies have examined the effects of psychological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), their overall effectiveness remains unclear. We aimed to estimate their overall effect by combining all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychological treatments to control groups for OCD.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis of 48 RCTs with 55 comparisons published between 1992 and 1 January 2023. The primary outcome was OCD symptom severity, with Hedges' g calculated at post-treatment and follow-up. Random-effects models were employed for all analyses, and the risk of bias was assessed.

RESULTS

In general, psychological treatments demonstrated a significantly large effect (g = -1.14; 95% CI [-1.31 to -0.97]; I2 = 72.23%) on reducing OCD symptom severity post-treatment, this finding remained consistent across measures and after excluding outliers, but lost significance in the sensitivity analysis for only studies with low risk of bias. Type of treatment, control group and treatment format were associated with treatment effects. Moreover, more severe baseline OCD symptom severity predicted higher degree of treatment efficacy. No significant differences were observed in dropout rates between the treatment and control groups. Treatment effects lost significance at 3-6 and 6-12 month follow-ups. 87% of RCTs were rated at high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychological treatments are effective in reducing OCD symptom severity. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting these results due to the high heterogeneity and risk of bias across RCTs. Future studies with more rigorous methodology are required, as well as studies examining their long-term effectiveness.

The effectiveness of unguided self-help psychological interventions for obsessive-compulsive disorder: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based psychological interventions exist for individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), but many individuals with OCD are unable to access them because of barriers, such as geographical isolation, treatment cost, and stigma etc. Unguided self-help psychological intervention has emerged as a potential solution to this problem. However, there is limited research on its overall effectiveness. This study aimed to address this gap.

METHODS

Comprehensive searches from inception to 1st Jan 2023 were conducted in both international (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, International clinical trials registry platform of WHO) and Chinese (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WeiPu, WanFang, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry) databases. The registered protocol is accessible at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/FKB5W. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing unguided self-help psychological interventions to control groups for individuals with OCD. The primary outcome was OCD symptom severity, with Hedges' g calculated post-intervention. Heterogeneity was deemed to be low, moderate, and high if the I2 value was quantified 25%, 50%, and 75% respectively. Relative Risks (RRs) was calculated for dropout rates post-intervention. Random-effects models were used for all analyses.

RESULTS

12 RCTs comparing unguided self-help psychological interventions to control groups were identified, with a total of 20 comparisons and 769 OCD patients. Overall, unguided self-help psychological interventions demonstrated a significant moderate effect on reducing OCD symptom severity (g = -0.42; 95% CI [-0.69; -0.14]) compared to control groups, with a moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 59%; 95% CI [22.73; 78.38]). This finding remained significant in sensitivity analyses for the self-rated Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS; k = 7, g = -0.46; 95% CI [-0.71; -0.2]) and after removing an outlier (g = -0.37; 95% CI [-0.55; -0.19]), but not for the clinician-rated Y-BOCS (k = 4, g = -0.78; 95% CI [-2.75; 1.19]) and Obsessive Compulsive Inventory-Revised (k = 6, g = -0.26; 95% CI [-0.53; 0]). Subgroup analyses revealed a significant difference in effect size between studies conducting intention-to-treat and completers-only analyses (p = .01). The completers-only analyses demonstrated a moderate significant effect (g = -0.65; 95% CI [-1.08; -0.21]), whereas the effect of the intention-to-treat analyses was not significant (g = -0.18; 95% CI [-0.36; 0]). Participants in the unguided self-help groups exhibited a significantly higher dropout rate (RR = 2.08; 95% CI [1.53; 2.81]) compared to control groups. Furthermore, participants recruited from the community had a higher likelihood of dropping out compared to those recruited from clinical settings (p < .001). Additionally, participants who received cognitive-behavioural therapy intervention were more likely to drop out than those who received other types of intervention (p < .001). Most trials (92%) were rated at a high risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

Unguided self-help psychological interventions demonstrate potential effectiveness in alleviating OCD symptom severity post-intervention. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting the results due to high risk of bias across trials and the relatively small sample size. And the considerable dropout rate might hinder treatment effects. Future studies with strict methodology should investigate the long-term effectiveness of unguided self-help psychological interventions for OCD, explore the reasons for high dropout rates, and improve intervention adherence.

Things that make you go Hmm: Myths and misconceptions within cognitive-behavioral treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder

The past four decades have yielded a robust body of evidence supporting the efficacy and effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) as a gold-standard treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) across the lifespan. Exposure and response prevention (E/RP) has been identified as a key component of this approach. Despite robust research support for CBT with E/RP, several myths and misconceptions continue to proliferate in both research and practice settings. Such myths and misconceptions are concerning, as they lack empirical basis, may hinder widespread dissemination and implementation of CBT for OCD, and run contrary to the practice of evidence-based psychological medicine. Focusing on the importance of promoting evidence-based practice and generative clinical science, the present review article synthesizes relevant research within the field of treatments for OCD to address the following myths / misconceptions: (a) uncertainty exists concerning the evidence base supporting CBT for OCD, (b) E/RP attrition and dropout rates are unacceptably high due to excessive risk and perceived patient intolerability, and (c) alternative treatments for OCD need to be expeditiously developed due to major limitations of E/RP. Recommendations for future research and clinical dissemination and implementation to further advance a generative clinical science of OCD treatment are discussed.

Psychotherapies and digital interventions for OCD in adults: What do we know, what do we need still to explore?

BACKGROUND

Despite significant advances in the understanding and treatment of obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD), current treatment options are limited in terms of efficacy for symptom remission. Thus, assessing the potential role of iterative or alternate psychotherapies is important. Also, the potential role of digital technologies to enhance the accessibility of these therapies, should not be underestimated. We also need to embrace the idea of a more personalized treatment choice, being cognisant of clinical, genetic and neuroimaging predictors of treatment response.

PROCEDURES

Non-systematic review of current literature on emerging psychological and digital therapies for OCD, as well as of potential biomarkers of treatment response.

FINDINGS

A number of 'third wave' therapies (e.g., Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy) have an emerging and encouraging evidence base in OCD. Other approaches entail employment of elements of other psychotherapies such as Dialectical Behaviour Therapy; or trauma-focussed therapies such as Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing, and Imagery Rescripting and Narrative Therapy. Further strategies include Danger Ideation Reduction Therapy and Habit Reversal. For these latter approaches, large-scale randomised controlled trials are largely lacking, and the precise role of these therapies in treating people with OCD, remains to be clarified. A concentrated 4-day program (the Bergen program) has shown promising short- and long-term results. Exercise, music, and art therapy have not been adequately tested in people with OCD, but may have an adjunctive role. Digital technologies are being actively investigated for enhancing reach and efficacy of psychological therapies for OCD. Biomarkers, including genetic and neuroimaging, are starting to point to a future with more 'personalised medicine informed' treatment strategizing for OCD.

CONCLUSIONS

There are a number of potential psychological options for the treatment of people with OCD who do not respond adequately to exposure/response prevention or cognitive behaviour therapy. Adjunctive exercise, music, and art therapy might be useful, albeit the evidence base for these is very small. Consideration should be given to different ways of delivering such interventions, including group-based, concentrated, inpatient, or with outreach, where appropriate. Digital technologies are an emerging field with a number of potential applications for aiding the treatment of OCD. Biomarkers for treatment response determination have much potential capacity and deserve further empirical testing.

The effect of exposure and response prevention therapy on obsessive-compulsive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis mainly examined the effect size of exposure and response prevention (ERP) for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) when compared with different control conditions, and the difference in the efficacy of different variants of ERP in the treatment of OCD. Thirty studies were included, involving 39 randomized controlled trials with 1793 participants, from 30 studies up to January 18, 2022. Hedge's g was calculated using random-effects models. The results showed that ERP had a definite effect on OCD (g = 0.37), and its effect was significant when the control condition was placebo (g = 0.97) or drug (g = 0.59). However, ERP did not show statistical differences with other therapies in improving OCD (g = -0.07). In addition, we found that both therapist and self-controlled exposure (at the same time as the therapist controls, self-control is exercised after the therapy session) and total response prevention can better improve OCD symptoms. In addition, compared with the control group, ERP reduced depression (g = 0.15) and anxiety symptoms (g = 0.23) in patients with OCD. Meta-regression results showed that the longer the length of sessions, the better the treatment effect (t = 2.41, p = 0.022).

The More the Better, Only in the Longer Term: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate a Compound Intervention Among Mainland Chinese Immigrants in Hong Kong

Barriers to adaptation faced by mainland Chinese immigrants to Hong Kong can be reduced by improving two targets of adaptation: information about negotiating their new environment and psychological well-being. We developed and evaluated a Compound intervention to address these two domains simultaneously and compared its effects to two separate interventions exclusively targeting either information about Hong Kong or psychological well-being. This cluster randomized controlled trial assigned 251 immigrants to an information provision arm (IP, n = 84) targeting knowledge and adaptation difficulties, a psychological well-being enhancement arm (WBE, n = 80) targeting resilience and mental health, or a Compound arm (i.e., IP + WBE, n = 87). The Compound arm showed stronger effects from baseline to postintervention on knowledge than the WBE arm. From postintervention to 6-month follow-up, the Compound arm showed better sustained effects on knowledge and adaptation difficulties than the IP arm and on resilience and mental health than the WBE arm. Additionally, participants in the Compound arm with more baseline depressive symptoms showed greater improvements in adaptation difficulties and general mental health than those with fewer symptoms. The study demonstrated the longer-term effectiveness of the Compound intervention and its greater benefits for immigrants with more depressive symptoms.