Internetbasierte Therapie der sozialen Phobie: Ergebnisse einer 6-Monate-Katamnese

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an unguided, internet-based self-help intervention for social anxiety disorder in university students: protocol of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is highly prevalent among university students, but the majority of affected students remain untreated. Internet- and mobile-based self-help interventions (IMIs) may be a promising strategy to address this unmet need. This study aims to investigate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an unguided internet-based treatment for SAD among university students. The intervention is optimized for the treatment of university students and includes one module targeting fear of positive evaluations that is a neglected aspect of SAD treatment.

METHODS

The study is a two arm randomized controlled trial in which 200 university students with a primary diagnosis of SAD will be assigned randomly to either a wait-list control group (WLC) or the intervention group (IG). The intervention consists of 9 sessions of an internet-based cognitive-behavioral treatment, which also includes a module on fear of positive evaluation (FPE). Guidance is delivered only on the basis of standardized automatic messages, consisting of positive reinforcements for session completion, reminders, and motivational messages in response to non-adherence. All participants will additionally have full access to treatment as usual. Diagnostic status will be assessed through Structured Clinical Interviews for DSM Disorders (SCID). Assessments will be completed at baseline, 10 weeks and 6-month follow-up. The primary outcome will be SAD symptoms at post-treatment, assessed via the Social Phobia Scale (SPS) and the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS). Secondary outcomes will include diagnostic status, depression, quality of life and fear of positive evaluation. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses will be evaluated from a societal and health provider perspective.

DISCUSSION

Results of this study will contribute to growing evidence for the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of unguided IMIs for the treatment of SAD in university students. Consequently, this trial may provide valuable information for policy makers and clinicians regarding the allocation of limited treatment resources to such interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

DRKS00011424 (German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS)) Registered 14/12/2016.

Efficacy of an unguided internet-based self-help intervention for social anxiety disorder in university students: A randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Internet- and mobile-based interventions (IMIs) offer the opportunity to deliver mental health treatments on a large scale. This randomized controlled trial evaluated the efficacy of an unguided IMI (StudiCare SAD) for university students with social anxiety disorder (SAD).

METHODS

University students (N = 200) diagnosed with SAD were randomly assigned to an IMI or a waitlist control group (WLC) with full access to treatment as usual. StudiCare SAD consists of nine sessions. The primary outcome was SAD symptoms at posttreatment (10 weeks), assessed via the Social Phobia Scale (SPS) and the Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SIAS). Secondary outcomes included depression, quality of life, fear of positive evaluation, general psychopathology, and interpersonal problems.

RESULTS

Results indicated moderate to large effect sizes in favor of StudiCare SAD compared with WLC for SAD at posttest for the primary outcomes (SPS: d = 0.76; SIAS: d = 0.55, p < 0.001). Effects on all secondary outcomes were significant and in favor of the intervention group.

CONCLUSION

StudiCare SAD has proven effective in reducing SAD symptoms in university students. Providing IMIs may be a promising way to reach university students with SAD at an early stage with an effective treatment.

Meta-analysis of technology-assisted interventions for social anxiety disorder

This meta-analysis investigated the efficacy of technology-assisted interventions for individuals with social anxiety disorder (SAD). A systematic literature search in the databases Medline, PsychInfo, and Web of Science revealed 37 randomized controlled trials (2991 participants) that were grouped into internet delivered cognitive behavior therapy (ICBT; 21 trials), virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET; 3 trials), and cognitive bias modification (CBM; 13 trials). Patients undergoing ICBT and VRET showed significantly less SAD symptoms at postassessment than passive control conditions (g=0.84 and 0.82, respectively). Compared to active control conditions, ICBT had a small advantage (g=0.38) and VRET showed comparable effects (p>0.05). CBM was not more effective than passive control conditions, except when delivered in the laboratory (g=0.35). While the efficacy of CBM was limited, substantial evidence for ICBT and preliminary evidence for VRET suggests that both can effectively reduce SAD symptoms indicating the potential of technology-assisted interventions for SAD.

A sorrow shared is a sorrow halved? A three-arm randomized controlled trial comparing internet-based clinician-guided individual versus group treatment for social anxiety disorder

A growing body of evidence suggests that internet-based cognitive behavioural treatments (ICBT) are effective to treat social anxiety disorder (SAD). Whereas the efficacy of clinician-guided ICBT has been established, ICBT in a group format has not yet been systematically investigated. This three-arm RCT compared the efficacy of clinician-guided group ICBT (GT) with clinician guided individual ICBT (IT) and a wait-list (WL). A total of 149 individuals meeting the diagnostic criteria for SAD were randomly assigned to one of three conditions. Primary endpoints were self-report measures of SAD and diagnostic status taken at baseline, after the twelve-week intervention and at six-month follow-up. Secondary endpoints were symptoms of depression, interpersonal problems and general symptomatology. At post-treatment, both active conditions showed superior outcome regarding SAD symptoms (GT vs. WL: d = 0.84-0.74; IT vs. WL: d = 0.94-1.22). The two active conditions did not differ significantly in symptom reduction (d = 0.12-0.26, all ps > 0.63), diagnostic response rate or attrition. Treatment gains were maintained at follow-up. The group format reduced weekly therapist time per participant by 71% (IT: 17 min, GT: 5 min). Findings indicate that a clinician-guided group format is a promising approach in treating SAD.

Therapist-supported Internet cognitive behavioural therapy for anxiety disorders in adults

BACKGROUND

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is an evidence-based treatment for anxiety disorders. Many people have difficulty accessing treatment, due to a variety of obstacles. Researchers have therefore explored the possibility of using the Internet to deliver CBT; it is important to ensure the decision to promote such treatment is grounded in high quality evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of therapist-supported Internet CBT (ICBT) on remission of anxiety disorder diagnosis and reduction of anxiety symptoms in adults as compared to waiting list control, unguided CBT, or face-to-face CBT. Effects of treatment on quality of life and patient satisfaction with the intervention were also assessed.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group Specialised Register (CCDANCTR) to 16 March 2015. The CCDANCTR includes relevant randomised controlled trials from MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CENTRAL. We also searched online clinical trial registries and reference lists of included studies. We contacted authors to locate additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Each identified study was independently assessed for inclusion by two authors. To be included, studies had to be randomised controlled trials of therapist-supported ICBT compared to a waiting list, attention, information, or online discussion group; unguided CBT (that is, self-help); or face-to-face CBT. We included studies that treated adults with an anxiety disorder (panic disorder, agoraphobia, social phobia, post-traumatic stress disorder, acute stress disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, and specific phobia) defined according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders III, III-R, IV, IV-TR or the International Classification of Disesases 9 or 10.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias of included studies and judged overall study quality. We used data from intention-to-treat analyses wherever possible. We assessed treatment effect for the dichotomous outcome of clinically important improvement in anxiety using a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). For disorder-specific and general anxiety symptom measures and quality of life we assessed continuous scores using standardized mean differences (SMD). We examined statistical heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic.

MAIN RESULTS

We screened 1736 citations and selected 38 studies (3214 participants) for inclusion. The studies examined social phobia (11 trials), panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (8 trials), generalized anxiety disorder (5 trials), post-traumatic stress disorder (2 trials), obsessive compulsive disorder (2 trials), and specific phobia (2 trials). Eight remaining studies included a range of anxiety disorder diagnoses. Studies were conducted in Sweden (18 trials), Australia (14 trials), Switzerland (3 trials), the Netherlands (2 trials), and the USA (1 trial) and investigated a variety of ICBT protocols. Three primary comparisons were identified, therapist-supported ICBT versus waiting list control, therapist-supported versus unguided ICBT, and therapist-supported ICBT versus face-to-face CBT.Low quality evidence from 11 studies (866 participants) contributed to a pooled risk ratio (RR) of 3.75 (95% CI 2.51 to 5.60; I(2) = 50%) for clinically important improvement in anxiety at post-treatment, favouring therapist-supported ICBT over a waiting list, attention, information, or online discussion group only. The SMD for disorder-specific symptoms at post-treatment (28 studies, 2147 participants; SMD -1.06, 95% CI -1.29 to -0.82; I(2) = 83%) and general anxiety symptoms at post-treatment (19 studies, 1496 participants; SMD -0.75, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.52; I(2) = 78%) favoured therapist-supported ICBT; the quality of the evidence for both outcomes was low.One study compared unguided CBT to therapist-supported ICBT for clinically important improvement in anxiety at post-treatment, showing no difference in outcome between treatments (54 participants; very low quality evidence). At post-treatment there were no clear differences between unguided CBT and therapist-supported ICBT for disorder-specific anxiety symptoms (5 studies, 312 participants; SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.13; I(2) = 58%; very low quality evidence) or general anxiety symptoms (2 studies, 138 participants; SMD 0.28, 95% CI -2.21 to 2.78; I(2) = 0%; very low quality evidence).Compared to face-to-face CBT, therapist-supported ICBT showed no significant differences in clinically important improvement in anxiety at post-treatment (4 studies, 365 participants; RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.34; I(2) = 0%; low quality evidence). There were also no clear differences between face-to-face and therapist supported ICBT for disorder-specific anxiety symptoms at post-treatment (7 studies, 450 participants; SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.25 to 0.37; I(2) = 60%; low quality evidence) or general anxiety symptoms at post-treatment (5 studies, 317 participants; SMD 0.17, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.69; I(2) = 78%; low quality evidence).Overall, risk of bias in included studies was low or unclear for most domains. However, due to the nature of psychosocial intervention trials, blinding of participants and personnel, and outcome assessment tended to have a high risk of bias. Heterogeneity across a number of the meta-analyses was substantial, some was explained by type of anxiety disorder or may be meta-analytic measurement artefact due to combining many assessment measures. Adverse events were rarely reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Therapist-supported ICBT appears to be an efficacious treatment for anxiety in adults. The evidence comparing therapist-supported ICBT to waiting list, attention, information, or online discussion group only control was low to moderate quality, the evidence comparing therapist-supported ICBT to unguided ICBT was very low quality, and comparisons of therapist-supported ICBT to face-to-face CBT were low quality. Further research is needed to better define and measure any potential harms resulting from treatment. These findings suggest that therapist-supported ICBT is more efficacious than a waiting list, attention, information, or online discussion group only control, and that there may not be a significant difference in outcome between unguided CBT and therapist-supported ICBT; however, this latter finding must be interpreted with caution due to imprecision. The evidence suggests that therapist-supported ICBT may not be significantly different from face-to-face CBT in reducing anxiety. Future research should explore heterogeneity among studies which is reducing the quality of the evidence body, involve equivalence trials comparing ICBT and face-to-face CBT, examine the importance of the role of the therapist in ICBT, and include effectiveness trials of ICBT in real-world settings. A timely update to this review is needed given the fast pace of this area of research.

Therapist-supported Internet cognitive behavioural therapy for anxiety disorders in adults

BACKGROUND

Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is an evidence-based treatment for anxiety disorders. Many people have difficulty accessing treatment, due to a variety of obstacles. Researchers have therefore explored the possibility of using the Internet to deliver CBT; it is important to ensure the decision to promote such treatment is grounded in high quality evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of therapist-supported Internet CBT on remission of anxiety disorder diagnosis and reduction of anxiety symptoms in adults as compared to waiting list control, unguided CBT, or face-to-face CBT. Effects of treatment on quality of life and patient satisfaction with the intervention were also assessed.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group Specialized Register (CCDANCTR) to 12 April 2013. The CCDANCTR includes relevant randomised controlled trials from EMBASE (1974 -), MEDLINE (1950 -) and PsycINFO (1967 -). We also searched online clinical trial registries and reference lists of included studies. We contacted authors to locate further trials. An update of an initial search (April 2013), conducted in September 2014, identified seven new completed studies, seven previously ongoing studies now completed, and four new ongoing studies. This is a fast-moving area; we plan to update this review shortly, incorporating these new studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Each identified study was independently assessed for inclusion by two authors. To be included, studies had to be randomised controlled trials of therapist-supported ICBT compared to a waiting list, attention, information, or online discussion group; unguided CBT (that is, self-help); or face-to-face CBT. We included studies that treated adults with an anxiety disorder (panic disorder, agoraphobia, social phobia, post-traumatic stress disorder, acute stress disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, and specific phobia) defined according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders III, III-R, IV, IV-TR or the International Classification of Disesases 9 or 10.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias of included studies and judged overall study quality. We used data from intention-to-treat analyses wherever possible. We assessed treatment effect for the dichotomous outcome of clinically important improvement in anxiety using a risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). For disorder-specific and general anxiety symptom measures and quality of life we assessed continuous scores using standardized mean differences (SMD). We examined statistical heterogeneity using the I(2) statistic.

MAIN RESULTS

We screened 1000 citations and selected 30 studies (2181 participants) for inclusion. The studies examined social phobia (11 trials), panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (8 trials), generalized anxiety disorder (4 trials), post-traumatic stress disorder (1 trial), and specific phobia (1 trial). Five remaining studies included a range of anxiety disorder diagnoses. Studies were conducted in Sweden (15 trials), Australia (12 trials), Switzerland (2 trials), and the Netherlands (1 trial) and investigated a variety of ICBT protocols. Three primary comparisons were identified, experimental versus waiting list control, experimental versus unguided ICBT, and experimental versus face-to-face CBT.Moderate quality evidence from 9 studies (644 participants) contributed to a pooled RR of 4.18 (95% CI 2.42 to 7.22) for clinically important improvement in anxiety at post-treatment, favouring therapist-supported ICBT over a waiting list, attention, information, or online discussion group only. Similarly, the SMD for disorder-specific symptoms at post-treatment (22 studies, 1573 participants; SMD -1.12, 95% CI -1.39 to -0.85) and general anxiety symptoms at post-treatment (14 studies, 1004 participants; SMD -0.79, 95% CI -1.10 to -0.48) favoured therapist-supported ICBT. The quality of the evidence for both outcomes was low.One study compared unguided CBT to therapist-supported ICBT for clinically important improvement in anxiety at post-treatment, showing no difference in outcome between treatments (54 participants; very low quality evidence). At post-treatment there were no clear differences between unguided CBT and therapist-supported ICBT for disorder-specific anxiety symptoms (4 studies, 253 participants; SMD -0.24, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.21; low quality evidence) or general anxiety symptoms (two studies, 138 participants; SMD 0.28, 95% CI -2.21 to 2.78; low quality evidence).Compared to face-to-face CBT, therapist-supported ICBT showed no significant differences in clinically important improvement in anxiety at post-treatment (4 studies, 365 participants; RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.34; moderate quality evidence). There were also no clear differences between face-to-face and therapist supported ICBT for disorder-specific anxiety symptoms at post-treatment (6 studies, 424 participants; SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.43; low quality evidence) or general anxiety symptoms at post-treatment (5 studies, 317 participants; SMD 0.17, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.69; low quality evidence).Overall, risk of bias in included studies was low or unclear for most domains. However, due to the nature of psychosocial intervention trials, blinding of participants and personnel, and outcome assessment tended to have a high risk of bias. Heterogeneity across a number of the meta-analyses was substantial, some was explained by type of anxiety disorder or may be meta-analytic measurement artefact due to combining many assessment measures. Adverse events were rarely reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Therapist-supported ICBT appears to be an efficacious treatment for anxiety in adults. The evidence comparing therapist-supported ICBT to waiting list, attention, information, or online discussion group only control was low to moderate quality, the evidence comparing therapist-supported ICBT to unguided ICBT was low to very low quality, and comparisons of therapist-supported ICBT to face-to-face CBT was low to moderate quality. Further research is needed to better define and measure any potential harms resulting from treatment. These findings suggest that therapist-supported ICBT is more efficacious than a waiting list, attention, information, or online discussion group only control, and that there may not be a significant difference in outcome between unguided CBT and therapist-supported ICBT; however, this latter finding must be interpreted with caution due to imprecision. The evidence suggests that therapist-supported ICBT may not be significantly different from face-to-face CBT in reducing anxiety. Future research should involve equivalence trials comparing ICBT and face-to-face CBT, examine the importance of the role of the therapist in ICBT, and include effectiveness trials of ICBT in real-world settings. A timely update to this review is needed given the fast pace of this area of research.

Internet-based individually versus group guided self-help treatment for social anxiety disorder: protocol of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is one of the most common mental disorders and causes subjective suffering and economic burden worldwide. Although effective treatments are available, a lot of cases go untreated. Internet-based self-help is a low-threshold and flexible treatment alternative for SAD. Various studies have already shown that internet-based self-help can be effective to reduce social phobic symptoms significantly. Most of the interventions tested include therapist support, whereas the role of peer support within internet-based self-help has not yet been fully understood. There is evidence suggesting that patients' mutual exchange via integrated discussion forums can increase the efficacy of internet-based treatments. This study aims at investigating the added value of therapist-guided group support on the treatment outcome of internet-based self-help for SAD.

METHODS/DESIGN

The study is conducted as a randomized controlled trial. A total of 150 adults with a diagnosis of SAD are randomly assigned to either a waiting-list control group or one of the active conditions. The participants in the two active conditions use the same internet-based self-help program, either with individual support by a psychologist or therapist-guided group support. In the group guided condition, participants can communicate with each other via an integrated, protected discussion forum. Subjects are recruited via topic related websites and links; diagnostic status will be assessed with a telephone interview. The primary outcome variables are symptoms of SAD and diagnostic status after the intervention. Secondary endpoints are general symptomology, depression, quality of life, as well as the primary outcome variables 6 months later. Furthermore, process variables such as group processes, the change in symptoms and working alliance will be studied.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study should indicate whether group-guided support could enhance the efficacy of an internet-based self-help treatment for SAD. This novel treatment format, if shown effective, could represent a cost-effective option and could further be modified to treat other conditions, as well.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN75894275.

Media-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy and behavioural therapy (self-help) for anxiety disorders in adults

BACKGROUND

Anxiety disorders are the most common mental health problems. They are chronic and unremitting. Effective treatments are available, but access to services is limited. Media-delivered behavioural and cognitive behavioural interventions (self-help) aim to deliver treatment with less input from professionals compared with traditional therapies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of media-delivered behavioural and cognitive behavioural therapies for anxiety disorders in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

Published and unpublished studies were considered without restriction by language or date. The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialized Register (CCDANCTR) was searched all years to 1 January 2013. The CCDANCTR includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: The Cochrane Library (all years), EMBASE (1974 to date), MEDLINE (1950 to date) and PsycINFO (1967 to date). Complementary searches were carried out on Ovid MEDLINE (1950 to 23 February 2013) and PsycINFO (1987 to February, Week 2, 2013), together with International trial registries (the trials portal of the World Health Organization (ICTRP) and ClinicalTrials.gov). Reference lists from previous meta-analyses and reports of randomised controlled trials were checked, and authors were contacted for unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of media-delivered behavioural or cognitive behavioural therapy in adults with anxiety disorders (other than post-traumatic stress disorder) compared with no intervention (including attention/relaxation controls) or compared with face-to-face therapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Both review authors independently screened titles and abstracts. Study characteristics and outcomes were extracted in duplicate. Outcomes were combined using random-effects models, and tests for heterogeneity and for small study bias were conducted. We examined subgroup differences by type of disorder, type of intervention provided, type of media, and recruitment methods used.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred and one studies with 8403 participants were included; 92 studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. These trials compared several types of media-delivered interventions (with varying levels of support) with no treatment and with face-to-face interventions. Inconsistency and risk of bias reduced our confidence in the overall results. For the primary outcome of symptoms of anxiety, moderate-quality evidence showed medium effects compared with no intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 0.80; 72 studies, 4537 participants), and low-quality evidence of small effects favoured face-to-face therapy (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.09; 24 studies, 1360 participants). The intervention was associated with greater response than was seen with no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 2.34, 95% CI 1.81 to 3.03; 21 studies, 1547 participants) and was not significantly inferior to face-to-face therapy in these studies (RR 0.78, 95 % CI 0.56 to 1.09; 10 studies, 575 participants), but the latter comparison included versions of therapies that were not as comprehensive as those provided in routine clinical practice. Evidence suggested benefit for secondary outcome measures (depression, mental-health related disability, quality of life and dropout), but this evidence was of low to moderate quality. Evidence regarding harm was lacking.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Self-help may be useful for people who are not able or are not willing to use other services for people with anxiety disorders; for people who can access it, face-to-face cognitive behavioural therapy is probably clinically superior. Economic analyses were beyond the scope of this review.Important heterogeneity was noted across trials. Recent interventions for specific problems that incorporate clinician support may be more effective than transdiagnostic interventions (i.e. interventions for multiple disorders) provided with no guidance, but these issues are confounded in the available trials.Although many small trials have been conducted, the generalisability of their findings is limited. Most interventions tested are not available to consumers. Self-help has been recommended as the first step in the treatment of some anxiety disorders, but the short-term and long-term effectiveness of media-delivered interventions has not been established. Large, pragmatic trials are needed to evaluate and to maximise the benefits of self-help interventions.

Does a pre-treatment diagnostic interview affect the outcome of internet-based self-help for social anxiety disorder? a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies suggest that Internet-based self-help treatments are effective in treating anxiety disorders. Trials evaluating such interventions differ in their screening procedures and in the amount of clinician contact in the diagnostic assessment phase. The present study evaluates the impact of a pre-treatment diagnostic interview on the outcome of an Internet-based treatment for Social Anxiety Disorder (SAD).

METHOD

One hundred and nine participants seeking treatment for SAD were randomized to either an interview-group (IG, N = 53) or to a non-interview group (NIG, N = 56). All participants took part in the same 10-week cognitive-behavioural unguided self-help programme. Before receiving access to the programme, participants of the IG underwent a structured diagnostic interview. Participants of the NIG started directly with the programme.

RESULTS

Participants in both groups showed significant and substantial improvement on social anxiety measures from pre- to post-assessment (d IG = 1.30-1.63; d NIG = 1.00-1.28) and from pre- to 4-month follow-up assessment (d IG = 1.38-1.87; d NIG = 1.10-1.21). Significant between-groups effects in favour of the IG were found on secondary outcome measures of depression and general distress (d = 0.18-0.42).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that Internet-based self-help is effective in treating SAD, whether or not a diagnostic interview is involved. However, the pre-treatment interview seems to facilitate change on secondary outcomes such as depression and general distress.

Internet-based treatment of social phobia: a randomized controlled trial comparing unguided with two types of guided self-help

Internet-based self-help for social phobia with minimal therapist support via email have shown efficacy in several controlled trials by independent research teams. The role and necessity of therapist guidance is, however, still largely unclear. The present study compared the benefits of a 10-week web-based unguided self-help treatment for social phobia with the same intervention complemented with minimal, although weekly, therapist support via email. Further, a third treatment arm was included, in which the level of support was flexibly stepped up, from no support to email or telephone contact, on demand of the participants. Eighty-one individuals meeting diagnostic criteria for social phobia were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions. Primary outcome measures were self-report measures of symptoms of social phobia. Secondary outcome measures included symptoms of depression, interpersonal problems, and general symptomatology. Measures were taken at baseline, post-treatment, and at 6-month follow-up. Data from a telephone-administered diagnostic interview conducted at post-treatment were also included. Results showed significant symptom reductions in all three treatment groups with large effect sizes for primary social phobia measures (Cohen's d=1.47) and for secondary outcome measures (d=1.16). No substantial and significant between-groups effects were found on any of the measures (Cohen's d=00-.36). Moreover, no difference between the three conditions was found regarding diagnosis-free status, clinically significant change, dropout rates, or adherence measures such as lessons or exercises completed. These findings indicate that Internet-delivered treatment for social phobia is a promising treatment option, whether no support is provided or with two different types of therapist guidance.