Search

Although cognitive behavioral group therapy (CBGT) is an effective treatment for social anxiety disorder, many socially anxious patients are still symptomatic after treatment. A possible improvement for CBGT could come from the more experiential group psychotherapy, psychodrama (PD). The integration of CBGT and PD (labeled CBPT) might offer an even more effective treatment than CBGT or PD alone. With the present study, we investigated first whether three kinds of group therapy (CBGT, PD, and CBPT) are superior to a waitlist (WL). Second, we investigated whether CBPT is more effective than CBGT or PD alone. One hundred and forty-four social anxiety patients were randomly assigned to three active conditions or a WL. After wait, WL-participants were randomized over the active treatment conditions. The results of a multilevel analysis showed that all treatments were superior to WL in reducing social anxiety complaints. Only CBGT and CBPT differed significantly from WL in reducing fear of negative evaluations. There were no significant differences between active conditions in any of the variables after treatment and after six-month follow up, neither were there significant differences in treatment dropout. First there is the lack of a long-term follow-up. Second, because of loss of participants, we did not reach the planned numbers in the active treatment groups in comparison to WL. Moreover, this study was not designed as a non-inferiority or equivalence trial. Although the integrative CBPT showed good results, it was not more effective than the other treatments. • All treatments were superior to the waiting list group in reducing social anxiety. • Compared to WL, CBGT and CBPT but not PD decreased fear of negative evaluation. • Comparing only active treatments, no treatment was superior to another treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Treatments for eating disorders are moderately effective, with cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) providing the strongest evidence. However, it remains important to investigate other interventions, particularly for eating disorders with greater complexity (e.g., substantial comorbidity; trauma history) or for patients who have not responded adequately to previous treatments. This randomized controlled trial compared CBT against compassion-focused therapy for eating disorders (CFT-E), where half of the sample had a childhood trauma history. The study was pre-registered and adequately powered. A total of 130 patients were randomly assigned to CBT or CFT-E and were assessed at pre-treatment, post-treatment and one-year follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the total score on the Eating Disorder Examination-Interview (EDE), and secondary outcome measures were the Symptom Checklist-90, Inventory of Interpersonal Problems–64 and Post-Traumatic Symptom Scale. Attrition during treatment was low (13%), suggesting good acceptability. Eating pathology (EDE scores) reduced substantially overall, with large effect sizes, and there were no differences between therapies. However, at follow-up, for patients with a childhood trauma history, CFT-E maintained benefits better than CBT. Conclusion : While both CBT and CFT-E resulted in significant reductions in eating pathology, CFT-E showed superior maintenance of benefits for patients with a history of childhood trauma at one-year follow-up, underlining the necessity of tailored interventions for specific patient subgroups. • Lack of treatment studies for eating disorder patients with trauma histories. • First study comparing CFT and CBT for eating disorders. • Both treatments viable; CFT superior in long-term outcomes for patients with trauma histories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]