Search

A proposed advantage of virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety disorders is that people will be less likely to drop out of treatment prematurely if the treatment involves facing one's fear in a virtual world rather than the real world, but this has yet to be empirically tested. The present meta-analyses assess the odds of dropout from virtual reality exposure therapy compared to in vivo exposure therapy, estimate the overall rate of dropout from virtual reality exposure treatment, and test potential moderating variables. The odds ratio meta-analysis indicated that there was no significant difference in the likelihood of attrition from virtual reality exposure therapy relative to in vivo exposure therapy. The overall attrition rate for virtual reality exposure therapy across 46 studies with a combined sample size of 1057 participants was 16%. This rate is slightly lower than other estimates of dropout from in vivo therapy and from cognitive-behavioral therapy for anxiety disorders. Incorporation of between-session intervention (i.e., homework) was identified as a moderator; specifically, inclusion of between-session interventions in the treatment was associated with better retention. Overall, the findings of the present study indicate that virtual reality exposure and in vivo exposure therapy show similar rates of attrition., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Ample evidence supports the use of Virtual Reality (VR) for anxiety disorders. Nonetheless, currently there is no evidence about moderators or potential negative effects of VR treatment strategies. An Individual Patient Data (IPD) approach was employed with 15 retrieved datasets. The current study sample was composed of 810 patients. Randomized control trials (RCTs) for each primary outcome measure were performed, in addition to moderator analyses of the socio-demographic variables. Deterioration rates were 14 patients (4.0%) in VR, 8 (2.8%) in active control conditions, and 27 (15%) in the WL condition. With regard to receiving treatment, patients in a waiting list control condition had greater odds of deteriorating than in the two active conditions, odds ratios (ORs) 4.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.05, 0.67]. In the case of the socio-demographic variables, none of them were associated with higher or lower odds of deterioration, with the exception of marital status in the WL condition; married people presented a significantly lower probability of deterioration, OR 0.19, 95% CI [0.05, 0.67]. Finally, when comparing pooled effects of VR versus all control conditions, the OR was 0.61 (95% CI 0.31-1.23) in favor of VR, although this result was not statistically significant. This study provides evidence about the deterioration rates of a therapeutic VR approach, showing that the number of deteriorated patients coincides with other therapeutic approaches, and that deterioration is less likely to occur, compared to patients in WL control groups., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Ruminative habits of thought about one's problems and the resulting consequences are correlated with symptoms of depression and cognitive biases (Nolen-Hoeksema, Wisco, & Lyubomirsky, 2008). In our orienting task, brooders and non-brooders concentrated on self-focusing phrases while they were also exposed to neutral target words. On each trial in the unfocused condition, participants saw and then reported the target before concentrating on the phrase; in the focused condition, the target was reported after phrase concentration. A brooding-related deficit on a subsequent unexpected test of free and forced recall was obtained in the unfocused condition only. Brooders recalled more successfully in the focused than in the unfocused condition. Thus, impaired recall of material unrelated to self-concerns may be corrected in situations that constrain attention.