Search

Background. Online treatments are increasing in number and are currently available for a wide range of clinical problems. To date little is known about the role of treatment expectations and other placebo-like mechanisms in online settings compared to traditional face-to-face treatment. To address this knowledge gap, we analyzed individual participant data from randomized clinical trials that compared online and face-to-face psychological interventions.Methods. MEDLINE (Ovid) and PsycINFO (Ovid) were last searched on 2 February 2021. Randomized clinical trials of therapist guided online v. face-to-face psychological interventions for psychiatric or somatic conditions using a randomized controlled design were included. Titles, abstracts, and full texts of studies were independently screened by multiple observers. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline was followed. Authors of the matching trials were contacted for individual participant data. Ratings from the Credibility and Expectancy Questionnaire and the primary outcome measure from each trial were used to estimate the association between expectation ratings and treatment outcomes in online v. face-to-face interventions, using a mixed-effects model.Results. Of 7045 screened studies, 62 full-text articles were retrieved whereof six studies fulfilled the criteria and provided individual participant data (n = 491). Overall, CEQ ratings predicted clinical outcomes (beta = 0.27) at end of treatment with no moderating effect of treatment modality (online v. face-to-face).Conclusions. Online treatment appears to be equally susceptible to expectancy effects as face-to-face therapy. This furthers our understanding of the importance of placebo-like factors in online treatment and may aid the improvement of healthcare in online settings.

Treating culturally diverse patients (CDPs) presents considerable challenges for psychotherapists, including language barriers, differing beliefs, and insecurities. Improving their transcultural competence requires training, but empirical evidence is lacking. This 6-week randomized controlled trial evaluated the impact of standardized internet-based training on psychotherapists' transcultural competence (i.e., awareness, engagement, and handling challenges). Demographic data were collected before training. Transcultural competence was measured at pre-training, post-training, and 3-month follow-up. Training satisfaction was assessed at post-training and follow-up visits. In the guided training group (GTG; n = 83), psychotherapists received hands-on training with practical exercises, weekly knowledge assessments, and online feedback. The second condition comprised a non-guided control group (CG; n = 90) that received only text-based training. Primary analyses on both intent-to-treat (n = 173) and completer analyses (n = 95) indicated significant improvements in transcultural awareness and engagement after 6 weeks of training for both groups. Significant within-group improvements were noted, as evidenced by large Cohen's d effect sizes for both groups. No between-group differences were observed. Qualitative assessments revealed that GTG participants evaluated the training's concept and content significantly more positively than CG participants and felt significantly less insecure about treating CDPs. Such training could pave the way for the long-term development of innovative, culturally sensitive mental health care services that more effectively meet the needs of CDPs., Funding Agencies|Outpatient Clinic for Psychotherapy, Marburg, Germany

Background. Online treatments are increasing in number and are currently available for a wide range of clinical problems. To date little is known about the role of treatment expectations and other placebo-like mechanisms in online settings compared to traditional face-to-face treatment. To address this knowledge gap, we analyzed individual participant data from randomized clinical trials that compared online and face-to-face psychological interventions.Methods. MEDLINE (Ovid) and PsycINFO (Ovid) were last searched on 2 February 2021. Randomized clinical trials of therapist guided online v. face-to-face psychological interventions for psychiatric or somatic conditions using a randomized controlled design were included. Titles, abstracts, and full texts of studies were independently screened by multiple observers. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline was followed. Authors of the matching trials were contacted for individual participant data. Ratings from the Credibility and Expectancy Questionnaire and the primary outcome measure from each trial were used to estimate the association between expectation ratings and treatment outcomes in online v. face-to-face interventions, using a mixed-effects model.Results. Of 7045 screened studies, 62 full-text articles were retrieved whereof six studies fulfilled the criteria and provided individual participant data (n = 491). Overall, CEQ ratings predicted clinical outcomes (beta = 0.27) at end of treatment with no moderating effect of treatment modality (online v. face-to-face).Conclusions. Online treatment appears to be equally susceptible to expectancy effects as face-to-face therapy. This furthers our understanding of the importance of placebo-like factors in online treatment and may aid the improvement of healthcare in online settings., Funding Agencies|Riksbankens Jubileumsfond

Previous studies showed that alpha/delta ratio neurofeedback was effective in reducing unpleasant psychological, emotional and perceptual consequences of tinnitus. The main goal of the present study was to investigate, whether the specific combination of enhancing alpha frequency band activity and reducing delta frequency band activity was necessary, or merely sufficient, to obtain a positive treatment outcome regarding tinnitus distress and intensity. A second research aim was to assess the relative contribution of neurofeedback-related non-specific and general non-specific effects in neurofeedback treatment. In a three-arm, randomized controlled trial, 94 chronic tinnitus patients were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: alpha/delta ratio neurofeedback (n = 31), beta/theta ratio neurofeedback (n = 28) and non-neurofeedback minimal treatment intervention (n = 35). Neurofeedback participants underwent 10 treatment sessions over a 4-week period. Outcome measures were collected pre-, mid- and post-interventions and at 3-months follow-up. The Tinnitus Handicap Inventory and the Tinnitus Magnitude Index were used as primary outcome measures for tinnitus distress and tinnitus intensity. EEG data recorded during training supplemented primary outcomes. Since data were repeated measures, the analyses used a two-level mixed effects model approach including by-subject random effects (random intercept). For the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory, the results showed no interaction effect. For the Tinnitus Magnitude Index, the analysis showed a significant time x group interaction, indicating that both alpha/delta ratio neurofeedback and beta/theta ratio neurofeedback reported reduced tinnitus intensity. Analysis of EEG data showed a consistent pattern for the alpha/delta ratio over the course of training. Compared to beta/theta ratio neurofeedback, alpha/delta ratio neurofeedback showed an elevated response. Conversely, for the beta ratio to theta ratio, the pattern was more, Funding Agencies|William Demant Fonden [16-3805]; Outpatient Clinic for Psychotherapy Marburg [PAM_2017-11]