Prediction of treatment outcome in social phobia: a cross-validation.

Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Behaviour Research and Therapy (Impact Factor: 3.85). 08/1999; 37(7):659-70. DOI: 10.1016/S0005-7967(98)00175-2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study was a replication of a study on the prediction of treatment outcome in social phobic patients [Chambless, D. L., Tran, G. Q. Glass, C.R. (1997). Predictors of response to cognitive-behavioral group therapy for social phobia. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 11 221-240]. Results at the posttest and the 18-months follow-up were analyzed for DSM-III-R social phobic patients, with either a generalized social phobia (n = 50) or a nongeneralized fear, i.e. fear of blushing, trembling or sweating in social situations (n = 26). Predictors were pretreatment depression, personality disorder traits, clinician rated severity of impairment and frequency of negative self-statements during social interactions. The criterium variable was (the residual gain score of) self-reported avoidance of social situations. In line with Chambless et al., pretreatment depression showed some predictive value, but smaller and only at the posttest. Change in the frequency of negative self-statements paralleled, but did not predict, change in social phobia symptoms. In contrast with Chambless et al., clinician rated severity was (slightly) predictive for treatment outcome, whereas avoidant personality traits had reverse correlations with outcome in both subgroups. The results are discussed and directions for further research are given.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has been consistently supported as highly efficacious in the management of various anxiety disorders, a significant number of individuals fail to respond to treatment. In this article, the authors present an attempt to operationalize and implement alternative interventions in two cases of CBT non-responsiveness for anxiety management. Both cases were identified as CBT nonresponsive through repeated psychometric assessment of symptoms, and the focus of therapy was shifted to motivational enhancement techniques. These alternative interventions were conceptualized using the Stages of Change Model, which advocates stage-matched interventions based on individual differences in readiness for change. In the first case of generalized anxiety disorder, motivational enhancement interventions were associated with marked improvement in anxiety symptomatology, whereas the second case of social phobia failed to respond to these interventions. Discussion is focused on possible mediators of differential treatment response to motivational interventions with a view to proposing future application and evaluations of these novel techniques.
    Clinical Case Studies 01/2003; 2(4):306-322.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present study examined rates of trauma exposure, clinical characteristics associated with trauma exposure, and the effect of trauma exposure on treatment outcome in a large sample of primary care patients without posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Individuals without PTSD (N = 1263) treated as part of the CALM program (Roy-Byrne et al., 2010) were assessed for presence of trauma exposure. Those with and without trauma exposure were compared on baseline demographic and diagnostic information, symptom severity, and responder status six months after beginning treatment. Trauma-exposed individuals (N = 662, 53%) were more likely to meet diagnostic criteria for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and had higher levels of somatic symptoms at baseline. Individuals with and without trauma exposure did not differ significantly on severity of anxiety, depression, or mental health functioning at baseline. Trauma exposure did not significantly impact treatment response. Findings suggest that adverse effects of trauma exposure in those without PTSD may include OCD and somatic anxiety symptoms. Treatment did not appear to be adversely impacted by trauma exposure. Thus, although trauma exposure is prevalent in primary care samples, results suggest that treatment of the presenting anxiety disorder is effective irrespective of trauma history.
    Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 06/2013; 35(2):254-263. · 1.55 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is one of the most common psychiatric disorders worldwide. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment option for patients with SAD. In the present study, we examined the efficacy of group CBT for patients with generalized SAD in Japan at 1-year follow-up and investigated predictors with regard to outcomes. This study was conducted as a single-arm, naturalistic, follow-up study in a routine Japanese clinical setting. A total of 113 outpatients with generalized SAD participated in group CBT from July 2003 to August 2010 and were assessed at follow-ups for up to 1 year. Primary outcome was the total score on the Social Phobia Scale/Social Interaction Anxiety Scale (SPS/SIAS) at 1 year. Possible baseline predictors were investigated using mixed-model analyses. Among the 113 patients, 70 completed the assessment at the 1-year follow-up. The SPS/SIAS scores showed significant improvement throughout the follow-ups for up to 1 year. The effect sizes of SPS/SIAS at the 1-year follow-up were 0.68 (95% confidence interval 0.41-0.95)/0.76 (0.49-1.03) in the intention-to-treat group and 0.77 (0.42-1.10)/0.84 (0.49-1.18) in completers. Older age at baseline, late onset, and lower severity of SAD were significantly associated with good outcomes as a result of mixed-model analyses. CBT for patients with generalized SAD in Japan is effective for up to 1 year after treatment. The effect sizes were as large as those in previous studies conducted in Western countries. Older age at baseline, late onset, and lower severity of SAD were predictors for a good outcome from group CBT.
    Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment 01/2013; 9:267-75. · 2.15 Impact Factor