Dataset Information

Targeting excessive worry with internet-based extinction therapy: a randomised controlled trial with mediation analysis and economical evaluation.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Excessive worry is a common phenomenon. Our research group has previously developed an online intervention for excessive worry based on operant principles of extinction (IbET; internet-based extinction therapy) and tested it against a waiting-list. The aim of this study was to evaluate IbET against an active control comparator (CTRL).

Methods

A 10-week parallel participant blind randomised controlled trial with health-economical evaluation and mediation analyses. Participants (N = 311) were randomised (ratio 4.5:4.5:1) to IbET, to CTRL (an internet-based stress-management training program) or to waiting-list. The nation-wide trial included self-referred adults with excessive worry. The primary outcome was change in worry assessed with the Penn State Worry Questionnaire from baseline to 10 weeks.

Results

IbET had greater reductions in worry compared to CTRL [-3.6 point difference, (95% CI -2.4 to -4.9)] and also a significantly larger degree of treatment responders [63% v. 51%; risk ratio = 1.24 (95% CI 1.01-1.53)]. Both IbET and CTRL made large reductions in worry compared to waiting-list and effects were sustained up to 1 year. Treatment credibility, therapist attention, compliance and working alliance were equal between IbET and CTRL. Data attrition was 4% at the primary endpoint. The effects of IbET were mediated by the hypothesized causal mechanism (reduced thought suppression) but not by competing mediators. Health-economical evaluation indicated that IbET had a 99% chance of being cost-effective compared to CTRL given societal willingness to pay of 1000€.

Conclusions

IbET is more effective than active comparator to treat excessive worry. Replication and extensions to real-world setting are warranted.

SUBMITTER: Andersson E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8426147 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWorry might be a contributory causal factor in the occurrence of persecutory delusions in patients with psychotic disorders. Therefore we postulated that reducing worry with cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) would reduce persecutory delusions.MethodsFor our two-arm, assessor-blinded, randomised controlled trial (Worry Intervention Trial [WIT]), we recruited patients aged 18-65 years with persistent persecutory delusions but non-affective psychosis from two centres: the Oxford Health National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust (Oxford, UK) and the Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust (Southampton, UK). The key inclusion criteria for participants were a score of at least 3 on the Psychotic Symptoms Rating Scale (PSYRATS) denoting a current persecutory delusion; that the delusion had persisted for at least 3 months; a clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or delusional disorder; and a clinically significant level of worry. We randomly assigned (1:1) eligible patients, using a randomly permuted block procedure with variable block sizes and division by four strata, to either six sessions of worry-reduction CBT intervention done over 8 weeks added to standard care (the CBT-intervention group), or to standard care alone (the control group). The assessors were masked to patient allocations and did their assessments at week 0 (baseline), 8 weeks (end of treatment), and 24 weeks, follow-up. The primary outcomes were worry measured by the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ) and delusions measured by the PSYRATS-delusion scale; we did the analyses in the intention-to-treat population, and also did a planned mediation analysis. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry (number ISRCTN23197625) and is closed to new participants.FindingsFrom Nov 1, 2011, to Sept 9, 2013, we recruited 150 eligible participants and randomly assigned 73 to the CBT intervention group, and 77 to the control group. 143 patients (95%) provided primary outcome follow-up data. Compared with standard care alone, at 8 weeks the CBT intervention significantly reduced worry (mean difference 6·35 [SE 1·56] PSWQ units, 95% CI 3·30-9·40; p<0·001) and persecutory delusions (2·08 [SE 0·73] PSYRATS units, 95% CI 0·64-3·51; p=0·005). The reductions were maintained to 24 weeks follow-up. The mediation analysis suggested that the change in worry accounted for 66% of the change in delusion. No patients died or were admitted to secure units during our study. Six suicide attempts (two in the CBT intervention group, and four in the control group) and two serious violent incidents (one in each group) were noted, but no adverse events were deemed related to the treatments or the assessments.InterpretationTo our knowledge, this is the first large trial focused on persecutory delusions. We have shown that long-standing delusions were significantly reduced by a brief intervention targeted on worry, although the limitations for our study include no determination of the key elements within the intervention. Our results suggest that worry might cause paranoia, and that worry intervention techniques might be a beneficial addition to the standard treatment of psychosis.FundingEfficacy and Mechanism Evaluation programme, which is a UK Medical Research Council and National Institute of Health Research partnership.

Project description:ObjectiveThis study aims at evaluating the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a guided and unguided internet-based intervention for chronic pain patients (ACTonPainguided and ACTonPainunguided) compared with a waitlist control group (CG) as well as the comparative cost-effectiveness of the guided and the unguided version.DesignThis is a health economic evaluation alongside a three-arm randomised controlled trial from a societal perspective. Assessments were conducted at baseline, 9?weeks and 6?months after randomisation.SettingParticipants were recruited through online and offline strategies and in collaboration with a health insurance company.Participants302 adults (?18 years, pain for at least 6?months) were randomly allocated to one of the three groups (ACTonPainguided, ACTonPainunguided, CG).InterventionsACTonPain consists of seven modules and is based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. ACTonPainguided and ACTonPainunguided only differ in provision of human support.Primary and secondary outcome measuresMain outcomes of the cost-effectiveness and the cost-utility analyses were meaningful change in pain interference (treatment response) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively. Economic evaluation estimates were the incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratio (ICER/ICUR).ResultsAt 6-month follow-up, treatment response and QALYs were highest in ACTonPainguided (44% and 0.280; mean costs = €6,945), followed by ACTonPainunguided (28% and 0.266; mean costs = €6,560) and the CG (16% and 0.244; mean costs = €6,908). ACTonPainguided vs CG revealed an ICER of €45 and an ICUR of €604.ACTonPainunguided dominated CG. At a willingness-to-pay of €0 the probability of being cost-effective was 50% for ACTonPainguided (vs CG, for both treatment response and QALY gained) and 67% for ACTonPainunguided (vs CG, for both treatment response and QALY gained). These probabilities rose to 95% when society's willingness-to-pay is €91,000 (ACTonPainguided) and €127,000 (ACTonPainunguided) per QALY gained. ACTonPainguided vs ACTonPainunguided revealed an ICER of €2,374 and an ICUR of €45,993.ConclusionsDepending on society's willingness-to-pay, ACTonPain is a potentially cost-effective adjunct to established pain treatment. ACTonPainunguided (vs CG) revealed lower costs at better health outcomes. However, uncertainty has to be considered. Direct comparison of the two interventions does not indicate a preference for ACTonPainguided.Trial registration numberDRKS00006183.

Project description:BackgroundThe need for economical rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is increasing in developing countries. Implementation of the two currently approved economical intradermal (ID) vaccine regimens is restricted due to confusion over different vaccines, regimens and dosages, lack of confidence in intradermal technique, and pharmaceutical regulations. We therefore compared a simplified 4-site economical PEP regimen with standard methods.MethodsTwo hundred and fifty-four volunteers were randomly allocated to a single blind controlled trial. Each received purified vero cell rabies vaccine by one of four PEP regimens: the currently accepted 2-site ID; the 8-site regimen using 0.05 ml per ID site; a new 4-site ID regimen (on day 0, approximately 0.1 ml at 4 ID sites, using the whole 0.5 ml ampoule of vaccine; on day 7, 0.1 ml ID at 2 sites and at one site on days 28 and 90); or the standard 5-dose intramuscular regimen. All ID regimens required the same total amount of vaccine, 60% less than the intramuscular method. Neutralising antibody responses were measured five times over a year in 229 people, for whom complete data were available.FindingsAll ID regimens showed similar immunogenicity. The intramuscular regimen gave the lowest geometric mean antibody titres. Using the rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test, some sera had unexpectedly high antibody levels that were not attributable to previous vaccination. The results were confirmed using the fluorescent antibody virus neutralisation method.ConclusionsThis 4-site PEP regimen proved as immunogenic as current regimens, and has the advantages of requiring fewer clinic visits, being more practicable, and having a wider margin of safety, especially in inexperienced hands, than the 2-site regimen. It is more convenient than the 8-site method, and can be used economically with vaccines formulated in 1.0 or 0.5 ml ampoules. The 4-site regimen now meets all requirements of immunogenicity for PEP and can be introduced without further studies.Trial registrationControlled-Trials.com ISRCTN 30087513.

Project description:Background:One in twenty adolescents experience excessive worry and evidence-based psychological therapies are not sufficiently widespread to reach most of those affected. In this multiple baseline evaluation, we assess the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a scalable, online cognitive-behavioral intervention for adolescents with excessive worry (BIP worry). Methods:Thirteen adolescents (age 13-17) with excessive worry underwent the 10-week online BIP worry intervention. The treatment also included an online intervention for parents. Completion rates, treatment satisfaction, and adverse events were measures of feasibility. Clinical outcomes included worry severity, symptoms of other anxiety and depression, and general functioning. To control for time and spontaneous fluctuations in symptoms, adolescents were randomized to a 2-, 6-, or 10-week baseline phase prior to treatment. A short measure of worry severity was administered weekly during the baseline and treatment phases. Outcomes were assessed before the baseline-phase, at pre-treatment, post-treatment, and at 1- and 3-month follow-ups. Results:Twelve of 13 included adolescents, together with their parents, participated in BIP worry, with a mean completion rate of 9.8 of the 10 treatment modules. Adolescents reported an average of 4.4 exposures per week as homework during treatment. High levels of treatment adherence, credibility, and satisfaction, and no serious adverse events were reported. Therapists averaged 21 min per week communicating with each family. Linear mixed effects models indicated significant improvements in worry, anxiety, and general functioning from pre- to post-treatment, with these gains maintained at 1- and 3-months follow-up. Reductions in worry severity during treatment were significantly larger than during the baseline phase. The results from the multiple baseline evaluation suggested an association between the introduction of the BIP worry intervention and subsequent symptom change for some but not all adolescents. Conclusions:BIP worry is a feasible and potentially effective treatment. As the treatment is scalable and involves limited therapist contact, it represents a low-cost method for treating adolescents with excessive worry and anxiety. Further investigation under randomized controlled trial (RCT) conditions is warranted.

Project description:BackgroundVulvodynia is defined as vulvar pain for at least 3 months without a clear cause. To the best of our knowledge, there are no trials investigating the effects of internet treatment using CBT (Cognitive behavioural therapy) treatment with Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) components for women with vulvodynia. The aim of this study is to examine the effects of such a guided internet-based intervention on provoked vulvar pain during the waiting period before clinical treatment.MethodsWe will randomise 52 patients to either guided internet-based intervention with CBT with (ACT) components or no intervention during the waiting period for treatment as usual. Online assessments are conducted at baseline, posttreatment, and at follow-up after 9 months. The primary outcome measure is provoked vulvar pain. Secondary outcomes are depression, anxiety, sexual function, and quality of life. Linear-mixed effect models will be used to assess the effect of the internet-based intervention on vulvar pain, pain acceptance, depression, anxiety, sexual function, and quality of life over time, by applying the intention-to-treat approach. Continuous data will be analysed with general linear models using intention-to-treat and also per protocol approaches to assess the effects of the intervention at different time points. Ordinal and binary data will be analysed with Mann Whitney's test, Fischer's exact test and multivariate logistic regression, respectively.DiscussionAs a randomised controlled trial with short- and long-term follow-up points, the EMBLA study intends to provide a novel and better understanding regarding the treatment of vulvodynia and the role of internet-based treatment as a complement to standard care for women suffering from vulvodynia. The effects of vulvodynia on pain, sexual function, quality of life, depression, and anxiety are investigated. The study's results are expected to be of value in the planning of clinical care in the medical area. High dropout rates and technical difficulties associated with using the platform are common in similar studies.Trial registration numberNCT02809612.

Project description:BACKGROUND: All mothers in South Australia are offered a clinic or home-visit by a Child and Family Health community nurse in the initial postnatal weeks. Subsequent support is available on request from staff in community clinics and from a telephone helpline. The aim of the present study is to compare equivalence of a single clinic-based appointment plus a nurse-moderated group-based internet intervention when infants were aged 0-6 months versus a single home-visit together with subsequent standard services (the latter support was available to mothers in both study groups). METHODS/DESIGN: The evaluation utilised a pragmatic preference randomised trial comparing the equivalence of outcomes for mothers and infants across the two study groups. Eligible mothers were those whose services were provided by nurses working in one of six community clinics in the metropolitan region of Adelaide. Mothers were excluded if they did not have internet access, required an interpreter, or their nurse clinician recommended that they not participate due to issues such as domestic violence or substance abuse. Randomisation was based on the service identification number sequentially assigned to infants when referred to the Child and Family Health Services from birthing units (this was done by administrative staff who had no involvement in recruiting mothers, delivering the intervention, or analyzing results for the study). Consistent with design and power calculations, 819 mothers were recruited to the trial. The primary outcomes for the trial are parents' sense of competence and self-efficacy measured using standard self-report questionnaires. Secondary outcomes include the quality of mother-infant relationships, maternal social support, role satisfaction and maternal mental health, infant social-emotional and language development, and patterns of service utilisation. Maternal and infant outcomes will be evaluated using age-appropriate questionnaires when infants are aged <2 months (pre-intervention), 9, 15, and 21 months. DISCUSSION: We know of no previous study that has evaluated an intervention that combines the capacity of nurse and internet-based services to improve outcomes for mothers and infants. The knowledge gained from this study will inform the design and conduct of community-based postnatal mother and child support programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12613000204741.