Internet-based psychodynamic therapy vs cognitive behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder: A preference study
Objective: Both Internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (ICBT) and Internet-delivered psychodynamic psychotherapy (IPDT) have shown promise in the treatment of social anxiety disorder (SAD). However, little is known about client preferences and what predicts treatment outcome. The objective...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Elsevier
2020-04-01
|
Series: | Internet Interventions |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214782919301319 |
id |
doaj-fc98e0cd006f4d6d8552698aa478597f |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-fc98e0cd006f4d6d8552698aa478597f2020-11-25T03:23:37ZengElsevierInternet Interventions2214-78292020-04-0120Internet-based psychodynamic therapy vs cognitive behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder: A preference studyTomas Lindegaard0Thomas Hesslow1Maja Nilsson2Robert Johansson3Per Carlbring4Peter Lilliengren5Gerhard Andersson6Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; Corresponding author at: Department of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, SE-581 83 Linköping, Sweden.Department of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, SwedenDepartment of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, SwedenDepartment of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, SwedenDepartment of Psychology, Stockholm University, Stockholm, SwedenErsta Sköndal Bräcke University College, Stockholm, SwedenDepartment of Behavioural Sciences and Learning, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden; Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, SwedenObjective: Both Internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (ICBT) and Internet-delivered psychodynamic psychotherapy (IPDT) have shown promise in the treatment of social anxiety disorder (SAD). However, little is known about client preferences and what predicts treatment outcome. The objective of the present pilot study was to examine preference for ICBT versus IPDT in the treatment of SAD and whether participants' preference strength and therapeutic alliance predicted treatment response. Further, we also investigated the effect of the two treatments, including 6-months follow-up. Method: Thirty-six participants were instructed to choose between either IPDT or ICBT based on a brief description. Both treatments were 10 weeks long. Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale – Self Report was used as the primary outcome measure. Results: IPDT (N = 23; 63.9%) was preferred more often than ICBT (N = 13; 36.1%), but the difference did not reach statistical significance (p = .10). Preference strength did not predict the treatment effect but therapeutic alliance did. The observed within-group effects for the treatment period were d = 0.40 [−0.21, 0.99] for the IPDT group and d = 0.53 [−0.29, 1.31] for the ICBT group. An intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis revealed no significant difference between the two treatments on any outcome measure at either post-treatment or at six months follow-up. Conclusion: The present pilot study did not find a difference in preference for IPDT or ICBT in the treatment of SAD and both treatments resulted in small to moderate improvements in symptoms of SAD. Preference strength might not predict treatment effect, but this needs to be tested in larger studies.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214782919301319Social anxiety disorderPsychodynamic psychotherapyCognitive behavioural therapyInternet-delivered treatmentPreference matching |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Tomas Lindegaard Thomas Hesslow Maja Nilsson Robert Johansson Per Carlbring Peter Lilliengren Gerhard Andersson |
spellingShingle |
Tomas Lindegaard Thomas Hesslow Maja Nilsson Robert Johansson Per Carlbring Peter Lilliengren Gerhard Andersson Internet-based psychodynamic therapy vs cognitive behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder: A preference study Internet Interventions Social anxiety disorder Psychodynamic psychotherapy Cognitive behavioural therapy Internet-delivered treatment Preference matching |
author_facet |
Tomas Lindegaard Thomas Hesslow Maja Nilsson Robert Johansson Per Carlbring Peter Lilliengren Gerhard Andersson |
author_sort |
Tomas Lindegaard |
title |
Internet-based psychodynamic therapy vs cognitive behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder: A preference study |
title_short |
Internet-based psychodynamic therapy vs cognitive behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder: A preference study |
title_full |
Internet-based psychodynamic therapy vs cognitive behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder: A preference study |
title_fullStr |
Internet-based psychodynamic therapy vs cognitive behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder: A preference study |
title_full_unstemmed |
Internet-based psychodynamic therapy vs cognitive behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder: A preference study |
title_sort |
internet-based psychodynamic therapy vs cognitive behavioural therapy for social anxiety disorder: a preference study |
publisher |
Elsevier |
series |
Internet Interventions |
issn |
2214-7829 |
publishDate |
2020-04-01 |
description |
Objective: Both Internet-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (ICBT) and Internet-delivered psychodynamic psychotherapy (IPDT) have shown promise in the treatment of social anxiety disorder (SAD). However, little is known about client preferences and what predicts treatment outcome. The objective of the present pilot study was to examine preference for ICBT versus IPDT in the treatment of SAD and whether participants' preference strength and therapeutic alliance predicted treatment response. Further, we also investigated the effect of the two treatments, including 6-months follow-up. Method: Thirty-six participants were instructed to choose between either IPDT or ICBT based on a brief description. Both treatments were 10 weeks long. Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale – Self Report was used as the primary outcome measure. Results: IPDT (N = 23; 63.9%) was preferred more often than ICBT (N = 13; 36.1%), but the difference did not reach statistical significance (p = .10). Preference strength did not predict the treatment effect but therapeutic alliance did. The observed within-group effects for the treatment period were d = 0.40 [−0.21, 0.99] for the IPDT group and d = 0.53 [−0.29, 1.31] for the ICBT group. An intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis revealed no significant difference between the two treatments on any outcome measure at either post-treatment or at six months follow-up. Conclusion: The present pilot study did not find a difference in preference for IPDT or ICBT in the treatment of SAD and both treatments resulted in small to moderate improvements in symptoms of SAD. Preference strength might not predict treatment effect, but this needs to be tested in larger studies. |
topic |
Social anxiety disorder Psychodynamic psychotherapy Cognitive behavioural therapy Internet-delivered treatment Preference matching |
url |
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214782919301319 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT tomaslindegaard internetbasedpsychodynamictherapyvscognitivebehaviouraltherapyforsocialanxietydisorderapreferencestudy AT thomashesslow internetbasedpsychodynamictherapyvscognitivebehaviouraltherapyforsocialanxietydisorderapreferencestudy AT majanilsson internetbasedpsychodynamictherapyvscognitivebehaviouraltherapyforsocialanxietydisorderapreferencestudy AT robertjohansson internetbasedpsychodynamictherapyvscognitivebehaviouraltherapyforsocialanxietydisorderapreferencestudy AT percarlbring internetbasedpsychodynamictherapyvscognitivebehaviouraltherapyforsocialanxietydisorderapreferencestudy AT peterlilliengren internetbasedpsychodynamictherapyvscognitivebehaviouraltherapyforsocialanxietydisorderapreferencestudy AT gerhardandersson internetbasedpsychodynamictherapyvscognitivebehaviouraltherapyforsocialanxietydisorderapreferencestudy |
_version_ |
1724605436764618752 |