Reviewbronze2019

A meta‐analysis of dropout rates from exposure with response prevention and pharmacological treatment for youth with obsessive compulsive disorder

Carly J. Johnco · Joseph F. Mcguire · Tegan Roper · Eric A. Storch

53 citations0/0 files storedDepression and Anxiety

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Beliefs that exposure with response prevention (ERP) is excessively distressing and will result in client dropout from treatment are commonly-cited reasons for clinicians not providing evidence-based treatment. This meta-analysis examined treatment attrition for ERP for youth with obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) compared with other treatment modalities. METHOD: A systematic literature search identified 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ERP to active or waitlist control conditions, 9 comparing pharmacotherapy to control, and 3 comparing ERP to pharmacotherapy for youth with OCD. RESULTS: Attrition rates were low for ERP (10.24%) compared to pharmacotherapy (17.29%), active control (e.g., relaxation, metacognitive therapy; 20.63%), and pill placebo (23.49%). ERP had lower risk of attrition compared to active control conditions (RR = 0.60; p = .02), and was not significantly different to waitlist (RR = 0.80; p = .59). In head-to-head trials, there was no difference between the risk of attrition from ERP and pharmacotherapy (RR = 1.26; p = .74). Of the pharmacotherapy trials, risk of attrition from serotonin reuptake inhibitors treatment was not significantly different compared to placebo (RR = 0.94; p = .76), with no difference between antidepressants and clomipramine (p = .19). Attrition from ERP was primarily for logistical reasons, compared to lack of efficacy for relaxation and/or adverse reactions from pharmacotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Attrition from ERP is low, and is generally lower than non-ERP interventions. Given favorable attrition and efficacy data, there is little justification for appropriately-trained clinicians not to offer ERP as a first-line treatment for youth with OCD.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 53 citations exist upstream.

References

2009The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration 2004Cognitive-Behavior Therapy, Sertraline, and Their Combination for Children and Adolescents With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder 2003A survey of psychologists’ attitudes towards and utilization of exposure therapy for PTSD 1999A 40-Year Follow-up of Patients With Obsessive-compulsive Disorder 2003Functional Impairment in Children and Adolescents with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder 2011Practice Parameter for the Assessment and Treatment of Children and Adolescents With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder 2004Long‐term outcome of pediatric obsessive–compulsive disorder: a meta‐analysis and qualitative review of the literature 1998Sertraline in Children and Adolescents With Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.