Shanghai Mental Health Center, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, PR China.
The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xinxiang Medical University, PR China.
J Psychiatr Res. 2023 Dec;168:140-148. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2023.10.025. Epub 2023 Oct 16.
Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is widely recognized as an effective treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, few patients are able to receive CBT. Internet-based CBT (ICBT) may be able to overcome this problem. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of CBT, therapist-guided ICBT (TG-ICBT), unguided ICBT (UG-ICBT), and none therapist-guided ICBT (NTG-ICBT) by a network meta-analysis. The primary outcome was the mean change in OCD severity measured by the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) or the Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS). The secondary outcomes included the severity of depressive symptoms, side effects, and cost-effectiveness. A total of 25 trials with 1642 participants were included. We found that the efficacy of CBT was superior to that of TG-ICBT. The mean improvement in Y-BOCS/CY-BOCS scores was higher in CBT group than in UG-ICBT group, but this difference was not statistically significant. The efficacy did not differ significantly between TG-ICBT and UG-ICBT. CBT, TG-ICBT, and UG-ICBT were all more effective than the psychological placebo, waiting list, and pill placebo. In terms of efficacy, CBT combined with drug therapy was better than CBT, TG-ICBT, and UG-ICBT. Sensitivity analyses supported these findings. Based on the current evidence, we recommend TG-ICBT when CBT is not available. However, it is undeniable that UG-ICBT also has the potential to be an effective alternative to CBT. More evidence is needed to support this possibility.
认知行为疗法(CBT)被广泛认为是治疗强迫症(OCD)的有效方法。然而,只有少数患者能够接受 CBT。基于互联网的认知行为疗法(ICBT)可能能够克服这个问题。在这项研究中,我们旨在通过网络荟萃分析比较 CBT、治疗师指导的 ICBT(TG-ICBT)、非指导的 ICBT(UG-ICBT)和无治疗师指导的 ICBT(NTG-ICBT)的疗效。主要结局是使用耶鲁-布朗强迫症量表(Y-BOCS)或儿童耶鲁-布朗强迫症量表(CY-BOCS)测量的 OCD 严重程度的平均变化。次要结局包括抑郁症状严重程度、副作用和成本效益。共纳入 25 项试验,共 1642 名参与者。我们发现 CBT 的疗效优于 TG-ICBT。CBT 组的 Y-BOCS/CY-BOCS 评分改善程度高于 UG-ICBT 组,但差异无统计学意义。TG-ICBT 和 UG-ICBT 之间的疗效差异无统计学意义。CBT、TG-ICBT 和 UG-ICBT 均比心理安慰剂、等待名单和药丸安慰剂更有效。在疗效方面,CBT 联合药物治疗优于 CBT、TG-ICBT 和 UG-ICBT。敏感性分析支持这些发现。基于目前的证据,我们建议在无法进行 CBT 时使用 TG-ICBT。然而,不可否认的是,UG-ICBT 也有可能成为 CBT 的有效替代方法。需要更多的证据来支持这种可能性。