Trent Erika S, Lanzillo Elizabeth C, Wiese Andrew D, Spencer Samuel D, McKay Dean, Storch Eric A
Menninger Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Department of Psychology, University of Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
Res Child Adolesc Psychopathol. 2025 May;53(5):729-745. doi: 10.1007/s10802-024-01258-x. Epub 2024 Oct 23.
Pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) can be debilitating and chronic unless treated early with efficacious intervention. The past several decades of intervention research have identified cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) with exposure and response/ritual prevention (ERP) as the first-line, evidence-based psychological intervention for pediatric OCD. Yet, many youths with OCD unfortunately remain inadequately treated. In well-meaning but misguided efforts to treat this complex disorder, clinicians holding misconceptions about ERP may fail to apply evidence-based treatments, misapply generic CBT techniques and ERP principles, or turn to non-evidence-based interventions. Potentially harmful treatments may worsen symptoms, while ineffective treatments can waste resources, impede patient access to efficacious treatment, and weaken public confidence in psychotherapy. The overarching goals of this review paper are to describe potentially harmful and ineffective practices in the treatment of pediatric OCD and to offer recommendations aligned with evidence-based practice. First, we dispel common misconceptions about ERP that may underlie its underuse among clinicians. We then describe potentially harmful and ineffective interventions for pediatric OCD, starting with misapplication of generic CBT techniques and ERP principles. We also identify non-evidence-based treatments for pediatric OCD that have limited conceptual or empirical foundations. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for clinicians who treat pediatric OCD, intervention researchers, training programs across mental health-related disciplines, and policymakers.
小儿强迫症(OCD)若不及早接受有效的干预治疗,可能会造成身心损害且病程迁延。在过去几十年的干预研究中,认知行为疗法(CBT)结合暴露与反应/仪式预防(ERP)已被确定为小儿强迫症的一线循证心理干预方法。然而,不幸的是,许多患有强迫症的青少年仍未得到充分治疗。在治疗这种复杂疾病时,临床医生出于善意却 misguided 的努力,可能会因为对 ERP 存在误解而未能采用循证治疗方法,错误地应用一般的 CBT 技术和 ERP 原则,或者转向非循证干预措施。潜在有害的治疗可能会使症状恶化,而无效的治疗则会浪费资源,阻碍患者获得有效治疗,并削弱公众对心理治疗的信心。本综述文章的总体目标是描述小儿强迫症治疗中潜在有害和无效的做法,并提供与循证实践相符的建议。首先,我们消除一些关于 ERP 的常见误解,这些误解可能是临床医生对其使用不足的潜在原因。然后,我们描述小儿强迫症潜在有害和无效的干预措施,从错误应用一般的 CBT 技术和 ERP 原则开始。我们还确定了一些针对小儿强迫症的非循证治疗方法,这些方法的概念或实证基础有限。最后,我们为治疗小儿强迫症的临床医生、干预研究人员、心理健康相关学科的培训项目以及政策制定者提供建议。 (注:原文中“misguided”未准确翻译,根据语境这里大概是指错误的引导之类的意思,可灵活理解,但需结合上下文确定更准确含义)