Juster H R, Heimberg R G
Social Phobia Program, Center for Stress and Anxiety Disorders, University at Albany, State University of New York, USA.
Psychiatr Clin North Am. 1995 Dec;18(4):821-42.
Interest in social phobia has increased dramatically in the past decade, and our knowledge of this previously understudied disorder has increased as well. We now know that social phobia is a chronic condition and that patients with this disorder are unlikely to experience significant improvement without intervention. It is also a highly prevalent condition affecting as many as 13% of the adult population of the Unites States. Although our understanding of the causes of social phobia remains limited, we do know that it is associated with serious impairment and disability in multiple spheres. Thus, the development of treatments with proven long-term efficacy is an important research goal. In this article, we have reviewed studies that examined either exposure, cognitive restructuring, social skills training, or some combination of these treatments. Here, we summarize the major findings of this review. Exposure has fared well as a treatment for social phobia and, in every case, within-group analyses show that patients have improved after treatment. Methodologic problems in some studies, however, limit the conclusions that can be drawn about the comparative efficacy of exposure, social skills training, and relaxation therapy. Conceptual models of social phobia have stressed the importance of cognitive processes in the development and maintenance of social phobia and much attention has been directed at the long-term efficacy of cognitive-behavioral techniques. It has been hypothesized that exposure plus cognitive restructuring would be a particularly effective combination and several methodologically sound studies have examined this combination. These studies have demonstrated consistently clinically significant within-group changes and superiority to control conditions. Heimberg's CBGT is probably the most widely studied of these treatments. CBGT has been shown to be more effective than an equally credible attention-placebo group. Patients receiving CBGT have maintained their advantage over patients in the attention-placebo group, even 5 years after treatment although flaws in that follow-up study limit generalizability of its results. Generalized and nongeneralized social phobic patients respond equivalently to this highly integrated treatment, and it has been applied effectively by researchers outside the center where it was developed. Despite the successes of combined exposure and cognitive restructuring treatments, it remains unclear as to what the effective component(s) of these and similar treatments are and, therefore, whether or not the integration of therapy components is really necessary. A number of the studies reviewed addressed this question with mixed results. Three studies showed that the combination therapy was superior to either treatment alone. There is also evidence that patients treated with exposure only may show some deterioration during follow-up whereas patients treated with cognitive restructuring and exposure may continue to improve. Still, other studies found no differences in long-term outcome among exposure alone, RET, or the combined treatment. Hope et al found that exposure alone was as effective as an integrated treatment combining exposure and cognitive restructuring (CBGT), and Taylor and colleagues (submitted for publication, 1995) reported that exposure was not enhanced by initial treatment with cognitive restructuring. These results are disappointing in light of all that has been written about the likely benefits of combining cognitive and behavioral therapy in the treatment of social phobia. For example, it has been hypothesized that fear of negative evaluation is a key factor in social phobia and that change in this construct should be the goal of treatment. There is some research that supports this claim and other evidence that suggests that exposure alone is not particularly effective in producing those changes. Butler concluded that the treatment of social phobia is made more difficult whe
在过去十年中,对社交恐惧症的关注急剧增加,我们对这种先前研究不足的疾病的了解也有所增加。我们现在知道社交恐惧症是一种慢性疾病,患有这种疾病的患者如果不进行干预,不太可能有显著改善。它也是一种高度普遍的疾病,影响着多达13%的美国成年人口。尽管我们对社交恐惧症病因的理解仍然有限,但我们确实知道它与多个领域的严重损害和残疾有关。因此,开发具有长期疗效的治疗方法是一个重要的研究目标。在本文中,我们回顾了研究暴露疗法、认知重建、社交技能训练或这些治疗方法某种组合的研究。在此,我们总结本次综述的主要发现。暴露疗法作为社交恐惧症的一种治疗方法效果良好,在每种情况下,组内分析表明患者在治疗后有所改善。然而,一些研究中的方法学问题限制了我们对暴露疗法、社交技能训练和放松疗法相对疗效得出的结论。社交恐惧症的概念模型强调了认知过程在社交恐惧症发展和维持中的重要性,并且人们对认知行为技术的长期疗效给予了很多关注。据推测,暴露疗法加认知重建可能是一种特别有效的组合,并且有几项方法学上合理的研究对此组合进行了检验。这些研究一致证明了临床上显著的组内变化以及相对于对照条件的优越性。海姆伯格的认知行为团体疗法(CBGT)可能是这些治疗方法中研究最广泛的。CBGT已被证明比同样可信的注意力安慰剂组更有效。接受CBGT治疗的患者在治疗后甚至5年都保持了相对于注意力安慰剂组患者的优势,尽管该随访研究中的缺陷限制了其结果的普遍性。广泛性和非广泛性社交恐惧症患者对这种高度综合的治疗反应相同,并且它已被该疗法研发中心之外的研究人员有效应用。尽管暴露疗法和认知重建联合治疗取得了成功,但这些及类似治疗方法的有效成分是什么,因此治疗成分的整合是否真的必要,仍不清楚。本次综述中的一些研究探讨了这个问题,结果不一。三项研究表明联合疗法优于单独的任何一种治疗。也有证据表明仅接受暴露疗法治疗的患者在随访期间可能会出现一些恶化,而接受认知重建和暴露疗法治疗的患者可能会持续改善。还有其他研究发现单独暴露疗法、理性情绪疗法(RET)或联合治疗在长期结果上没有差异。霍普等人发现单独暴露疗法与暴露疗法和认知重建联合治疗(CBGT)一样有效,泰勒及其同事(1995年提交发表)报告说,认知重建初始治疗并没有增强暴露疗法的效果。鉴于所有关于认知和行为疗法联合治疗社交恐惧症可能益处的论述,这些结果令人失望。例如,据推测对负面评价的恐惧是社交恐惧症的一个关键因素,并且这种结构的改变应该是治疗的目标。有一些研究支持这一说法,也有其他证据表明单独的暴露疗法在产生这些改变方面并不是特别有效。巴特勒得出结论,社交恐惧症的治疗变得更加困难,当……