Comparison of Prolonged Exposure vs Cognitive Processing Therapy for Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Among US Veterans: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a prevalent and serious mental health problem. Although there are effective psychotherapies for PTSD, there is little information about their comparative effectiveness. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of prolonged exposure (PE) vs cognitive processing therapy (CPT) for treating PTSD in veterans. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial assessed the comparative effectiveness of PE vs CPT among veterans with military-related PTSD recruited from outpatient mental health clinics at 17 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers across the US from October 31, 2014, to February 1, 2018, with follow-up through February 1, 2019. The primary outcome was assessed using centralized masking. Tested hypotheses were prespecified before trial initiation. Data were analyzed from October 5, 2020, to May 5, 2021. Interventions: Participants were randomized to 1 of 2 individual cognitive-behavioral therapies, PE or CPT, delivered according to a flexible protocol of 10 to 14 sessions. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in PTSD symptom severity on the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5) from before treatment to the mean after treatment across posttreatment and 3- and 6-month follow-ups. Secondary outcomes included other symptoms, functioning, and quality of life. Results: Analyses were based on all 916 randomized participants (730 [79.7%] men and 186 [20.3%] women; mean [range] age 45.2 [21-80] years), with 455 participants randomized to PE (mean CAPS-5 score at baseline, 39.9 [95% CI, 39.1-40.7] points) and 461 participants randomized to CPT (mean CAPS-5 score at baseline, 40.3 [95% CI, 39.5-41.1] points). PTSD severity on the CAPS-5 improved substantially in both PE (standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.89-1.08]) and CPT (SMD, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.61-0.80]) groups from before to after treatment. Mean improvement was greater in PE than CPT (least square mean, 2.42 [95% CI, 0.53-4.31]; P = .01), but the difference was not clinically significant (SMD, 0.17). Results for self-reported PTSD symptoms were comparable with CAPS-5 findings. The PE group had higher odds of response (odds ratio [OR], 1.32 [95% CI, 1.00-1.65]; P < .001), loss of diagnosis (OR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.12-1.74]; P < .001), and remission (OR, 1.62 [95% CI, 1.24-2.00]; P < .001) compared with the CPT group. Groups did not differ on other outcomes. Treatment dropout was higher in PE (254 participants [55.8%]) than in CPT (215 participants [46.6%]; P < .01). Three participants in the PE group and 1 participant in the CPT group were withdrawn from treatment, and 3 participants in each treatment dropped out owing to serious adverse events. Conclusions and Relevance: This randomized clinical trial found that although PE was statistically more effective than CPT, the difference was not clinically significant, and improvements in PTSD were meaningful in both treatment groups. These findings highlight the importance of shared decision-making to help patients understand the evidence and select their preferred treatment. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01928732.

Focus-of-attention behavioral experiment: an examination of a therapeutic procedure to reduce social anxiety.

A clinical protocol based on contemporary cognitive behavioral treatment for social anxiety was developed and examined. Previously published instructions for conducting a focus-of-attention behavioral experiment targeting self-focused attention and safety behaviors during exposure were used to create a structured protocol. Individuals (n = 45) with high levels of social anxiety and public-speaking anxiety were randomly assigned to either a focus-of-attention behavioral experiment (FABE) or an Exposure-Only Control (EOC) condition. During four exposure trials, those in the FABE condition (n = 24) were alternately instructed to engage in self-focused attention vs. externally focused attention and to eliminate safety behaviors. Those in the EOC condition (n = 21) were not so instructed. At post-intervention, individuals in the FABE condition showed significantly less self-focused attention and anxiety, and better observed performance as rated by audience members. Focus-of-attention statistically mediated the effect of condition on anxiety. For those in the FABE condition, the degree of association between focus-of-attention and anxiety during the intervention predicted less self-focused attention post-intervention. The FABE appears to be a useful procedure for implementing part of the contemporary cognitive behavioral treatment model.

Self-verification and social anxiety: preference for negative social feedback and low social self-esteem.

BACKGROUND: A self-verification model of social anxiety views negative social self-esteem as a core feature of social anxiety. This core feature is proposed to be maintained through self-verification processes, such as by leading individuals with negative social self-esteem to prefer negative social feedback. This model is tested in two studies. METHODS: In Study 1, questionnaires were administered to a college sample (N = 317). In Study 2, questionnaires were administered to anxiety disordered patients (N = 62) before and after treatment. RESULTS: Study 1 developed measures of preference for negative social feedback and social self-esteem, and provided evidence of their incremental validity in a college sample. Study 2 found that these two variables are not strongly related to fears of evaluation, are relatively unaffected by a treatment that targets such fears, and predict residual social anxiety following treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these studies provide preliminary evidence for a self-verification model of social anxiety.