The effectiveness of unguided self-help psychological interventions for obsessive-compulsive disorder: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based psychological interventions exist for individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), but many individuals with OCD are unable to access them because of barriers, such as geographical isolation, treatment cost, and stigma etc. Unguided self-help psychological intervention has emerged as a potential solution to this problem. However, there is limited research on its overall effectiveness. This study aimed to address this gap. METHODS: Comprehensive searches from inception to 1st Jan 2023 were conducted in both international (PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, International clinical trials registry platform of WHO) and Chinese (China National Knowledge Infrastructure, WeiPu, WanFang, Chinese Clinical Trial Registry) databases. The registered protocol is accessible at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/FKB5W. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing unguided self-help psychological interventions to control groups for individuals with OCD. The primary outcome was OCD symptom severity, with Hedges' g calculated post-intervention. Heterogeneity was deemed to be low, moderate, and high if the I2 value was quantified 25%, 50%, and 75% respectively. Relative Risks (RRs) was calculated for dropout rates post-intervention. Random-effects models were used for all analyses. RESULTS: 12 RCTs comparing unguided self-help psychological interventions to control groups were identified, with a total of 20 comparisons and 769 OCD patients. Overall, unguided self-help psychological interventions demonstrated a significant moderate effect on reducing OCD symptom severity (g = -0.42; 95% CI [-0.69; -0.14]) compared to control groups, with a moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 59%; 95% CI [22.73; 78.38]). This finding remained significant in sensitivity analyses for the self-rated Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS; k = 7, g = -0.46; 95% CI [-0.71; -0.2]) and after removing an outlier (g = -0.37; 95% CI [-0.55; -0.19]), but not for the clinician-rated Y-BOCS (k = 4, g = -0.78; 95% CI [-2.75; 1.19]) and Obsessive Compulsive Inventory-Revised (k = 6, g = -0.26; 95% CI [-0.53; 0]). Subgroup analyses revealed a significant difference in effect size between studies conducting intention-to-treat and completers-only analyses (p = .01). The completers-only analyses demonstrated a moderate significant effect (g = -0.65; 95% CI [-1.08; -0.21]), whereas the effect of the intention-to-treat analyses was not significant (g = -0.18; 95% CI [-0.36; 0]). Participants in the unguided self-help groups exhibited a significantly higher dropout rate (RR = 2.08; 95% CI [1.53; 2.81]) compared to control groups. Furthermore, participants recruited from the community had a higher likelihood of dropping out compared to those recruited from clinical settings (p < .001). Additionally, participants who received cognitive-behavioural therapy intervention were more likely to drop out than those who received other types of intervention (p < .001). Most trials (92%) were rated at a high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Unguided self-help psychological interventions demonstrate potential effectiveness in alleviating OCD symptom severity post-intervention. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting the results due to high risk of bias across trials and the relatively small sample size. And the considerable dropout rate might hinder treatment effects. Future studies with strict methodology should investigate the long-term effectiveness of unguided self-help psychological interventions for OCD, explore the reasons for high dropout rates, and improve intervention adherence.

Use of tailoring features and reasons for dropout in a guided internet-based transdiagnostic individually-tailored cognitive behavioral therapy for symptoms of depression and/or anxiety in college students.

Transdiagnostic individually-tailored digital interventions reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety in adults with moderate effects. However, research into these approaches for college students is scarce and contradicting. In addition, the exact reasons for intervention dropout in this target group are not well known, and the use of individually-tailored intervention features, such as optional modules, has not yet been explored. The current study aimed to (1) investigate reasons for dropout from a guided internet-based transdiagnostic individually-tailored intervention for college students assessed in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and (2) evaluate whether participants used tailoring features intended for their baseline symptoms. A sample of college students with mild to moderate depression and/or anxiety symptoms (n = 48) in the Netherlands (partially) followed a guided internet-based transdiagnostic individually-tailored intervention. We contacted those who did not complete the entire intervention (n = 29) by phone to report the reasons for intervention dropout. Further, we descriptively explored the use of tailoring features (i.e., depression versus anxiety trajectory) and optional modules of the intervention in the whole sample. We identified a range of person- and intervention-related reasons for intervention dropout, most commonly busy schedules, needs for different kinds of help, or absence of personal contact. Furthermore, only less than half of the participants used the individually-tailoring features to address the symptoms they reported as predominant. In conclusion, digital interventions clear about the content and targeted symptoms, tested in user research could prevent dropout and create reasonable expectations of the intervention. Participants would benefit from additional guidance when using tailoring features of digital interventions, as they often do not choose the tailoring features targeting their baseline symptoms.