Things that make you go Hmm: Myths and misconceptions within cognitive-behavioral treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder
(2023) In Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders 37.- Abstract
- The past four decades have yielded a robust body of evidence supporting the efficacy and effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) as a gold-standard treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) across the lifespan. Exposure and response prevention (E/RP) has been identified as a key component of this approach. Despite robust research support for CBT with E/RP, several myths and misconceptions continue to proliferate in both research and practice settings. Such myths and misconceptions are concerning, as they lack empirical basis, may hinder widespread dissemination and implementation of CBT for OCD, and run contrary to the practice of evidence-based psychological medicine. Focusing on the importance of promoting... (More)
- The past four decades have yielded a robust body of evidence supporting the efficacy and effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) as a gold-standard treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) across the lifespan. Exposure and response prevention (E/RP) has been identified as a key component of this approach. Despite robust research support for CBT with E/RP, several myths and misconceptions continue to proliferate in both research and practice settings. Such myths and misconceptions are concerning, as they lack empirical basis, may hinder widespread dissemination and implementation of CBT for OCD, and run contrary to the practice of evidence-based psychological medicine. Focusing on the importance of promoting evidence-based practice and generative clinical science, the present review article synthesizes relevant research within the field of treatments for OCD to address the following myths/misconceptions: (a) uncertainty exists concerning the evidence base supporting CBT for OCD, (b) E/RP attrition and dropout rates are unacceptably high due to excessive risk and perceived patient intolerability, and (c) alternative treatments for OCD need to be expeditiously developed due to major limitations of E/RP. Recommendations for future research and clinical dissemination and implementation to further advance a generative clinical science of OCD treatment are discussed.
(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/1dc21f2e-9dc1-4044-b2a7-cdf9ecf2d16c
- author
- Spencer, Samuel ; Stiede, Jordan ; Wiese, Andrew ; Guzick, Andrew ; Cervin, Matti LU ; Mckay, Dean and Storch, Eric A.
- organization
- publishing date
- 2023-04-01
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders
- volume
- 37
- article number
- 100805
- publisher
- Elsevier
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:85151508971
- pmid:37193037
- ISSN
- 2211-3649
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.jocrd.2023.100805
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 1dc21f2e-9dc1-4044-b2a7-cdf9ecf2d16c
- date added to LUP
- 2023-04-12 15:39:05
- date last changed
- 2023-07-13 03:00:06
@article{1dc21f2e-9dc1-4044-b2a7-cdf9ecf2d16c,
abstract = {{The past four decades have yielded a robust body of evidence supporting the efficacy and effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) as a gold-standard treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) across the lifespan. Exposure and response prevention (E/RP) has been identified as a key component of this approach. Despite robust research support for CBT with E/RP, several myths and misconceptions continue to proliferate in both research and practice settings. Such myths and misconceptions are concerning, as they lack empirical basis, may hinder widespread dissemination and implementation of CBT for OCD, and run contrary to the practice of evidence-based psychological medicine. Focusing on the importance of promoting evidence-based practice and generative clinical science, the present review article synthesizes relevant research within the field of treatments for OCD to address the following myths/misconceptions: (a) uncertainty exists concerning the evidence base supporting CBT for OCD, (b) E/RP attrition and dropout rates are unacceptably high due to excessive risk and perceived patient intolerability, and (c) alternative treatments for OCD need to be expeditiously developed due to major limitations of E/RP. Recommendations for future research and clinical dissemination and implementation to further advance a generative clinical science of OCD treatment are discussed.<br/><br/>}},
author = {{Spencer, Samuel and Stiede, Jordan and Wiese, Andrew and Guzick, Andrew and Cervin, Matti and Mckay, Dean and Storch, Eric A.}},
issn = {{2211-3649}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{04}},
publisher = {{Elsevier}},
series = {{Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders}},
title = {{Things that make you go Hmm: Myths and misconceptions within cognitive-behavioral treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jocrd.2023.100805}},
doi = {{10.1016/j.jocrd.2023.100805}},
volume = {{37}},
year = {{2023}},
}