Background: The efficacy of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) in social phobia has been demonstrated in several controlled trials and meta-analyses, but no comparison of CBT with supportive therapy (ST) can be found in the literature. Method: The aim of the trial was to study the effectiveness of CBT versus ST carried out ‘as usual’. Sixty-seven DSM-4 social phobic patients (89% generalized subtype, most with avoidant personality) were randomly allocated into two groups. Group 1 (CBT) received 8 1-hour sessions of individual cognitive therapy (CT) for 6 weeks, followed by 6 2-hour sessions of social skills training (SST) in group weekly. Group 2 received ST for 12 weeks (6 half-hour sessions), then the patients were switched to CBT. All patients agreed not to take any medication during the whole trial. In group 1, 29 patients reached week 6, 27 reached week 12, and 24 weeks 36 and 60 (endpoint). In group 2, 29 patients reached week 6, 28 reached weeks 12 and 18, 26 week 24, and 23 reached weeks 48 and 72 (endpoint). Results: At week 6, after CT, group 1 was better than group 2 on the main social phobia measure. At week 12, after SST, group 1 was better than group 2 on most of the measures and demonstrated a significantly higher rate of responders. This finding was replicated after switching group 2 to CBT. Sustained improvement was observed in both groups at follow-up. Compliance with abstinence from medication increased over time. Conclusions: CBT was more effective than ST and demonstrated long-lasting effects. This may suggest that social phobia management requires more than a simple and inexpensive psychological intervention.
Anxiety Disorder Unit, University Lyon I
Hôpital Neurologique, 59 boulevard Pinel
F–69394 Lyon (France)
Tel. +33 4 72 11 80 65, Fax +33 4 72 35 73 30, E-Mail email@example.com
Number of Print Pages : 10
Number of Figures : 0, Number of Tables : 5, Number of References : 38
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics
Founded 1953 as ‘Acta Psychotherapeutica et Psychosomatica’ by E.A.D.E. Carp and B. Stokvis, continued by Th. Spoerri (1964–1974) and P.E. Sifneos (1974–1991)
Vol. 69, No. 3, Year 2000 (Cover Date: May-June 2000)
Journal Editor: G.A. Fava, Bologna
ISSN: 0033–3190 (print), 1423–0348 (Online)
For additional information: http://www.karger.com/journals/pps
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.