The aim of this study was to address claims that among bona fide treatments no one is more efficacious than another by comparing the relative efficacy of cognitive therapy (CT) and relaxation therapy (RT) in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and panic disorder without agoraphobia (PD). Two fixed-effects meta-analyses were conducted, for GAD and PD separately, to review the treatment outcome literature directly comparing CT with RT in the treatment of those disorders. For GAD, CT and RT were equivalent. For PD, CT, which included interoceptive exposure, outperformed RT on all panic-related measures, as well as on indices of clinically significant change. There is ample evidence that both CT and RT qualify as bona fide treatments for GAD and PD, for which they are efficacious and intended to be so. Therefore, the finding that CT and RT do not differ in the treatment of GAD, but do for PD, is evidence for the specificity of treatment to disorder, even for 2 treatments within a CBT class, and 2 disorders within an anxiety class.

Evidence-based practice suggests that clinicians should integrate the best available research with clinical judgment and patient values. Treatment of religious patients with scrupulosity provides a paradigmatic example of such integration. The purpose of this study is to describe potential adaptations to make exposure and response prevention, the first-line treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder, acceptable and consistent with the values of members of the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community. We believe that understanding these challenges will enhance the clinician's ability to increase patient motivation and participation in therapy and thereby provide more effective treatment for these and other religious patients.

There is conflicting evidence as to whether military populations (i.e., veteran and active-duty military service members) demonstrate a poorer response to psychotherapy for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) compared to civilians. Existing research may be complicated by the fact that treatment outcomes differences could be due to the type of trauma exposure (e.g., combat) or population differences (e.g., military culture). This meta-analysis evaluated PTSD treatment outcomes as a function of trauma type (combat v. assault v. mixed) and population (military v. civilian). Unlike previous meta-analyses, we focused exclusively on manualized, first-line psychotherapies for PTSD as defined by expert treatment guidelines. Treatment outcomes were large across trauma types and population; yet differences were observed between trauma and population subgroups. Military populations demonstrated poorer treatment outcomes compared to civilians. The combat and assault trauma subgroups had worse treatment outcomes compared to the mixed trauma subgroup, but differences were not observed between assault and combat subgroups. Higher attrition rates predicted poorer treatment outcomes, but did not vary between military populations and civilians. Overall, manualized, first-line psychotherapies for PTSD should continue to be used for civilians and military populations with various trauma types. However, greater emphasis should be placed on enhancing PTSD psychotherapies for military populations and on treatment retention across populations based on findings from this metaanalysis.

No abstract

Scrupulous individuals have unique treatment-seeking preferences. Moreover, most scrupulous individuals perceive their symptoms as interfering with their religious experience. Focusing on the religious costs and benefits of scrupulous rituals might have clinical utility. Finally, scrupulous individuals with a more negative concept of God experienced more severe symptoms. Future research is necessary to evaluate whether addressing such concepts can improve treatment outcome.