Social Skills Group Training ("KONTAKT") for Children and Adolescent With High-functioning Autism Spectrum Disorders; https://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT01854346.

Social skills group training (SSGT) is widely used for intellectually able children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Previous studies indicate small to moderate effects on social communication capacities. The duration of most available programs is relatively short, and extended training might lead to further improvement. This randomized controlled trial compared an extended 24-week version of the SSGT program KONTAKT with standard care. The weekly sessions gradually shifted in content from acquisition of new skills to real-world application of the acquired skills. A total of 50 participants with ASD (15 females; 35 males) aged 8-17 years were included. The study was conducted at two child and adolescent psychiatry outpatient units in Sweden. The primary outcome was the Social Responsiveness Scale-Second Edition (SRS-2) rated by parents and blinded teachers. Secondary outcomes included parent- and teacher-rated adaptive behaviors, trainer-rated global functioning and clinical severity, and self-reported child and caregiver stress. Assessments were made at baseline, posttreatment, and at 3-months follow-up. Parent-rated SRS-2 scores indicated large effects posttreatment [- 19.2; 95% CI - 29.9 to - 8.5; p < .001, effect size (ES) = 0.76], which were maintained at follow-up (- 20.7; 95% CI - 31.7 to - 9.7; p < .0001, ES = 0.82). These estimates indicate substantially larger improvement than previously reported for shorter SSGT. However, the effects on teacher-rated SRS-2 and most secondary outcomes did not reach statistical significance. Our results suggest added benefits of extended SSGT training, implying that service providers might reach better results by optimizing the delivery of SSGT.

IMPORTANCECognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a highly specialized treatment that is in short supply worldwide. OBJECTIVES To investigate whether both therapist-guided and unguided internet-based CBT (ICBT) are noninferior to face-to-face CBT for adults with OCD, to conduct a health economic evaluation, and to determine whether treatment effects were moderated by source of participant referral. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This study is a single-blinded, noninferiority, randomized clinical trial, with a full health economic evaluation, conducted between September 2015 and January 2020, comparing therapist-guided ICBT, unguided ICBT, and individual face-to-face CBT for adults with OCD. Follow-up data were collected up to 12 months after treatment. The study was conducted at 2 specialist outpatient OCD clinics in Stockholm, Sweden. Participants included a consecutive sample of adults with a primary diagnosis of OCD, either self-referred or referred by a clinician. Data analysis was performed from June 2019 to January 2022. INTERVENTIONS Guided ICBT, unguided ICBT, and face-to-face CBT delivered over 14 weeks. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point was the change in OCD symptom severity from baseline to 3-month follow-up. The noninferiority margin was 3 points on the masked assessor-rated Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale.RESULTS A total of 120 participants were enrolled (80 women [67%]; mean [SD] age, 32.24 [9.64] years); 38 were randomized to the face-to-face CBT group, 42 were randomized to the guided ICBT group, and 40 were randomized to the unguided ICBT group. The mean difference between therapist-guided ICBT and face-to-face CBT at the primary end point was 2.10 points on the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (90% CI, −0.41 to 4.61 points; P = .17), favoring face-to-face CBT, meaning that the primary noninferiority results were inconclusive. The difference between unguided ICBT and face-to-face CBT was 5.35 points (90% CI, 2.76 to 7.94 points; P < .001), favoring face-toface CBT. The health economic analysis showed that both guided and unguided ICBT were costeffective compared with face-to-face CBT. Source of referral did not moderate treatment outcome.The most common adverse events were anxiety (30 participants [25%]), depressive symptoms (20 participants [17%]), and stress (11 participants [9%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe findings of this randomized clinical trial of ICBT vs face-toface CBT for adults with OCD do not conclusively demonstrate noninferiority. Therapist-guided ICBT could be a cost-effective alternative to in-clinic CBT for adults with OCD in scenarios where traditional (continued)