Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry · 2016
Threat expectancy bias and treatment outcome in patients with panic disorder and agoraphobia.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Duits Puck, Klein Hofmeijer-Sevink Mieke, Engelhard Iris M, Baas Johanna M P, Ehrismann Wieske A M, Cath Danielle C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Previous studies suggest that patients with panic disorder and agoraphobia (PD/A) tend to overestimate the associations between fear-relevant stimuli and threat. This so-called threat expectancy bias is thought to play a role in the development and treatment of anxiety disorders. The current study tested 1) whether patients with PD/A (N = 71) show increased threat expectancy ratings to fear-relevant and fear-irrelevant stimuli relative to a comparison group without an axis I disorder (N=65), and 2) whether threat expectancy bias before treatment predicts treatment outcome in a subset of these patients (n = 51).
METHODS: In a computerized task, participants saw a series of panic-related and neutral words and rated for each word the likelihood that it would be followed by a loud, aversive sound.
RESULTS: Results showed higher threat expectancy ratings to both panic-related and neutral words in patients with PD/A compared to the comparison group. Threat expectancy ratings did not predict treatment outcome.
LIMITATIONS: This study only used expectancy ratings and did not include physiological measures. Furthermore, no post-treatment expectancy bias task was added to shed further light on the possibility that expectancy bias might be attenuated by treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients show higher expectancies of aversive outcome following both fear-relevant and fear-irrelevant stimuli relative to the comparison group, but this does not predict treatment outcome.
METHODS: In a computerized task, participants saw a series of panic-related and neutral words and rated for each word the likelihood that it would be followed by a loud, aversive sound.
RESULTS: Results showed higher threat expectancy ratings to both panic-related and neutral words in patients with PD/A compared to the comparison group. Threat expectancy ratings did not predict treatment outcome.
LIMITATIONS: This study only used expectancy ratings and did not include physiological measures. Furthermore, no post-treatment expectancy bias task was added to shed further light on the possibility that expectancy bias might be attenuated by treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients show higher expectancies of aversive outcome following both fear-relevant and fear-irrelevant stimuli relative to the comparison group, but this does not predict treatment outcome.