Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Objective: CBT is an empirically supported treatment for childhood anxiety disorders. However, it has been rarely tested in real-world clinical practice or compared to treatment-as-usual (TAU). Method: The present study was a randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing manualized CBT with TAU in Dutch mental health centers for clinically referred anxious children (N=88) aged 7-13 years. Treatment predictors included therapeutic alliance and parenting. Assessment took place at baseline, post-treatment, 6 and 12 months after treatment, and consisted of child-reports of anxiety, therapeutic alliance, and parenting; and mother-reports of children’s anxiety, children’s problem behavior, and parenting. Results: Both groups benefitted significantly from treatment with medium to large effect sizes, for mother- and child-reported outcomes. CBT was not superior to TAU on primary or secondary outcomes. TAU was even superior to CBT in some instances. Treatment gains were maintained at follow-ups. Therapeutic alliance and parenting did not predict treatment outcome. Conclusions: Manualized CBT did not produce better treatment outcomes than usual treatment within routine clinical practice. Findings suggest that CBT can be effective in a shorter and more flexible manner. More research is needed to identify which children profit best from which treatment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Doorn et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: