The Effects of Safety Seeking Behaviors During Exposure Therapy for Adults With Spider Phobia

Completed · Not applicable

Conditions studied: Specific Phobia

In brief

Exposure-based cognitive-behavioral therapy (i.e., "exposure therapy"), which entails repeated and prolonged confrontation with feared situations/stimuli, is the most effective treatment for anxiety disorders (e.g., arachnophobia). Safety behaviors are actions performed to prevent, minimize, or escape a feared catastrophe and/or associated distress (e.g., wearing thick shoes or gloves when around areas where there might be spiders). It is understood that safety behaviors contribute to the development and maintenance of anxiety disorders; accordingly, patients' safety behaviors are traditionally eliminated as soon as possible during exposure therapy (i.e., "response prevention"). Unfortunately, not everyone who receives exposure therapy benefits from this approach. To address the limitations of exposure's effectiveness, some experts have questioned the clinical convention of response prevention during exposure therapy. Specifically, they propose the "judicious use of safety behaviors": the careful and strategic incorporation of safety behaviors during exposure therapy. The controversial role of permitting safety behaviors during exposure has garnered substantial research attention, yet study findings are mixed. The current study, therefore, was designed to improve upon the methodological limitations of previous related research and examine the relative efficacy of traditional exposure with response prevention (E/RP) and the experimental exposure with the judicious use of safety behaviors (E/JU) in a sample of adults with arachnophobia. In light of previous related research, several hypotheses were made regarding the short- (posttreatment) and long-term (1-month follow-up) treatment effects: 1. Primary outcomes: E/RP participants will demonstrate greater improvement in spider phobia than the E/JU participants along behavioral and self-report symptom measures at follow-up. 2. Secondary outcomes: Treatment acceptability and tolerability will be higher for E/JU participants, relative to E/RP participants, before beginning exposures and at posttreatment, but not at follow-up. In addition, hypothesize that E/RP participants will report greater reductions in peak distress and greater improvements in distress tolerance relative to E/JU participants at follow-up. 3. Additional outcome: Exploratory analyses will be conducted to compare the relative rate of behavioral approach and exposure goal completion between treatment conditions.

Key facts

Study ID
NCT03233113
Run by
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
People needed
60
Starts
2016-09-20
Expected to finish
2017-09-13
Last updated by the study team
2018-01-16

Who can join

Age: 18 and older. Sex: any. Healthy volunteers: not accepted.

You may qualify if…

You may not qualify if…

Where it is running

Full record on ClinicalTrials.gov

Trial information comes from ClinicalTrials.gov and is refreshed daily. TrialsForMe does not provide medical care and does not run the studies it lists.