Lovell et al. (2006)

Question 1

Context

Answer 1

Weekly, in-person therapy is costly and lengthy waiting lists can make it inaccessible.

Question 2

Aim and hypothesis

Answer 2

To compare telephone vs face-to-face ERP CBT treatment.

Telephone ERP is not less effective than face-to-face ERP.

Question 3

Method

Answer 3

Randomised control trial, independent measures, longitudinal.

Question 4

Participants

Answer 4

72 16-65 year-old outpatients with OCD from the UK.

All scored 16+ on the Y-BOCS and did not suffer from substance misuse or other conditions.

Question 5

Sampling

Answer 5

Opportunity sample.

Question 6

How were ppts assigned to each condition?

What were the conditions?

Answer 6

Randomly assigned to either the telephone or face-to-face condition (independent measures design).

Question 7

Explain the sessions of CBT

Answer 7

Exposure response prevention therapy, either delivered traditionally through a 60-minute face-to-face session, or by a shorter telephone call (up to 30 minutes).

Question 8

How many sessions were given to each ppt?

How often?

Answer 8

10 weekly sessions.

Question 9

How many therapists carried out the treatments?

How was the consistency of treatment maintained?

Answer 9

2 experienced therapists (one at each clinic carried out both type).

Therapist manuals were used, alongside fortnightly supervision sessions and 4-monthly training days.

Question 10

How were ppts assessed prior to treatment?

Answer 10

Prior to treatment, all ppts were assessed twice, 4 weeks apart, using the Y-BOCS to measure the severity of their OCD and BDI to measure feelings of depressive disorder.

Question 11

How were ppts assessed after treatment?

Answer 11

Ppts were assesed using the Y-BOCS and BDI immediately following treatment, then at 1, 3 and 6-month follow-ups.

There were also given a client satisfaction questionnaire.

Question 12

What was there no significant difference in between the groups before treatment or at any of the follow-up assessments?

Answer 12

No significant difference in symptom severity between the telephone and face-to-face groups.

Question 13

Did client satisfaction differ?

Answer 13

Client satisfaction did not differ immediately after treatment.

Question 14

For what percentage of ppts in each group was treatment successful for?

Answer 14

• Telephone group = 77%
• Face-to-face group = 67%

Question 15

Conclusions

Answer 15

Telephone ERP CBT for OCD is as effective as face-to-face therapy, despite 50% less therapist contact time.

Question 16

Strengths

Answer 16

• Valid = random allocation should control for researcher bias/individual differences.
• Reliable = baseline measures were taken twice (test-retest reliability).
• Standardised = objective scales for measurement and trained therapists.
• RWA = cheaper more accessible alternative to traditional CBT but just as effective.

Question 17

Criticisms

Answer 17

• Cultural bias = hard to generalise since the sample was small.
• Self-report = risk of demand characteristics/social desirability bias since answers are subjective.
• Longitudinal = 11 ppts dropped out, attrition can cause reduced validity/generalisability.