PreprintCited by 3Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Habit Reversal Training for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: A Multiple Case Report

Open access
Toffolo, Marieke Bianca Jolien, Saxena, Sanjaya·2019

Abstract

Although exposure and response prevention (ERP) is currently the most effective treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), there are substantial refusal and dropout rates. Therefore, there is a need to find ways to make treatments for OCD more acceptable and increase efficacy. This report presents four patients with OCD who received a novel treatment, Habit Reversal Training (HRT). HRT is the treatment of choice for OCD-related disorders such as Trichotillomania, but has not been formally tested for OCD. Based on recent studies showing that excessive habit formation plays an important role in OCD, we examined whether HRT would be an effective and acceptable treatment for OCD. Single case methodology was used to investigate its feasibility, acceptability and preliminary efficacy for OCD treatment. After 9 sessions of HRT over 11 weeks, all four participants showed 32-48% reductions in OCD severity, and three showed a clinically significant treatment response. These gains were largely maintained at 3 months follow-up. All participants rated HRT as a highly acceptable treatment. This suggests that HRT could prove to be an effective, efficient, and acceptable new OCD treatment, with a novel mechanism of action – targeting the habit system.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.31234/osf.io/gefv6

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Foa, E. B., Yadin, E., & Lichner, T. K. (2012). Exposure and Response (Ritual) Prevention for Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Therapist Guide -Edition 2. New York: Oxford University Press.
  2. Ruscio, A. M., Stein, D. J., Chiu, W. T., & Kessler, R. C. (2010). The epidemiology of obsessive-compulsive disorder in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Molecular Psychiatry, 15, 53-63. doi:10.1038/mp.2008. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Toffolo, M. B. J., & Saxena, S.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
Published
2019-08-24
OpenAlex
W3160736122
Cited by
2
References
43
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2021: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
habit reversal training, obsessive-compulsive disorder, habit formation, treatment acceptability, treatment discontinuation, treatment refusal, trichotillomania, exposure and response prevention, treatment efficacy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review