This study evaluates the efficacy and acceptability of two cognitive-behavioural interventions for reassurance seeking behaviour in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), a family accommodation reduction protocol vs. a novel support-seeking protocol. Half of participants will be randomly assigned to participate in the support-seeking intervention, whereas the other half will participate in the family accommodation reduction intervention.
An existing family accommodation reduction intervention to reduce reassurance seeking behaviour in OCD (which represents treatment as usual, or TAU) is being compared to a novel support-seeking intervention to determine which is more efficacious and acceptable to participants. The TAU protocol asks participants to make an agreement with their significant others to withhold reassurance when it is sought. It is believed that this behaviourally-based intervention encourages extinction of reassurance seeking over time by eliminating reinforcement of the behaviour by significant others. The support-seeking intervention asks participants to move towards adaptively seeking support from a significant other to manage anxiety or distress rather than seeking reassurance. Significant others are taught to provide support rather than reassurance. It is believed that support-seeking may reduce reassurance seeking behaviour because it helps participants manage the anxiety or distress that underlies the requests for reassurance without interfering with disconfirmatory learning.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
7
Empirically-supported psychological intervention for various mental health concerns including obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Includes components to foster cognitive (i.e., thinking) and behavioural changes.
Concordia University
Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Self-reported reassurance seeking behaviour
Number of times participants self-report seeking reassurance per day
Time frame: 5 weeks (baseline through 3 week follow-up)
Self-reported support-seeking behaviour
Number of times participants in the support-seeking condition self-report seeking reassurance per day
Time frame: 4 weeks (condition assignment through 3 week follow-up)
Self-reported anxiety
Level of anxiety on average per day, self-rated from 0-100
Time frame: 5 weeks (baseline monitoring through 3 week follow-up)
One-week follow-up: Treatment Acceptability and Adherence Scale (TAAS; Milosevic, Levy, Alcolado, & Radomsky, 2015)
Validated questionnaire assessing how acceptable participants find an intervention as well as ease of adherence.
Time frame: One-week follow-up
One-week follow-up: Endorsement and Discomfort Scales (EDS; Tarrier, Liversidge, & Gregg, 2006)
Validated questionnaire assessing acceptability of and discomfort caused by an intervention.
Time frame: One-week follow-up
Three-week follow-up: Treatment Acceptability and Adherence Scale (TAAS; Milosevic, Levy, Alcolado, & Radomsky, 2015)
Validated questionnaire assessing how acceptable participants find an intervention as well as ease of adherence.
Time frame: Three-week follow-up
Three-week follow-up: Endorsement and Discomfort Scales (EDS; Tarrier, Liversidge, & Gregg, 2006)
Validated questionnaire assessing acceptability of and discomfort caused by an intervention.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Time frame: Three-week follow-up
Change in self-reported reassurance-seeking
Pre-post assessment of change in the number of times per day that participants self-report reassurance seeking behaviour from the baseline monitoring week to the follow-up assessments.
Time frame: Baseline to one-week follow-up and baseline to three-week follow-up
Change in anxiety
Pre-post assessment of change in participants' self-reported anxiety ratings, as rated from 0-100
Time frame: Baseline (monitoring week 1) to end of reassurance provision week (monitoring week 2)