4.3 Review

Acceptability of internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy (i-CBT) for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD): a systematic review

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PSYCHOTRAUMATOLOGY
Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/20008198.2019.1646092

Keywords

Post-traumatic stress disorder; PTSD; cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT); guided self help (GSH); stress disorders; post-traumatic; treatment adherence and compliance; patient dropouts

Funding

  1. Cochrane Collaboration
  2. National Centre for Mental Health

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Internet-delivered Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (i-CBT) offers potential as an alternative, accessible, clinically and cost-effective treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), but little is known about its acceptability. Objective: To review the available evidence to understand the acceptability of i-CBT for PTSD. Method: We undertook a mixed-methods systematic review according to Cochrane Collaboration Guidelines, of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of i-CBT for adults with PTSD. We examined included studies for measures of acceptability, and possible proxy indicators of acceptability, including dropout rates, which were meta-analysed as risk ratios (RRs). Results: Ten studies with 720 participants were included. We found i-CBT to be acceptable according to specific acceptability measures, and suggestions for acceptability according to some proxy measures of i-CBT programme usage. There was, however, evidence of greater dropout from i-CBT than waitlist (RR 1.39, CI 1.03-1.88; 8 studies; participants = 585) and no evidence of a difference in dropout between i-CBT and i-non-CBT (RR 2.14, CI 0.97-4.73; participants = 132; 2 studies). Conclusion: i-CBT appears a potentially acceptable intervention for adults with PTSD. We identified clinical and research questions, including the status of proxy indicators, and call for standardised, consistent treatment acceptability measurement.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available