CClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT05402306Updated Jun 2, 2022

The Feasibility and Efficacy of a Two-week MCT Treatment of Anxiety Disorders in a Group Setting

An interventional study of Treatment group in Anxiety Disorders, sponsored by University of Oslo. Status unknown at 1 site in Norway. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 30 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-06-02.

Sponsored by University of Oslo · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified May 2022), so the status shown — last known as Recruiting — may be out of date.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
60
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 30 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Long treatment durations may not always be feasible for patients due to pressure to get better quickly, long travel distance to treatment clinics, inflexible working hours, or childcare. To overcome these challenges intensive treatments are currently emerging and several research studies have shown significant and lasting results of diagnosis-specific intensive treatments. A transdiagnostic treatment in a group setting can contribute to a more efficient course of treatment for patients.

Research suggests that Metacognitive Therapy (MCT) is an effective treatment for anxiety disorders. However, MCT has not previously been used on inpatients over a two-week period. To make the treatment tangible for patients and easy to administer for therapists over a short time, attention training technique (ATT) will mainly be used as a changing technique.

The main aim of the study is to explore the feasibility and efficacy of intensive and short-term MCT for anxiety disorders in a group setting.

Read the detailed description

Design: The study will use randomized control trial with a waitlist control. Cohorts of 12 included patients will be randomly assigned to active treatment or waitlist for two weeks. The waitlist patients will receive the same treatment immediately after the two-week waiting period.

Inclusion criteria: Adults ranging from 18 to 30 years of age meeting diagnostic criteria for generalised anxiety disorder, social phobia, and/or panic disorder with or without agoraphobia will be included in the study. Further the participants must be able to communicate in Norwegian and provide written consent.

Exclusion criteria: Exclusion criteria will be ongoing drug abuse, history of psychotic episodes, current suicidality, or participants not able to adapt to an intensive group format.

02

Conditions studied

  • Anxiety Disorders

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Metacognitive therapy
  • Attention training technique
03

In context

Anxiety Disorders

4,868 studies on the registry are indexed under Anxiety Disorders; 1,390 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 60 is below the median of 80 across 4,174 interventional studies indexed under Anxiety Disorders.

Browse Anxiety Disorders studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Oslo is the lead sponsor of 176 studies on the registry; 23 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 30 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Adults between 18 and 30 years
  • Meeting diagnostic criteria for generalised anxiety disorder, social phobia, and/or panic disorder with or without agoraphobia
  • Provide written consent to partake in the study

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Ongoing drug abuse
  • History of psychotic episodes
  • Current suicidality
  • Participants not able to adapt to an intensive group format
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
60 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Treatment group

    A two-week intensive group treatment with MCT mainly focusing on attention training. The participants will be allocated into treatment in groups of six. Group sessions will be conducted two times a day for approximately 60 minutes.

    Other: Treatment group

  • No intervention
    Waitlist control group

    Cohorts of 12 included patients will be randomly assigned to active treatment or waitlist for two weeks. The waitlist patients will receive the same treatment immediately after four-week waiting period.

Interventions

  • OtherTreatment group

    Group metacognitive therapy, mainly with attention training technique over two weeks.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (Change)

    The Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7, Spitzer et al., 2006) will be used to measure anxiety symptoms. GAD-7 is a seven-item, self-report measure which assess the severity of anxiety symptoms within the last two weeks. The items are scored on a four-point Likert scale (0-3), with the scores ranging from minimum 0 to maximum 21. Higher scores means worse outcome.

    Time frame: Change from baseline; pre-intervention; after the intervention; 3 months follow up; 6 months follow up.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (Change)

    Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9; Kroenke, Spitzer \& Williams, 2001) will be used to measure symptoms of depression. The questionnaire consists of nine items where each is scored on a four-point Likert scale (0-3), with the range of scores from 0 to 27. Higher scores indicate greater depression severity

    Time frame: Change from baseline; pre-intervention; after the intervention; 3 months follow up; 6 months follow up.

  2. Social Phobia Inventory (Change)

    Social Phobia Inventory (SPIN; Connor et al., 2000) will be used to measure symptoms of social phobia. SPIN is a 17-item, self-report measure which assess social phobia symptoms during the last weeks. Items is rated from 0 to 4, from "not at all", "a little bit", "somewhat", "very much" to "extremely". The score ranges from 0 to 68. Higher scores indicate greater social anxiety severity. A cut-off score of 19 assumes to indicate a clinical social phobia.

    Time frame: Change from baseline; pre-intervention; after the intervention; 3 months follow up; 6 months follow up.

  3. CAS-1 (Change)

    CAS-1 (Wells, 2009) is a 16-item self-report measure which assess metacognitive strategies and metacognitive beliefs within the last week.The first two items examine time used on worry/rumination and threat monitoring rated on an eight-point scale from "no time" to "all the time". The next six items assess unhelpful coping behaviours on the same likert-scale. The last eight items investigate metacognitive beliefs which is rated from 0 to 100. Higher scores means more time spent on CAS and higher belief in metacognitions.

    Time frame: Change from baseline; pre-intervention; after the intervention; 3 months follow up; 6 months follow up.

  4. Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (Change)

    Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP-32; Horowitz et al., 2000) is a 32-item self-report questionnaire which measure interpersonal functioning in total and on eight different subscales. The items are rated from 0 "not at all" to 4 "extremely". High scores for the total score and the subscales indicate an increased level of interpersonal problems.

    Time frame: Change from baseline; pre-intervention; after the intervention; 3 months follow up; 6 months follow up.

  5. Metacognition questionnaire 30 (Change)

    The Metacognition questionnaire (MCQ-30; Wells \& Cartwright-Hatton, 2004) will be used to measure metacognitive beliefs. MCQ-30 is a 30-item self-report measuring general belief in different metacognitions on a scale from 1 to 4, and the responses are "do not agree", "agree slightly", "agree moderately", and "agree very much". The items are divided in five subscales; cognitive confidence, positive beliefs about worry, cognitive self-consciousness, negative beliefs about uncontrollability and danger, and need to control thoughts. The scores for each subscale range from 6 to 24. Summing each subscale gives an overall total score that ranges from 30 to 120, with higher scores indicating higher beliefs in metacognitions.

    Time frame: Change from baseline; pre-intervention; after the intervention; 3 months follow up; 6 months follow up.

  6. The Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being scale (Change)

    The Short Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (SWEMWBS; Stewart-Brown et al., 2009) is a measure of mental well-being. SWEMWBS is a seven-item self-report related to positive aspects of subjective well-being and psychological functioning over the previous two weeks. Items is rated from 1 "none of the time" to 5 "all of the time". Scores range from 7 to 35 and a higher score indicates a higher level of mental well-being.

    Time frame: Change from baseline; pre-intervention; after the intervention; 3 months follow up; 6 months follow up.

  7. Work ability score (WAS) (Change)

    The single-item Work Ability Score (WAS) will be used to measure work ability. The WAS concerns the first item of the 7-item Work Ability Index (WAI), "Current work ability compared with the lifetime best" (Ilmarines, 2007). The item is rated from 0 "completely unable to work" to 10 "work ability at its best". Higher score indicate greater work ability.

    Time frame: Change from baseline; pre-intervention; after the intervention; 3 months follow up; 6 months follow up.

Other outcomes

  1. Ecological Momentary Assessment-questions

    Single item questions capturing anxiety and depression symptoms, and different mechanisms of change.

    Time frame: 4 times per day before, during and after treatment. The collection will go on for a total of six weeks.

  2. Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview

    Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.; Sheehan et al., 1998) will be used for diagnostic evaluation of the participants.

    Time frame: Evaluation at baseline, two weeks after the intervention and follow up at 6 months.

  3. ADIS Severity Scale in Anxiety Disorders Interview Schedule IV (Brown, DiNardo & Barlow, 1996)

    We will use the ADIS Diagnostic severity Scale to evaluate the severity of the diagnoses.

    Time frame: Evaluation at baseline, two weeks after the intervention and follow up at 6 months.

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Modum Bad
    Vikersund, Norway
    • Sverre Urnes Johnson, PhD · Contact
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 2, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05402306
Lead sponsor
University of Oslo
Collaborators
Modum Bad
Responsible party
Sverre Urnes Johnson (Associate Professor Sverre Urnes Johnson, University of Oslo) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 2, 2022
Start date
Feb 28, 2022
Primary completion
Jan 28, 2023 (estimated)
Completion
Jan 28, 2023 (estimated)
Last update
Jun 2, 2022

Study contacts

Sverre Urnes Johnson, PhD
Contact
s.u.johnson@psykologi.uio.no
+4741633313
Sverre Urnes Johnson, PhD
principal investigator · University of Oslo & Modum Bad
Henrik Nordahl, PhD
principal investigator · Norwegian University of Science and Technology
KariAnne Vrabel, PhD
principal investigator · Modum bad & University of Oslo
Asle Hoffart, PhD
principal investigator · Modum Bad & University of Oslo
Therese R. Snuggerud, Masters
principal investigator · Modum Bad

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in May 2022. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion