Potential for Harm in the Treatment of Pediatric Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Pitfalls and Best Practices

Abstract

Pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) can be debilitating and chronic unless treated early with efficacious intervention. The past several decades of intervention research have identified cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) with exposure and response/ritual prevention (ERP) as the first-line, evidence-based psychological intervention for pediatric OCD. Yet, many youths with OCD unfortunately remain inadequately treated. In well-meaning but misguided efforts to treat this complex disorder, clinicians holding misconceptions about ERP may fail to apply evidence-based treatments, misapply generic CBT techniques and ERP principles, or turn to non-evidence-based interventions. Potentially harmful treatments may worsen symptoms, while ineffective treatments can waste resources, impede patient access to efficacious treatment, and weaken public confidence in psychotherapy. The overarching goals of this review paper are to describe potentially harmful and ineffective practices in the treatment of pediatric OCD and to offer recommendations aligned with evidence-based practice. First, we dispel common misconceptions about ERP that may underlie its underuse among clinicians. We then describe potentially harmful and ineffective interventions for pediatric OCD, starting with misapplication of generic CBT techniques and ERP principles. We also identify non-evidence-based treatments for pediatric OCD that have limited conceptual or empirical foundations. Finally, we conclude with recommendations for clinicians who treat pediatric OCD, intervention researchers, training programs across mental health-related disciplines, and policymakers.

Keywords: Child and adolescent; Cognitive-behavioral therapy; Education and training; Evidence-based practice; Exposure and response prevention; Parents.