Approximately 15% of pregnant women experience anxiety disorders. Effective treatments exist but their acceptability during pregnancy, particularly exposure therapy, is not known.

To understand patient and therapist experiences of time-intensive and weekly exposure-based therapy for anxiety disorders delivered during pregnancy. Trial registration: ISRCTN81203286.

In-depth interviews were conducted with patients and therapists who had taken part in a feasibility trial of predominantly online time-intensive versus weekly cognitive–behavioural therapy in pregnancy in a primary care setting in the UK. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.

In total, 45 women participating in the trial and 6 therapists who had delivered the treatments were interviewed. Five themes were developed from the data that showed convergence from therapist and patient perspectives: ‘Acquiring tools to navigate the perinatal period’; ‘Motivated yet constrained by pregnancy’; ‘Having the confidence to face fears and tolerate uncertainty’; ‘Momentum with the need for flexibility’; ‘Being removed from the face-to-face world’.

Exposure therapy is acceptable and helpful in pregnancy and can lead to lasting gains. Exposure is a key element of treatment and needs to be confidently conducted by therapists with perinatal knowledge and expertise. Treatments need to consider the unfolding context of pregnancy. The momentum of intensive therapy can lead to rapid improvements, but is demanding for both patients and therapists, especially fitting round other commitments. Online treatments can work well and are a good fit for perinatal women, but this needs to be balanced with the need for social connection, suggesting a hybrid model is the ideal.

Despite evidence for its efficacy, exposure therapy for anxiety is rarely used in routine care settings. Efforts to address one major barrier to its use – therapists’ negative beliefs about exposure – have included therapist-level implementation strategies, such as training and consultation. Experiential training, in which therapists themselves undergo exposures, has recently demonstrated feasibility, acceptability and preliminary effectiveness for increasing exposure use.

This study aimed to assess: (1) therapists’ perceptions of experiential training and (2) barriers and facilitators to implementing exposure following training.

Therapists who underwent experiential training (n=12) completed qualitative interviews and quantitative questionnaires. Interviews were coded using an integrated approach, combining both inductive and deductive approaches. Mixed methods analyses examined how themes varied by practice setting (community mental health versus private practice) and exposure use.

Results highlight how therapist-level factors, such as clinician self-efficacy, interact with inner- and outer-setting factors. Participants reported positive perceptions of exposure after training; they noted that directly addressing myths about exposure and experiencing exposures themselves improved their attitudes toward exposure. Consistent with prior literature, issues such as insufficient supervisory support, organizational constraints, and client characteristics made it challenging to implement exposures.

Results highlight the benefits of experiential training, while also highlighting the need to consider contextual determinants. Differences in responses across practice settings highlight areas for intervention and the importance of tailoring implementation strategies. Barriers that were specific to therapists who did not use exposure (e.g. hesitancy about its appropriateness for most clients) point to directions for future implementation efforts.

1. (1) To learn about the theoretical underpinnings of specialized approaches to treating taboo/unacceptable thoughts subtype of OCD with gold-standard CBT treatments, cognitive therapy (CT) and exposure and ritual prevention (Ex/RP).

2. (2) To learn about recognizing and identifying commonly missed covert cognitive symptoms in OCD such as rumination and mental compulsions.

3. (3) To learn how to assess commonly unrecognized behavioural symptoms in OCD such as concealment, reassurance seeking, searching on online forums, etc.

4. (4) To gain a nuanced understanding of the phenomenology of the taboo/unacceptable thoughts OCD subtype and the cycles that maintain symptoms and impairment.

5. (5) To learn about in-session techniques such as thought experiments, worksheets, fear hierarchies, and different types of exposures.

1. (1) How can training of CBT techniques such as exposure occur prior to graduate education?

2. (2) Can self-efficacy in conducting exposures meaningfully increase in an experiential training of pre-professionals?

3. (3) How does an individual’s tolerance of disgust impact feelings of competence conducting exposures?

Preclinical findings suggest that transcranial infrared laser stimulation (TILS) improves fear extinction learning and cognitive function by enhancing prefrontal cortex (PFC) oxygen metabolism. These findings prompted our investigation of treating pathological fear using this non-invasive stimulation approach either alone to the dorsolateral PFC (dlPFC), or to the ventromedial PFC (vmPFC) in combination with exposure therapy.

Volunteers with pathological fear of either enclosed spaces, contamination, public speaking, or anxiety-related bodily sensations were recruited for this randomized, single-blind, sham-controlled trial with four arms: (a) Exposure + TILS_vmPFC (n = 29), (b) Exposure + sham TILS_vmPFC (n = 29), (c) TILS_dlPFC alone (n = 26), or (d) Sham TILS _dlPFC alone (n = 28). Post-treatment assessments occurred immediately following treatment. Follow-up assessments occurred 2 weeks after treatment.

A total of 112 participants were randomized [age range: 18–63 years; 96 females (85.71%)]. Significant interactions of Group × Time and Group × Context indicated differential treatment effects on retention (i.e. between time-points, averaged across contexts) and on generalization (i.e. between contexts, averaged across time-points), respectively. Among the monotherapies, TILS_dlPFC outperformed SHAM_dlPFC in the initial context, b = −13.44, 95% CI (−25.73 to −1.15), p = 0.03. Among the combined treatments, differences between EX + TILS_vmPFC and EX + SHAM_vmPFC were non-significant across all contrasts.

TILS to the dlPFC, one of the PFC regions implicated in emotion regulation, resulted in a context-specific benefit as a monotherapy for reducing fear. Contrary to prediction, TILS to the vmPFC, a region implicated in fear extinction memory consolidation, did not enhance exposure therapy outcome.

There is a debate among researchers and clinicians regarding whether the judicious use of safety behaviours (SBs) during exposure therapy is helpful or detrimental. Central to this debate is the premise that SBs may interfere with one’s ability to gather disconfirmatory evidence.

No study to date has assessed how SB use may impact cognitive mechanisms implicated during an exposure-like task. We investigated multiple cognitive, emotional, psychophysiological and behavioural underpinnings of exposure with and without SBs.

Speech anxious participants (n = 111) were randomly assigned to deliver an evaluated speech with or without SBs. Self-reported anxiety ratings and psychophysiological arousal measures were recorded at baseline, in anticipation of the speech, and following the speech. Measures of working memory, ability to gather disconfirmatory evidence, speech duration, objective and subjective speech performance, and speech task acceptability were administered.

There were no differences between conditions on working memory, self-reported anxiety, psychophysiological arousal, ability to gather disconfirmatory evidence, speech duration, or objective and subjective speech performance. All participants were able to gather disconfirmatory evidence. However, condition did influence willingness to deliver future speeches. Our sample was largely female undergraduate students, and we offered only a small number of specific safety behaviours.

Judicious SB use may not necessarily be detrimental, but clients may believe them to be more helpful than they actually are.

Social feedback in the virtual environment is a critical part of successful virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET), and identifying the influences of virtual social feedback on social anxiety patients is necessary.

The present study aimed to explore the influences of ambiguous and negative virtual social feedback on social anxiety patients and a health control group (HCG).

Twenty-six social anxiety patients and 26 healthy participants were recruited. All participants were exposed to a virtual public speaking scenario. The participants were required to make two 3-minute speeches while the virtual audiences gave them either ambiguous feedback or negative feedback. The subjective units of discomfort (SUD) and heart rate were collected during the process.

The results showed that SAD individuals reported higher levels of subjective anxiety than those in the HCG, and the between-group differences were larger in the mild ambiguous condition than in the intense negative condition.

This study indicates that social anxiety patients have an interpretation bias towards ambiguous virtual social feedback. Therefore, it is important for VR-based interventions to take into account not only the valence of the feedback but also the ambiguity aspect.