+1 Recommend
1 collections

      To submit your manuscript, please click here

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Efficacy of Seren@ctif, a Computer-Based Stress Management Program for Patients With Adjustment Disorder With Anxiety: Protocol for a Controlled Trial


      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.



          Adjustment disorder with anxiety (ADA) is the most frequent and best characterized stress-related psychiatric disorder. The rationale for prescription of benzodiazepine monotherapy is a public health issue. Cognitive behavioral stress management programs have been studied in many countries. Several reports have shown beyond reasonable doubt their efficiency at reducing perceived stress and anxiety symptoms and improving patient quality of life. Considering the number of people who could benefit from such programs but are unable to access them, self-help programs have been offered. First presented as books, these programs became enriched with computer-based and digital supports. Regrettably, programs for stress management based on cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), both face-to-face and digital support, have been only minimally evaluated in France. To our knowledge, the Seren@ctif program is the first French language self-help program for stress management using digital supports.


          The aim of this study is to assess the effectiveness of a 5-week standardized stress management program for reducing anxiety conducted via eLearning (iCBT) or through face-to-face interviews (CBT) with patients suffering from ADA compared with a wait list control group (WLC). These patients seek treatment in a psychiatric unit for anxiety disorders at a university hospital. The primary outcome is change in the State Trait Anxiety Inventory scale trait subscale (STAI-T) between baseline and 2-month visit.


          This is a multicenter, prospective, open label, randomized controlled study in 3 parallel groups with balanced randomization (1:1:1): computer-based stress management with minimal contact (not fully automated) (group 1), stress management with face-to-face interviews (group 2), and a WLC group that receives usual health care from a general practitioner (group 3). Programs are based on standard CBT principles and include 5 modules in 5 weekly sessions that include the following topics: stress and stress reaction and assessment; deep respiration and relaxation techniques; cognitive restructuring, mindfulness, and acceptance; behavioral skills as problem solving; and time management, healthy behaviors, and emotion regulation. In the Internet-based group, patients have minimal contact with a medical professional before and after every session. In the first session, a flash memory drive is supplied containing videos, audio files, a self-help book portfolio in the form of an eGuide, and log books providing the exercises to be completed between 2 sessions. The patient is encouraged to practice a 20-minute daily exercise 5 or 6 times per week. In the face-to-face group, patients receive the same program from a therapist with 5 weekly sessions without digital support. Interviews and self-assessments were collected face-to-face with the investigator.


          The feasibility of this program is being tested, and results show good accessibility in terms of acceptance, understanding, and treatment credibility. Results are expected in 2018.


          To our knowledge, this is the first French study to examine the effectiveness of a computer-based stress management program for patients with ADA. The Seren@ctif program may be useful within the framework of a psychoeducative approach. It could also be advised for people suffering from other diseases related to stress and for people with a clinical level of perceived stress.

          Trial Registration

          Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02621775; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02621775 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6tQrkPs1u)

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Development and validation of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire.

          The present report describes the development of the Penn State Worry Questionnaire to measure the trait of worry. The 16-item instrument emerged from factor analysis of a large number of items and was found to possess high internal consistency and good test-retest reliability. The questionnaire correlates predictably with several psychological measures reasonably related to worry, and does not correlate with other measures more remote to the construct. Responses to the questionnaire are not influenced by social desirability. The measure was found to significantly discriminate college samples (a) who met all, some, or none of the DSM-III-R diagnostic criteria for generalized anxiety disorder and (b) who met criteria for GAD vs posttraumatic stress disorder. Among 34 GAD-diagnosed clinical subjects, the worry questionnaire was found not to correlate with other measures of anxiety or depression, indicating that it is tapping an independent construct with severely anxious individuals, and coping desensitization plus cognitive therapy was found to produce significantly greater reductions in the measure than did a nondirective therapy condition.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials.

            To comprehend the results of a randomised controlled trial (RCT), readers must understand its design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation. That goal can be achieved only through total transparency from authors. Despite several decades of educational efforts, the reporting of RCTs needs improvement. Investigators and editors developed the original CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to help authors improve reporting by use of a checklist and flow diagram. The revised CONSORT statement presented here incorporates new evidence and addresses some criticisms of the original statement. The checklist items pertain to the content of the Title, Abstract, Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. The revised checklist includes 22 items selected because empirical evidence indicates that not reporting this information is associated with biased estimates of treatment effect, or because the information is essential to judge the reliability or relevance of the findings. We intended the flow diagram to depict the passage of participants through an RCT. The revised flow diagram depicts information from four stages of a trial (enrollment, intervention allocation, follow-up, and analysis). The diagram explicitly shows the number of participants, for each intervention group, included in the primary data analysis. Inclusion of these numbers allows the reader to judge whether the authors have done an intention-to-treat analysis. In sum, the CONSORT statement is intended to improve the reporting of an RCT, enabling readers to understand a trial's conduct and to assess the validity of its results.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The hospital anxiety and depression rating scale: A cross-sectional study of psychometrics and case finding abilities in general practice

              Background General practitioners' (GPs) diagnostic skills lead to underidentification of generalized anxiety disorders (GAD) and major depressive episodes (MDE). Supplement of brief questionnaires could improve the diagnostic accuracy of GPs for these common mental disorders. The aims of this study were to examine the usefulness of The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Rating Scale (HADS) for GPs by: 1) Examining its psychometrics in the GPs' setting; 2) Testing its case-finding properties compared to patient-rated GAD and MDE (DSM-IV); and 3) Comparing its case finding abilities to that of the GPs using Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) rating. Methods In a cross-sectional survey study 1,781 patients in three consecutive days in September 2001 attended 141 GPs geographically spread in Norway. Sensitivity, specificity, optimal cut off score, and Area under the curve (AUC) for the HADS and the CGI-S were calculated with Generalized Anxiety Questionnaire (GAS-Q) as reference standard for GAD, and Depression Screening Questionnaire (DSQ) for MDE. Results The HADS-A had optimal cut off ≥8 (sensitivity 0.89, specificity 0.75), AUC 0.88 and 76% of patients were correctly classified in relation to GAD. The HADS-D had by optimal cut off ≥8 (sensitivity 0.80 and specificity 0.88) AUC 0.93 and 87% of the patients were correctly classified in relation to MDE. Proportions of the total correctly classified at the CGI-S optimal cut-off ≥3 were 83% of patients for GAD and 81% for MDE. Conclusion The results indicate that addition of the patients' HADS scores to GPs' information could improve their diagnostic accuracy of GAD and MDE.

                Author and article information

                JMIR Res Protoc
                JMIR Res Protoc
                JMIR Research Protocols
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                October 2017
                02 October 2017
                : 6
                : 10
                : e190
                [1] 1 Stress and Anxiety Unit Department of Psychiatry University Hospital Lille France
                [2] 2 Unité Mixte de Recherche 9193 Sciences Cognitives et Sciences Affectives Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique Department of Psychiatry University Hospital Lille Lille France
                [3] 3 Centre d'Etudes et de Recherche en Informatique Médicale Department of Biostatistics University of Lille Lille France
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Dominique Servant dominique.servant@ 123456chru-lille.fr
                Author information
                ©Dominique Servant, Anne-Claire Leterme, Olivia Barasino, Laure Rougegrez, Alain Duhamel, Guillaume Vaiva. Originally published in JMIR Research Protocols (http://www.researchprotocols.org), 02.10.2017.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIR Research Protocols, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on http://www.researchprotocols.org, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                : 3 May 2017
                : 22 June 2017
                : 27 July 2017
                : 1 August 2017

                computer-assisted therapy,ehealth,cognitive therapy,behavior therapy,psychological stress,adjustment disorders,randomized controlled trial


                Comment on this article