Comparison of Treatment for Hoarding Disorder

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Hoarding Disorder
• Interventions: Behavioral: Group Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Behavioral: Peer Facilitated Support Group

• Registration Number: NCT02040805
• Lead Sponsor: University of California, San Francisco

Brief Summary

This study proposes to compare two forms of treatment for Hoarding Disorder (HD), a common and impairing neuropsychiatric syndrome that has a profound impact on the lives and functioning of individuals, families, and society. Specifically, we will compare a novel community-based group treatment led by individuals from the community who are not mental health professionals to the current standard of care treatment for Hoarding Disorder, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, conducted by psychologists in a group setting. We hypothesized that both treatment types will be similarly effective in reducing hoarding severity.

Detailed Description

The study design for this proposal is a stratified, randomized, single-blind, non- inferiority trial comparing the current standard of care for treatment of Hoarding Disorder (HD), Group Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (G-CBT), to an innovative and promising community-based treatment, Group Buried in Treasures (G-BiT). Participants will be stratified by gender, psychiatric status (high vs. low burden of psychiatric symptoms) and insurance status (insured vs. under- or un-insured) so that equal numbers of individuals with each of these characteristics are randomized to each treatment arm. They will then be randomly assigned (randomized) to either G-CBT or G-BiT. Participants will know which treatment group they are assigned to, but those members of the research team who are conducting clinical or neuropsychological assessments or analyzing the data will not; they will be blinded to participant group assignment, and group leaders will be blinded to the psychiatric status, neurocognitive status, insurance status, etc, of participants. The study is a non-inferiority trial, that is, the hypothesis to be tested is that G-BiT is as effective, or no less effective, than G-CBT. We chose a non-inferiority design because we have no reason to believe G-BiT is better than G-CBT and our preliminary data, as well as outcomes previously reported for G- CBT and G-BiT, suggest that these treatments may have similar efficacies.

Study Timeline

• Study First Submitted: 2014-01-16
• Study First Submitted QC: 2014-01-16
• Study First Posted: 2014-01-20
• Study Start: 2014-02
• Primary Completion: 2016-12-31
• Study Completion: 2016-12-31
• Results First Submitted: 2017-06-09
• Status Verified: 2020-02
• Results First Submitted QC: 2020-02-04
• Last Update Submitted: 2020-02-04
• Results First Posted: 2020-02-11
• Last Update Posted: 2020-02-11

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 323

Inclusion Criteria

• Diagnosis of Hoarding Disorder

Read More

Exclusion Criteria

• Individuals with active psychosis, schizophrenia, intellectual disability, or known dementia will be excluded
• Individuals who have participated in either cognitive-behavioral therapy for hoarding (group or individual) or in group Buried in Treasures in the past year

Read More

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Group Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy	Group Cognitive Behavioral Therapy	Sixteen sessions of group therapy facilitated by a psychologist.
Peer Facilitated Support Group	Peer Facilitated Support Group	Fifteen sessions of peer-facilitated group support.

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Saving Inventory-Revised (SI-R)	Administered at screening before start of treatment groups and after last treatment group (20 weeks later).	This is a 23-item self-report questionnaire that measures hoarding symptoms and their impact, including problems with acquisition, clutter, and difficulty discarding, as well as distress and impairment/interference. The SI-R is scored on a scale of 0-92. Higher scores indicate more severe hoarding, and scores of 42 and over are considered clinically significant hoarding. Although subscale scores can be calculated, this study uses total scores as the primary outcome.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Activities of Daily Living Scale, Hoarding (ADL-H)	Administered at baseline and after last treatment group (20 weeks later).	The ADL-H is a 15-item self-report questionnaire that measures hoarding specific difficulties or problems that may impact daily functioning. It includes questions on activities affected by clutter or hoarding, problems in the home, and safety issues. For this study, the score on each ADL-H item was summed to create a total score ranging from 0 to 75. Higher scores indicate more severe functional impairment due to hoarding.

Trial Locations

Locations (2)

University of California, San Francisco; 🇺🇸 San Francisco, California, United States

Mental Health Association; 🇺🇸 San Francisco, California, United States