Interpersonal psychotherapy for depression? The need to define its ecological niche

Identifying active ingredients in cognitive-behavioral therapies: What if we didn't?

Identifying active ingredients of psychological interventions is a major goal of psychotherapy researchers that is often justified by the promise that it will lead to improved patient outcomes. Much of this "active ingredients" research is conducted within randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with patient populations, putting it in Phase T2 of the clinical-translational spectrum. I argue that RCTs in patient populations are very "messy laboratories" in which to conduct active ingredient work and that T0 and T1 research provide more controlled contexts. However, I call attention to the long road from identifying active ingredients of CBTs, whether in T0, T1, or T2 research, to improving outcomes. Dissemination and implementation research (T3 and T4 approaches) may be conceptually closer to improving outcomes. Given how common and disabling mental health symptoms are, I argue that if researchers want to improve patient outcomes, these research programs must receive more attention including work on the uptake of psychological interventions as well as work on optimal ordering of existing interventions.

Psychiatric disorders: The psychiatrist's contribution to sport

Athletes experience a range of mental health problems with at least an equivalent prevalence to the general population. This chapter explores the psychiatrist's role in sport, along a pathway of mental healthcare from 'upstream' prevention, screening, and early detection of mental stress to 'downstream' assessment, treatment, rehabilitation, and recovery from mental illness. At each stage on this pathway the psychiatrist has a broad spectrum of bio-psycho-social strategies to employ in clinical practice. Upstream, the importance of psychological resilience is described along with the concept of mental 'pre-habilitation' (a term usually associated with the prevention of physical injury). Alongside these preventative measures, early detection is improved by education, increased awareness, and by the use of effective mental health screening measures. Further downstream ready access to psychiatric expertise and good collaboration between the psychiatrist and the world of sport improve access to treatment, delivery of that treatment, rehabilitation, and return to sport during recovery.

Optimizing the management of depression: primary care experience

This article is intended to identify some of the most important challenges faced by family physicians when treating MDD and to provide practical solutions. Key issues, reviewed from a primary care view point will include: treating to remission (and not just response), identification of high-risk groups, diagnosis, acute treatment approaches (including pharmacotherapy and the management of related side effects), the use of psychotherapy and somatic therapies, assessment of the adequacy of treatment including the assessment of remission, response measurement, optimal follow-up care throughout the phase of treatment, the key components of patient education and strategies for partial/limited response to the first-line antidepressant (switching, augmentation and combination strategies), how to provide support for improved treatment adherence, and approaches to prevent the recurrence of depressive episodes.

The effectiveness of individual interpersonal psychotherapy as a treatment for major depressive disorder in adult outpatients: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

This systematic review describes a comparison between several standard treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD) in adult outpatients, with a focus on interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT).

METHODS

Systematic searches of PubMed and PsycINFO studies between January 1970 and August 2012 were performed to identify (C-)RCTs, in which MDD was a primary diagnosis in adult outpatients receiving individual IPT as a monotherapy compared to other forms of psychotherapy and/or pharmacotherapy.

RESULTS

1233 patients were included in eight eligible studies, out of which 854 completed treatment in outpatient facilities. IPT combined with nefazodone improved depressive symptoms significantly better than sole nefazodone, while undefined pharmacotherapy combined with clinical management improved symptoms better than sole IPT. IPT or imipramine hydrochloride with clinical management showed a better outcome than placebo with clinical management. Depressive symptoms were reduced more in CBASP (cognitive behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy) patients in comparison with IPT patients, while IPT reduced symptoms better than usual care and wait list condition.

CONCLUSIONS

The differences between treatment effects are very small and often they are not significant. Psychotherapeutic treatments such as IPT and CBT, and/or pharmacotherapy are recommended as first-line treatments for depressed adult outpatients, without favoring one of them, although the individual preferences of patients should be taken into consideration in choosing a treatment.

Executive summary of the report by the WPA section on pharmacopsychiatry on general and comparative efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants in the acute treatment of depressive disorders

Current gold standard in the treatment of depression includes pharmacotherapeutic and psychotherapeutic strategies together with social support. Due to the actually discussed controversies concerning the differential efficacy of antidepressants, a contribution to a comprehensive clarification seems to be necessary to avert further deterioration and uncertainty from patients, relatives, and their treating psychiatrists and general practitioners. Both efficacy and clinical effectiveness of antidepressants in the treatment of depressive disorders can be confirmed. Clinically meaningful antidepressant treatment effects were confirmed in different types of studies. Methodological issues of randomized controlled studies, meta-analyses, and effectiveness studies will be discussed. Furthermore, actual data about the differential efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants with distinct pharmacodynamic properties and about outcome differences in studies using antidepressants and/or psychotherapy are discussed. This is followed by a clinically oriented depiction-the differential clinical effectiveness of different pharmacodynamic modes of action of antidepressants in different subtypes of depressive disorders. It can be summarized that the spectrum of different antidepressant treatments has broadened during the last decades. The efficacy and clinical effectiveness of antidepressants is statistically significant and clinically relevant and proven repeatedly. For further optimizing antidepressant treatment plans, clearly structured treatment algorithms and the implementation of psychotherapy seem to be useful. A modern individualized antidepressant treatment in most cases is a well-tolerated and efficacious tool to minimize the negative impact of the otherwise devastating and life-threatening outcome of depressive disorders.

General and comparative efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants in the acute treatment of depressive disorders: a report by the WPA section of pharmacopsychiatry

Current gold standard approaches to the treatment of depression include pharmacotherapeutic and psychotherapeutic interventions with social support. Due to current controversies concerning the efficacy of antidepressants in randomized controlled trials, the generalizability of study findings to wider clinical practice and the increasing importance of socioeconomic considerations, it seems timely to address the uncertainty of concerned patients and relatives, and their treating psychiatrists and general practitioners. We therefore discuss both the efficacy and clinical effectiveness of antidepressants in the treatment of depressive disorders. We explain and clarify useful measures for assessing clinically meaningful antidepressant treatment effects and the types of studies that are useful for addressing uncertainties. This includes considerations of methodological issues in randomized controlled studies, meta-analyses, and effectiveness studies. Furthermore, we summarize the differential efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants with distinct pharmacodynamic properties, and differences between studies using antidepressants and/or psychotherapy. We also address the differential effectiveness of antidepressant drugs with differing modes of action and in varying subtypes of depressive disorder. After highlighting the clinical usefulness of treatment algorithms and the divergent biological, psychological, and clinical efforts to predict the effectiveness of antidepressant treatments, we conclude that the spectrum of different antidepressant treatments has broadened over the last few decades. The efficacy and clinical effectiveness of antidepressants is statistically significant, clinically relevant, and proven repeatedly. Further optimization of treatment can be helped by clearly structured treatment algorithms and the implementation of psychotherapeutic interventions. Modern individualized antidepressant treatment is in most cases a well-tolerated and efficacious approach to minimize the negative impact of otherwise potentially devastating and life-threatening outcomes in depressive disorders.

Effectiveness, relapse prevention and mechanisms of change of cognitive therapy vs. interpersonal therapy for depression: Study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Major depression is a common mental disorder that substantially impairs quality of life and has high societal costs. Although psychotherapies have proven to be effective antidepressant treatments, initial response rates are insufficient and the risk of relapse and recurrence is high. Improvement of treatments is badly needed. Studying the mechanisms of change in treatment might be a good investment for improving everyday mental health care. However, the mechanisms underlying therapeutic change remain largely unknown. The objective of the current study is to assess both the effectiveness of two commonly used psychotherapies for depression in terms of reduction of symptoms and prevention of relapse on short and long term, as well as identifying underlying mechanisms of change.

Methods

In a randomised trial we will compare (a) Cognitive Therapy (CT) with (b) Interpersonal therapy (IPT), and (c) an 8-week waiting list condition followed by treatment of choice. One hundred eighty depressed patients (aged 18-65) will be recruited in a mental health care centre in Maastricht (the Netherlands). Eligible patients will be randomly allocated to one of the three intervention groups. The primary outcome measure of the clinical evaluation is depression severity measured by the Beck Depression Intenvory-II (BDI-II). Other outcomes include process variables such as dysfunctional beliefs, negative attributions, and interpersonal problems. All self-report outcome assessments will take place on the internet at baseline, three, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve and twenty-four months. At 24 months a retrospective telephone interview will be administered. Furthermore, a rudimentary analysis of the cost-effectiveness will be embedded. The study has been ethically approved and registered.

Discussion

By comparing CT and IPT head-to-head and by investigating multiple potential mediators and outcomes at multiple time points during and after therapy, we hope to provide new insights in the effectiveness and mechanisms of change of CT and IPT for depression, and contribute to the improvement of mental health care for adults suffering from depression.

Trial registration

The study has been registered at the Netherlands Trial Register, part of the Dutch Cochrane Centre (ISRCTN67561918)

Four potential criteria for deciding when to use antidepressants or psychotherapy for unipolar depression: a literature review

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the literature supporting four potential criteria for deciding whether to use psychotherapy or pharmacology when treating depression.

METHOD

Literature review of the evidence from the last 10 years on presenting patient's demographics, aetiology, comorbidity, and genetic factors, as predictors of treatment outcome efficacy.

RESULTS

Demographic information has little support as a potential criteria for decision-making; aetiology (melancholic vs. non-melancholic) has significant support; presence of personality disorder comorbidity is unproven as a criterion but may have some value; genetic predisposition has the strongest evidence supporting it as a criteria for treatment decision-making.

CONCLUSION

Although some presenting cases will be easier to classify than others, there are substantial data supporting the screening of patients according to three of these criteria.

Comparative outcomes among the problem areas of interpersonal psychotherapy for depression

BACKGROUND

Although interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) is an efficacious treatment for acute depression, the relative efficacy of treatment in each of the four IPT problem areas (grief, role transitions, role disputes, interpersonal deficits) has received little attention. We evaluated the specificity of IPT by comparing treatment success among patients whose psychotherapy focused on each problem area. Moreover, we sought to understand how the patient characteristics and interpersonal problems most closely linked to the onset of a patient's current depression contributed to IPT success.

METHODS

Patients meeting DSM-IV criteria for an episode of major depressive disorder (n=182) were treated with weekly IPT. Remission was defined as an average Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 17-item score of 7 or below over 3 weeks. Personality disorders were diagnosed using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders.

RESULTS

Contrary to our prediction that patients whose treatment was focused on interpersonal deficits would take longer to remit, survival analyses indicated that patients receiving treatment focused on each of the four problem areas did not differ in their times to remission. Nor were patients in the interpersonal deficits group more likely to have an Axis II diagnosis. Patients whose treatment focused on role transitions remitted faster than those whose treatment focused on role disputes, after controlling for covariates.

CONCLUSION

With skillful use of IPT strategies and tactics and with careful medication management where appropriate, patients in this study whose treatment focused on each problem area were treated with equal success by trained IPT clinicians.

A randomised control trial for the effectiveness of group Interpersonal Psychotherapy for postnatal depression

This study is a randomised controlled trial comparing outcomes from an 8-week Interpersonal Psychotherapy group (IPT-G) for postnatal depression with 'treatment as usual' (TAU), conducted in a routine community setting in the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). Eligible women were recruited and randomly assigned to either IPT-G or TAU conditions. This study compared outcomes on such variables as depressive symptoms, marital adjustment, social support and mother-infant bond at baseline, mid-treatment, end-of-treatment and 3 months follow-up. Participants were also independently assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D). 50 women completed baseline assessments and were included in the analysis. Comparisons of treatment conditions showed that by end of treatment both the TAU and IPT-G groups significantly improved in terms of mean depression scores, however, the IPT-G women improved significantly more and had continued improvements at 3 months post therapy. Furthermore, women who received IPT-G displayed significant improvement in terms of marital functioning and perceptions of the mother-infant relationship compared to TAU participants. These findings highlight the potential benefits of an interpersonally based treatment, which not only improves outcomes for the mother but also potentially for the couple and the infant when compared to usual care.

Adaptation of interpersonal psychotherapy to borderline personality disorder: a comparison of combined therapy and single pharmacotherapy

OBJECTIVE

Combined treatment with interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) and antidepressants (ADs) has been found more effective than single pharmacotherapy in patients with major depression and concomitant borderline personality disorder (BPD). The aim of our study is to investigate whether combined treatment with a modified version of IPT is still superior to ADs when treating patients with a single diagnosis of BPD.

METHOD

Fifty-five consecutive outpatients with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision, diagnosis of BPD were enrolled. They were randomly assigned to 2 treatment arms for 32 weeks: fluoxetine 20 to 40 mg per day plus clinical management; and fluoxetine 20 to 40 mg per day plus IPT adapted to BPD (IPT-BPD). Eleven patients (20%) discontinued treatment owing to noncompliance. Forty-four patients completed the treatment period. They were assessed at baseline, and at week 16 and 32 with: a semi-structured interview for demographic and clinical variables; Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI-S); Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS); Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS); Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS); BPD Severity Index (BPD-SI); and a questionnaire for quality of life (Satisfaction Profile [SAT-P]). A univariate general linear model was performed with 2 factors: duration and type of treatment. P values of less than 0.05 were considered significant.

RESULTS

Remission rates did not differ significantly between subgroups. Duration, but not type of treatment, had a significant effect on CGI-S, HDRS, SOFAS, and total BPD-SI score changes. Combined therapy was more effective on the HARS; the items: interpersonal relationships, affective instability, and impulsivity of BPD-SI; and the factors: psychological functioning and social functioning of SAT-P.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined therapy with adapted IPT was superior to fluoxetine alone in BPD patients, concerning a few core symptoms of the disorder, anxiety, and quality of life.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) clinical guidelines for the management of major depressive disorder in adults. II. Psychotherapy alone or in combination with antidepressant medication

BACKGROUND

In 2001, the Canadian Psychiatric Association and the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) partnered to produce evidence-based clinical guidelines for the treatment of depressive disorders. A revision of these guidelines was undertaken by CANMAT in 2008-2009 to reflect advances in the field. This article, one of five in the series, reviews new studies of psychotherapy in the acute and maintenance phase of MDD, including computer-based and telephone-delivered psychotherapy.

METHODS

The CANMAT guidelines are based on a question-answer format to enhance accessibility to clinicians. Evidence-based responses are based on updated systematic reviews of the literature and recommendations are graded according to the Level of Evidence, using pre-defined criteria. Lines of Treatment are identified based on criteria that included evidence and expert clinical support.

RESULTS

Cognitive-Behavioural Therapy (CBT) and Interpersonal Therapy (IPT) continue to have the most evidence for efficacy, both in acute and maintenance phases of MDD, and have been studied in combination with antidepressants. CBT is well studied in conjunction with computer-delivered methods and bibliotherapy. Behavioural Activation and Cognitive-Behavioural Analysis System of Psychotherapy have significant evidence, but need replication. Newer psychotherapies including Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, Motivational Interviewing, and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy do not yet have significant evidence as acute treatments; nor does psychodynamic therapy.

LIMITATIONS

Although many forms of psychotherapy have been studied, relatively few types have been evaluated for MDD in randomized controlled trials. Evidence about the combination of different types of psychotherapy and antidepressant medication is also limited despite widespread use of these therapies concomitantly.

CONCLUSIONS

CBT and IPT are the only first-line treatment recommendations for acute MDD and remain highly recommended for maintenance. Both computer-based and telephone-delivered psychotherapy--primarily studied with CBT and IPT--are useful second-line recommendations. Where feasible, combined antidepressant and CBT or IPT are recommended as first-line treatments for acute MDD.

[Group interpersonal psychotherapy: a review]

Interpersonal Psychotherapy was conceived as a psychotherapeutic approach to treating Depression, but has since now been broadly used to treat many other disorders. It has also recently been adapted to delivery in the group setting, with both advantages and disadvantages as other group psychotherapies. This adaptation, first used by Wilfley and colleagues, maintained the main features of IPT, i.e. the central role of the interpersonal focus and identification of one (or two) out of four problem interpersonal areas (Grief; Role Transition; Role Disputes; Interpersonal Deficits). It also kept the active role of the therapist and individual patient within the group. To date, G-IPT has been used for several diseases (Eating Disorders not Otherwise Specified, Bulimia Nervosa, Depressive Disorder, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder) and several populations (Adolescents, Older People, Pregnant Women or "New-Mothers," Substance-abusing Female Prisoners). Although the overall quality of most of outcome studies is to date quite poor, the review of the current state of knowledge shows the G-IPT may be helpful and present a number of advantages to treat different psychiatric disorders in several populations of patients.

A systematic review on the effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder

OBJECTIVE

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is the most common psychotherapy approach for the treatment of PTSD. Nevertheless, previous reviews on the efficacy of several types of psychotherapy were unable to detect differences between CBT and other psychotherapies. The purpose of this study was to conduct systematic review on the efficacy ofCBT in comparison with studies that used other psychotherapy techniques.

METHOD

Databases were searched using the following terms: posttraumatic stress disorder/stress disorder, treatment/psychotherapy/behavior cognitive therapy, randomized trials, and adults. Randomized clinical trials published between 1980 and 2005 and that compared CBT with other treatments for PTSD was included. The main outcomes were remission, clinical improvement, dropout rates and changes in symptoms.

RESULTS

The 23 clinical trials included in the review comprised 1923 patients: 898 in the treatment group and 1,025 in the control group. CBT had better remission rates than EMDR (RR = 0.35; 95% CI: 0.16; 0.79; p = 0.01) or supportive therapies (RR = 0.43; 95% CI: 0.25; 0.74; p = 0.002, completer analysis). CBT was comparable to Exposure Therapy (ET) (RR = 0.90; 95% CI: 0.58; 1.40; p = 0.64), and cognitive therapy (CT) (RR = 1.01; 95% CI: 0.67; 1.51; p = 0.98) in terms of efficacy and compliance.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that specific therapies, such as CBT, exposure therapy and cognitive therapy are equally effective, and more effective than supportive techniques in the treatment of PTSD.

Predicting the outcome of antidepressants and psychotherapy for depression: a qualitative, systematic review

As treatment outcome in depression varies widely, it is important to understand better the predictive value of particular patient characteristics. However, qualitative systematic reviews of the association between easily identifiable patient characteristics and outcome for commonly used treatment options have been unavailable. This article provides an overview of the consistency of findings on the association between sociodemographic factors and depression characteristics, on the one hand, and outcomes of pharmacotherapy, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and interpersonal/psychodynamic psychotherapy for major depression, on the other. There were no findings indicating that gender was associated with treatment outcome in the case of tricyclic antidepressants. There are some indications that younger patients respond worse to tricyclics, whereas especially women appeared to have better outcomes with modern antidepressants (selective serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors). Marital status may be related to better outcome in the case of antidepressants and cognitive-behavioral therapy. Longer duration of depression was identified as a negative predictor, most consistently in psychotherapy. In none of the treatment modalities was recurrence a negative predictor. The relation between severity of depression and outcome appeared to be complex, precluding any straightforward inferences.

How should mood disorders be modelled?

Classification of any mental disorder is likely to have clinical utility only if it is based on a valid underlying model. The depressive disorders have long provoked debates as to whether a categorical or a dimensional model is all explanatory. This paper will argue that no single (categorical or dimensional) model is likely to be valid, and that a mix of models is required to classify, diagnose and shape management decisions for the mood disorders. After reviewing limitations to the dimensionally based official classificatory systems (DSM-IV and ICD-10), and noting some of the consequences, a set of alternative strategies is outlined. In essence, identifying syndromal 'fuzzy sets' from phenotypic and aetiological clustering, a model that occurs in the rest of medicine.

Efficacy of Interpersonal Psychotherapy plus pharmacotherapy in chronically depressed inpatients

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines recommend the combination of pharmaco- and psychotherapy for the treatment of chronic depression, although there are only a few studies supporting an additive effect of psychotherapy.

METHODS

Forty-five inpatients with a chronic Major Depressive Disorder were randomized to 5 weeks of either Interpersonal Psychotherapy (IPT) modified for an inpatient setting (15 individual and 8 group sessions) plus pharmacotherapy or to medication plus Clinical Management (CM). The 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression was the primary outcome measure. The study included a prospective naturalistic follow-up, 3- and 12-months after discharge.

RESULTS

Intent-to-treat analyses revealed a significantly greater reduction of depressive symptoms as well as better global functioning of patients treated with IPT compared to the CM group at week 5. Response and sustained response rates differed significantly between the two treatment conditions, favouring the IPT group. Remission rates were considerably higher for IPT patients who completed the treatment (67% vs. 32%). Patients who initially responded to IPT exhibited greater treatment gains at 12 months since only 7% of these subjects relapsed compared with 25% of the CM subjects. In the long-term, additional IPT led to a lower symptom level and higher global functioning.

LIMITATIONS

The study uses data of a subset of patients from a larger trial. Both treatment groups did not receive comparable amounts of therapeutic attention. Extrapolating the data from this inpatient study to chronically depressed outpatients may not be possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive combined treatment provides superior acute and long-term effects over standard treatment in chronically depressed inpatients.

Depressive Störungen

Das Spektrum depressiver Erkrankungen macht den Hauptteil affektiver Störungen aus und gehört mit einer Inzidenz von ca. 8–20% zu den häufigsten psychischen Erkrankungen. Depressionen werden nach wie vor zu selten einer adäquaten Therapie (Antidepressiva, störungsspezifische Psychotherapie wie z. B. kognitive Verhaltenstherapie) zugeführt.

Is depression overdiagnosed? Yes

Rates of diagnosis of depression have risen steeply in recent years. Gordon Parker believes this is because current criteria are medicalising sadness, but Ian Hickie argues that many people are still missing out on lifesaving treatment

Treating depression with the evidence-based psychotherapies: a critique of the evidence

OBJECTIVE

While Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) and Interpersonal Therapy (IPT) have been positioned as first-line evidence-based treatments for depression, we suggest that limitations to the 'evidence' deserve wider appreciation.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was undertaken, and limitations to the evidence base discussed.

RESULTS

The review suggests that the specificity of CBT and IPT treatments for depression has yet to be demonstrated and details likely reasons.

CONCLUSION

The superiority of CBT and IPT may well be able to be demonstrated across defined rather than universal circumstances. To achieve this aim, outcome research should move away from testing treatments as if they have universal application for heterogeneous disorder categories. Findings have distinct implications for the clinical management of depressive disorders, and particularly in relation to the utility of psychotherapy.