Inpatient psychotherapy for depression in a large routine clinical care sample: A Bayesian approach to examining clinical outcomes and predictors of change

What if we wait? Using synthetic waiting lists to estimate treatment effects in routine outcome data

Objective: Due to the lack of randomization, pre-post routine outcome data precludes causal conclusions. We propose the "synthetic waiting list" (SWL) control group to overcome this limitation.

Method: First, a step-by-step introduction illustrates this novel approach. Then, this approach is demonstrated using an empirical example with data from an outpatient cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) clinic (N = 139). We trained an ensemble machine learning model ("Super Learner") on a data set of patients waiting for treatment (N = 311) to make counterfactual predictions of symptom change during this hypothetical period.

Results: The between-group treatment effect was estimated to be d = 0.42. Of the patients who received CBT, 43.88% achieved reliable and clinically significant change, while this probability was estimated to be 14.54% in the SWL group. Counterfactual estimates suggest a clear net benefit of psychotherapy for 41% of patients. In 32%, the benefit was unclear, and 27% would have improved similarly without receiving CBT.

Conclusions: The SWL is a viable new approach that provides between-group outcome estimates similar to those reported in the literature comparing psychotherapy with high-intensity control interventions. It holds the potential to mitigate common limitations of routine outcome data analysis.

[Inpatient psychotherapy of depressive disorders: options and challenges]

BACKGROUND

The psychotherapy of depressive disorders has become established as a central component of inpatient treatment in psychiatric and psychosomatic hospitals and furthermore constitutes an important component of the residency training in Germany; however, the number of studies examining the effectiveness and efficacy is limited.

METHODS

This narrative review summarizes the current state of research on inpatient psychotherapy for depressive disorders. The results of meta-analyses as well as practice-based observational studies from routine treatment in Germany, disorder-specific special programs, and side effects of inpatient psychotherapy are summarized.

RESULTS

The number of studies on the efficacy of inpatient psychotherapy of depressive disorders is overall low. The main finding of the largest recent meta-analysis indicates that psychotherapy in clinics and other facilities has a significant effect on depressive symptoms, with small to moderate effect sizes in randomized controlled studies. The effects are mostly maintained even after 9-15 months follow-up. An observational study from routine treatment with a very large sample size reported large pre-post and pre-follow-up effect sizes. It additionally revealed factors that appear to be difficult to change during inpatient psychotherapy, negatively affect treatment success and could be specifically addressed in future trials. Special programs, such as inpatient Interpersonal Psychotherapy (IPT) and the inpatient Cognitive Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy (CBASP) indicate acceptance and efficacy/effectiveness in an initial randomized controlled (IPT) study and in observational (CBASP) studies. Side effects of inpatient psychotherapy were reported by 60-94% of patients with depressive disorders, whereby a perceived dependence on the therapist or the therapeutic setting was identified as a frequent side effect.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the results of the narrative review reveal that inpatient psychotherapy appears to be meaningful and effective for many patients with depressive disorders. Specific side effects, cost-effectiveness, and the question of differential indications (what works for whom?) should be further investigated.

Praxisorientierte Forschung in der Psychotherapie

Zusammenfassung. In den letzten Jahrzehnten hat sich durch randomisiert-kontrollierte Studien (RCTs) eine breite Evidenzbasis von Psychotherapie mit mittleren bis großen Effekten für verschiedene psychische Störungen gebildet. Neben der Bestimmung dieser Wirksamkeit („Efficacy“) ebneten Studien zur Wirksamkeit unter alltäglichen Routinebedingungen („Effectiveness“) historisch den Weg zur Entwicklung eines praxisorientierten Forschungsparadigmas. Im Beitrag wird argumentiert, dass im Rahmen dieses Paradigmas praxisbasierte Studien eine wertvolle Ergänzung zu RCTs darstellen, da sie existierende Probleme in der Psychotherapieforschung adressieren können. In der gegenwärtigen praxisorientierten Forschung liefern dabei neue Ansätze aus der personalisierten Medizin und Methoden aus der ‚Computational Psychiatry‘ wichtige Anhaltspunkte zur Optimierung von Effekten in der Psychotherapie. Im Kontext der Personalisierung werden bspw. klinische multivariable Prädiktionsmodelle entwickelt, welche durch Rückmeldeschleifen an Praktiker_innen kurzfristig ein evidenzbasiertes Outcome-Monitoring ermöglicht und langfristig das Praxis-Forschungsnetzwerk in Deutschland stärkt. Am Ende des Beitrags werden zukünftige Richtungen für die praxisorientierte Forschung im Sinne des ‘Precision Mental Health Care’ -Paradigmas abgeleitet und diskutiert.