A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of psychodynamic counselling for general practice patients with chronic depression

Mental Health Outcomes of Psychosocial Intervention Among Traditional Health Practitioner Depressed Patients in Kenya

Task-shifting in mental health such as engaging Traditional Health Practitioners (THPs) in appropriate management of mental disorders is crucial in reducing global mental health challenges. This study aims to determine the outcomes of using evidence-based mental health Global Action Programme Intervention guide (mhGAP-IG) to provide psychosocial interventions among depressed patients seeking care from THPs. THPs were trained to deliver psychosocial interventions to their patients screening positive for mild to severe depression on Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI). Assessments were conducted at 0, 6 and 12 weeks and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) performed to determine the change in depression scores over the three time period. BDI mean score was 26.52 before intervention and reduced significantly at 6 (13%) and 12 (35%) weeks after intervention. 58 and 78% of patients showed reduction in symptoms of depression at 6 and 12 weeks. It is therefore crucial to engage THPs in the care of patients with depression and the need for inclusion of training packages; and other mental disorders in order to establish and maintain collaboration between THPs and conventional health workers and promote evidence-based care among marginalized populations. Moreover, further research on randomized control trials of mhGAP-IG intervention versus usual care is required.

Improving the analysis of routine outcome measurement data: what a Bayesian approach can do for you

Since recent decades, clinicians offering interventions against mental problems must systematically collect data on how clients change over time. Since these data typically contain measurement error, statistical tests have been developed which should disentangle true changes from random error. These statistical tests can be subdivided into two types: classical tests and Bayesian tests. Over the past, there has been much confusion among analysts regarding the questions that are answered by each of these tests. In this paper we discuss each type of test in detail and explain which questions are, and which are not, answered by each of the types of tests. We then apply a test of each type on an empirical data set and compare the results. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

THE LONG-TERM EFFICACY OF ACUTE-PHASE PSYCHOTHERAPY FOR DEPRESSION: A META-ANALYSIS OF RANDOMIZED TRIALS

BACKGROUND

Understanding the effectiveness of treatment for depression in both the short term and long term is essential for clinical decision making. The present meta-analysis examined treatment effects on depression and quality of life in acute-phase psychotherapeutic interventions compared to no treatment control groups for adult depression at 6 months or longer postrandomization.

METHODS

A systematic literature search resulted in 44 randomized controlled trials with 6,096 participants. Acute-phase psychotherapy was compared to control groups at 6-month or longer postrandomization. Odds ratios of a positive outcome were calculated.

RESULTS

Psychotherapy outperformed control groups at 6 months or longer postrandomization (OR = 1.92, 95% CI: 1.60-2.31, P < .001). Heterogeneity was moderate (I²: 65, 95% CI: 53-74, P < .001). However, effects significantly decreased with longer follow-up periods. Additionally, a small positive effect of psychotherapy was observed for quality of life, while similar effects were obtained in separate analyses of each type of psychotherapy, with the exception of nondirective supportive therapy. Studies that provided booster sessions had better treatment results compared with studies that did not provide any further sessions. Finally, we found that trials on psychotherapy aimed at major depressive disorder (MDD) had better outcomes than those that were aimed at elevated depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial evidence that acute-phase psychotherapy results in a better treatment effects on depression and quality of life in the long term for adult patients with depression.

The effectiveness of psychodynamic psychotherapies: An update

This paper provides a comprehensive review of outcome studies and meta-analyses of effectiveness studies of psychodynamic therapy (PDT) for the major categories of mental disorders. Comparisons with inactive controls (waitlist, treatment as usual and placebo) generally but by no means invariably show PDT to be effective for depression, some anxiety disorders, eating disorders and somatic disorders. There is little evidence to support its implementation for post-traumatic stress disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, bulimia nervosa, cocaine dependence or psychosis. The strongest current evidence base supports relatively long-term psychodynamic treatment of some personality disorders, particularly borderline personality disorder. Comparisons with active treatments rarely identify PDT as superior to control interventions and studies are generally not appropriately designed to provide tests of statistical equivalence. Studies that demonstrate inferiority of PDT to alternatives exist, but are small in number and often questionable in design. Reviews of the field appear to be subject to allegiance effects. The present review recommends abandoning the inherently conservative strategy of comparing heterogeneous "families" of therapies for heterogeneous diagnostic groups. Instead, it advocates using the opportunities provided by bioscience and computational psychiatry to creatively explore and assess the value of protocol-directed combinations of specific treatment components to address the key problems of individual patients.

Establishment of community mental health systems in a postdeinstitutional era: a study of organizational structures and service provision in Sweden

This article analyzes the state of community mental health services for people with psychiatric disabilities and the interplay between different organizational levels. The study is based on document analysis and interviews with stakeholders in 10 Swedish municipalities. The results show how systems are slow to change and are linked to local traditions. The services are often delivered in closed settings, and the organizations struggle to meet the needs of a new generation of users. There is a gap between local systems and national policies because the latter pays attention to the attributes of a recovery approach.

The effect of psychotherapy for depression on improvements in social functioning: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with depression often report impairments in social functioning. From a patient perspective, improvements in social functioning might be an important outcome in psychotherapy for depression. Therefore, it is important to examine the effects of psychotherapy on social functioning in patients with depression.

METHOD

We conducted a meta-analysis on studies of psychotherapy for depression that reported results for social functioning at post-treatment. Only studies that compared psychotherapy to a control condition were included (31 studies with 2956 patients).

RESULTS

The effect size of psychotherapy on social functioning was small to moderate, before [Hedges' g = 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-0.60] and after adjusting for publication bias (g = 0.40, 95% CI 0.25-0.55). Univariate moderator analyses revealed that studies using care as usual as a control group versus other control groups yielded lower effect sizes, whereas studies conducted in the USA versus other countries and studies that used clinician-rated instruments versus self-report yielded higher effect sizes. Higher quality studies yielded lower effect sizes whereas the number of treatment sessions and the effect size of depressive symptoms were positively related to the effect size of social functioning. When controlling for these and additional characteristics simultaneously in multivariate meta-regression, the effect size of depressive symptoms, treatment format and number of sessions were significant predictors. The effect size of social functioning remained marginally significant, indicating that improvements in social functioning are not fully explained by improvements in depressive symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychotherapy for depression results in small to moderate improvements in social functioning. These improvements are strongly associated with, but not fully explained by, improvements in depressive symptoms.

Short-term psychodynamic psychotherapies for common mental disorders

BACKGROUND

Since the mid-1970s, short-term psychodynamic psychotherapies (STPP) for a broad range of psychological and somatic disorders have been developed and studied. Early published meta-analyses of STPP, using different methods and samples, have yielded conflicting results, although some meta-analyses have consistently supported an empirical basis for STPP. This is an update of a review that was last updated in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of STPP for adults with common mental disorders compared with wait-list controls, treatments as usual and minimal contact controls in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). To specify the differential effects of STPP for people with different disorders (e.g. depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, somatoform disorders, mixed disorders and personality disorder) and treatment characteristics (e.g. manualised versus non-manualised therapies).

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR) was searched to February 2014, this register includes relevant randomised controlled trials from The Cochrane Library (all years), EMBASE (1974-), MEDLINE (1950-) and PsycINFO (1967-). We also conducted searches on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, DARE and Biological Abstracts (all years to July 2012) and all relevant studies (identified to 2012) were fully incorporated in this review update. We checked references from papers retrieved. We contacted a large group of psychodynamic researchers in an attempt to find new studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all RCTs of adults with common mental disorders, in which a brief psychodynamic therapy lasting 40 or fewer hours in total was provided in individual format.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Eight review authors working in pairs evaluated studies. We selected studies only if pairs of review authors agreed that the studies met inclusion criteria. We consulted a third review author if two review authors could not reach consensus. Two review authors collected data and entered it into Review Manager software. Two review authors assessed and scored risk of bias. We assessed publication bias using a funnel plot. Two review authors conducted and reviewed subgroup analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 studies of STPP involving 2173 randomised participants with common mental disorders. Studies were of diverse conditions in which problems with emotional regulation were purported to play a causative role albeit through a range of symptom presentations. These studies evaluated STPP for this review's primary outcomes (general, somatic, anxiety and depressive symptom reduction), as well as interpersonal problems and social adjustment. Except for somatic measures in the short-term, all outcome categories suggested significantly greater improvement in the treatment versus the control groups in the short-term and medium-term. Effect sizes increased in long-term follow-up, but some of these effects did not reach statistical significance. A relatively small number of studies (N < 20) contributed data for the outcome categories. There was also significant heterogeneity between studies in most categories, possibly due to observed differences between manualised versus non-manualised treatments, short versus longer treatments, studies with observer-rated versus self report outcomes, and studies employing different treatment models.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There has been further study of STPP and it continues to show promise, with modest to large gains for a wide variety of people. However, given the limited data, loss of significance in some measures at long-term follow-up and heterogeneity between studies, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Furthermore, variability in treatment delivery and treatment quality may limit the reliability of estimates of effect for STPP. Larger studies of higher quality and with specific diagnoses are warranted.

How much psychotherapy is needed to treat depression? A metaregression analysis

BACKGROUND

Although psychotherapies are effective in the treatment of adult depression it is not clear how this treatment effect is related to amount, frequency and intensity of therapy.

METHODS

To fill this gap in knowledge, the present metaregression analysis examined the association between the effects of psychotherapy for adult depression and several indicators of amount, frequency and intensity of therapy. The analysis included 70 studies (92 comparisons) with 5403 patients, in which individual psychotherapy was compared with a control group (e.g. waiting list, care-as-usual).

RESULTS

There was only a small association between number of therapy sessions and effect size, and this association was no longer significant when the analysis adjusted for other characteristics of the studies. The multivariable analyses also found no significant association with the total contact time or duration of the therapy. However, there was a strong association between number of sessions per week and effect size. An increase from one to two sessions per week increased the effect size with g=0.45, while keeping the total number of treatment sessions constant.

DISCUSSION

More research is needed to establish the robustness of this finding. Based on these findings, it may be advisable to concentrate psychotherapy sessions within a brief time frame.

Comparative efficacy of seven psychotherapeutic interventions for patients with depression: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous meta-analyses comparing the efficacy of psychotherapeutic interventions for depression were clouded by a limited number of within-study treatment comparisons. This study used network meta-analysis, a novel methodological approach that integrates direct and indirect evidence from randomised controlled studies, to re-examine the comparative efficacy of seven psychotherapeutic interventions for adult depression.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We conducted systematic literature searches in PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase up to November 2012, and identified additional studies through earlier meta-analyses and the references of included studies. We identified 198 studies, including 15,118 adult patients with depression, and coded moderator variables. Each of the seven psychotherapeutic interventions was superior to a waitlist control condition with moderate to large effects (range d = -0.62 to d = -0.92). Relative effects of different psychotherapeutic interventions on depressive symptoms were absent to small (range d = 0.01 to d = -0.30). Interpersonal therapy was significantly more effective than supportive therapy (d = -0.30, 95% credibility interval [CrI] [-0.54 to -0.05]). Moderator analysis showed that patient characteristics had no influence on treatment effects, but identified aspects of study quality and sample size as effect modifiers. Smaller effects were found in studies of at least moderate (Δd = 0.29 [-0.01 to 0.58]; p = 0.063) and large size (Δd = 0.33 [0.08 to 0.61]; p = 0.012) and those that had adequate outcome assessment (Δd = 0.38 [-0.06 to 0.87]; p = 0.100). Stepwise restriction of analyses by sample size showed robust effects for cognitive-behavioural therapy, interpersonal therapy, and problem-solving therapy (all d>0.46) compared to waitlist. Empirical evidence from large studies was unavailable or limited for other psychotherapeutic interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall our results are consistent with the notion that different psychotherapeutic interventions for depression have comparable benefits. However, the robustness of the evidence varies considerably between different psychotherapeutic treatments.

[The efficacy of psychodynamic therapy: a controversy]

There is growing evidence from randomized controlled trials supporting the efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy (PDT) in specific mental disorders. Yet the evidence for the efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy has not gone unchallenged. Several responses have addressed these concerns, showing that most of the criticism was not justified. Nevertheless, the evidence for psychodynamic psychotherapy continues to be frequently ignored, criticized or presented in a distorted way. A recent controversy published in the Nervenarzt may serve as an illustrative example, which is discussed here more in detail. This example shows that some authors are not interested in a truly scientific discussion, but rather try to discredit a rival method of psychotherapy and its scientific representatives for political reasons.

[Integral Care Guide for Early Detection and Diagnosis of Depressive Episodes and Recurrent Depressive Disorder in Adults. Integral Attention of Adults with a Diagnosis of Depressive Episodes and Recurrent Depressive Disorder: Part II: General Aspects of Treatment, Management of the Acute Phase, Continuation and Maintenance of Patients with a Depression Diagnosis]

INTRODUCTION

This article presents recommendations based on evidence gathered to answer a series of clinical questions concerning the depressive episode and the recurrent depressive disorder, with emphasis on general treatment aspects, treatment in the acute phase and management of the continuation/maintenance, all intended to grant health care parameters based on the best and more updated available evidence for achieving minimum quality standards with adult patients thus diagnosed.

METHODOLOGY

A practical clinical guide was elaborated according to standards of the Methodological Guide of the Ministry of Social Protection. Recommendation from NICE90 and CANMAT guides were adopted and updated so as to answer the questions posed while de novo questions were developed.

RESULTS

Recommendations 5-22 corresponding to management of depression are presented.

The effect of adding psychodynamic therapy to antidepressants in patients with major depressive disorder. A systematic review of randomized clinical trials with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder afflicts an estimated 17% of individuals during their lifetimes at tremendous suffering and costs. Psychodynamic therapy may be a treatment option for depression, but the effects have only been limitedly assessed in systematic reviews.

METHOD

Using Cochrane systematic review methodology, we compared the benefits and harms of psychodynamic therapy versus 'no intervention' or sham for major depressive disorder. We accepted any co-intervention, including antidepressants, as long as it was delivered similarly in both intervention groups. Trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Library's CENTRAL, MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, Psychlit, Psyc Info, and Science Citation Index Expanded until February 2010. Two authors independently extracted data. We evaluated risk of bias to control for systematic errors. We conducted trial sequential analysis to control for random errors.

RESULTS

We included five trials randomizing a total of 365 participants who all received antidepressants as co-intervention. All trials had high risk of bias. Four trials assessed 'interpersonal psychotherapy' and one trial 'short psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy'. Meta-analysis showed that psychodynamic therapy significantly reduced depressive symptoms on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (mean difference -3.01 (95% confidence interval -3.98 to -2.03; P<0.00001), no significant heterogeneity between trials) compared with 'no intervention'. Trial sequential analysis confirmed this result.

LIMITATIONS

Our results are based on few trials with high risk of bias and a limited number of participants so our results may be questionable.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding psychodynamic therapy to antidepressants might benefit depressed patients, but the possible treatment effect measured on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression is small.

Counselling for mental health and psychosocial problems in primary care

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of mental health and psychosocial problems in primary care is high. Counselling is a potential treatment for these patients, but there is a lack of consensus over the effectiveness of this treatment in primary care.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of counselling for patients with mental health and psychosocial problems in primary care.

SEARCH STRATEGY

To update the review, the following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis (CCDAN) trials registers (to December 2010), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (to May 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of counselling for mental health and psychosocial problems in primary care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted using a standardised data extraction sheet by two reviewers. Trials were rated for quality by two reviewers using Cochrane risk of bias criteria, to assess the extent to which their design and conduct were likely to have prevented systematic error. Continuous measures of outcome were combined using standardised mean differences. An overall effect size was calculated for each outcome with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Continuous data from different measuring instruments were transformed into a standard effect size by dividing mean values by standard deviations. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken to test the robustness of the results. Economic analyses were summarised in narrative form. There was no assessment of adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials were included in the review, involving 1384 randomised participants. Studies varied in risk of bias, although two studies were identified as being at high risk of selection bias because of problems with concealment of allocation. All studies were from primary care in the United Kingdom and thus comparability was high. The analysis found significantly greater clinical effectiveness in the counselling group compared with usual care in terms of mental health outcomes in the short-term (standardised mean difference -0.28, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.13, n = 772, 6 trials) but not in the long-term (standardised mean difference -0.09, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.10, n = 475, 4 trials), nor on measures of social function (standardised mean difference -0.09, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.11, n = 386, 3 trials). Levels of satisfaction with counselling were high. There was some evidence that the overall costs of counselling and usual care were similar. There were limited comparisons between counselling and other psychological therapies, medication, or other psychosocial interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Counselling is associated with significantly greater clinical effectiveness in short-term mental health outcomes compared to usual care, but provides no additional advantages in the long-term. Participants were satisfied with counselling. Although some types of health care utilisation may be reduced, counselling does not seem to reduce overall healthcare costs. The generalisability of these findings to settings outside the United Kingdom is unclear.

Do productivity costs matter?: the impact of including productivity costs on the incremental costs of interventions targeted at depressive disorders

BACKGROUND

When guidelines for health economic evaluations prescribe that a societal perspective should be adopted, productivity costs should be included. However, previous research suggests that, in practice, productivity costs are often neglected. This may considerably bias the results of cost-effectiveness studies, particularly those regarding treatments targeted at diseases with a high incidence rate in the working population, such as depressive disorders.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to, first, investigate whether economic evaluations of treatments for depressive disorders include productivity costs and, if so, how. Second, to investigate how the inclusion or exclusion of productivity costs affects incremental costs.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed. Included articles were reviewed to determine (i) whether productivity costs had been included and (ii) whether the studies adhered to national health economic guidelines about the inclusion or exclusion of these costs. For those studies that did include productivity costs, we calculated what proportion of total costs were productivity costs. Subsequently, the incremental costs, excluding productivity costs, were calculated and compared with the incremental costs presented in the original article, to analyse the impact of productivity costs on final results. Regression analyses were used to investigate the relationship between the level of productivity costs and the type of depressive disorder, the type of treatment and study characteristics such as time horizon used and productivity cost valuation method.

RESULTS

A total of 81 unique economic evaluations of treatments for adults with depressive disorders were identified, 24 of which included productivity costs in the numerator and one in the denominator. Approximately 69% of the economic evaluations ignored productivity costs. Two-thirds of the studies complied with national guidelines regarding the inclusion of productivity costs. For the studies that included productivity costs, these costs reflected an average of 60% of total costs per treatment arm. The inclusion or exclusion of productivity costs substantially affected incremental costs in a number of studies. Regression analyses showed that the level of productivity costs was significantly associated with study characteristics such as average age, the methods of data collection regarding work time lost, the values attached to lost work time, the type of depressive disorder, the type of treatment provided and the level of direct costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies that do not include productivity costs may, in many cases, poorly reflect full societal costs (or savings) of an intervention. Furthermore, when comparing total costs reported in studies that include productivity costs, it should be noted that study characteristics such as the methods used to assess productivity costs may affect their level.

Examination of the utility of psychotherapy for patients with treatment resistant depression: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To examine the utility of psychotherapy in managing treatment resistant depression.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, PsycInfo, Embase, Cochrane Registry of Controlled Clinical Trials, article bibliographies.

REVIEW METHODS

Eligible articles had to be in English and include English-speaking adult outpatients from general medical or mental health clinics. Studies had to be randomized clinical trials (RCT) involving at least one of the following psychotherapy modalities: cognitive therapy, interpersonal therapy, or behavior therapy. Patients were considered treatment resistant if they reported partial or no remission following treatment with an adequate antidepressant dose for ≥ 6 weeks. Exclusion criteria included receiving psychotherapy at the time of recruitment, and/or comorbid psychiatric conditions unlikely to be treated outside of specialized mental health care (e.g., severe substance abuse). Due to heterogeneity in study designs, a summary estimate of effect was not calculated. Studies were critically analyzed and a qualitative synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

Of 941 original titles, 13 articles evaluating 7 unique treatment comparisons were included. Psychotherapy was examined as an augmentation to antidepressants in five studies and as substitution treatment in two studies. A total of 592 patients were evaluated (Mean age ~40 y; Females = 50-85%; Caucasians ≥ 75%). The STAR*D trial used an equipoise stratified randomization design; the remaining studies were RCTs. Compared to active management, two good quality trials showed similar benefit from augmenting antidepressants with psychotherapy; one fair quality and one poor quality trial showed benefit from psychotherapy augmentation; and one good and one poor trial found similar benefit from substituting psychotherapy for antidepressants. One fair quality trial showed lithium augmentation to be more beneficial than psychotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Review demonstrates the utility of psychotherapy in managing treatment resistant depression. However, evidence is sparse and results are mixed. Given that quality trials are lacking, rigorous clinical trials are recommended to guide practice. In the interim, primary care providers should consider psychotherapy when treating patients with treatment resistant depression.

Depression: major problem for public health

The aim of this Editorial is to discuss depression as an important disorder for public health. The literature regarding epidemiology, consequences, adequacy of service delivery and prevention of depression is reviewed. Depression is a common disorder with high lifetime rates, particularly in women, and those experiencing social adversity. It is a major cause of disability, and causes death both by suicide and due to raised rates of physical disorders. Many cases are undiagnosed and treatment is often inadequate. Primary prevention is not yet easily feasible but secondary prevention by earlier recognition, public and professional education, can produce benefits. There is a need for public health programmes aimed at improving recognition, treatment, and reducing consequences.

The effect of interpersonal psychotherapy and other psychodynamic therapies versus 'treatment as usual' in patients with major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder afflicts an estimated 17% of individuals during their lifetimes at tremendous suffering and costs. Interpersonal psychotherapy and other psychodynamic therapies may be effective interventions for major depressive disorder, but the effects have only had limited assessment in systematic reviews.

METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Cochrane systematic review methodology with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized trials comparing the effect of psychodynamic therapies versus 'treatment as usual' for major depressive disorder. To be included the participants had to be older than 17 years with a primary diagnosis of major depressive disorder. Altogether, we included six trials randomizing a total of 648 participants. Five trials assessed 'interpersonal psychotherapy' and only one trial assessed 'psychodynamic psychotherapy'. All six trials had high risk of bias. Meta-analysis on all six trials showed that the psychodynamic interventions significantly reduced depressive symptoms on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (mean difference -3.12 (95% confidence interval -4.39 to -1.86;P<0.00001), no heterogeneity) compared with 'treatment as usual'. Trial sequential analysis confirmed this result.

DISCUSSION

We did not find convincing evidence supporting or refuting the effect of interpersonal psychotherapy or psychodynamic therapy compared with 'treatment as usual' for patients with major depressive disorder. The potential beneficial effect seems small and effects on major outcomes are unknown. Randomized trials with low risk of systematic errors and low risk of random errors are needed.

Meaningful lives: elders in treatment for depression

Depression among elderly persons is common. Major depression is disabling, highly prevalent, and adversely affects daily function and quality of life. Although studies have demonstrated that interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) and medication can relieve the symptoms of depression, many elders do not seek treatment. Of those elders who do participate in treatment experience, 20% to 50% do not experience partial or full relief from depressive symptoms. Improvements in treatment strategies are needed to better serve this population. In this study, 20 elders in treatment for depression with IPT and medication were interviewed to better understand their day-to-day lives. These interviews provided insights and perspectives to inform clinical practice and improve treatment strategies. The major themes identified were independence, spirituality, family, depression, medical comorbidities, and motivation. Potential treatment strategies were derived from these themes.

Continuous and dichotomous outcomes in studies of psychotherapy for adult depression: a meta-analytic comparison

BACKGROUND

In treatment research on depressive disorders, outcomes can be based on continuous outcomes but also on dichotomous outcomes. Although it is possible to convert the two types of outcomes to each other, it has not been tested whether this results in systematic differences.

METHOD

We selected studies on psychotherapy for adult depression from an existing database, in which both continuous and dichotomous outcomes were presented. We calculated effect sizes using both types of outcomes, and compared the results.

RESULTS

Although there were considerable differences between the two types of outcomes in individual studies, both types of outcomes resulted in very similar pooled effect sizes. The pooled effect size based on the continuous outcome were somewhat more conservative (d=0.59; OR=2.92) than the one based on the dichotomous outcome (d=0.64; OR=3.17). Heterogeneity was higher in the analyses based on the continuous outcomes than in those based on the dichotomous outcomes. Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses confirmed that the pooled effect sizes were very similar, that the effect sizes were somewhat smaller when the continuous outcomes are used, and that heterogeneity was higher in the analyses based on the continuous outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the two types of outcomes result in comparable pooled effect sizes and can both be used in meta-analyses. However, the results of the two types of outcomes should not be used interchangeably, because there may be systematic differences in heterogeneity and subgroup analyses.

Brief psychological therapies for anxiety and depression in primary care: meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

Psychological therapies provided in primary care are usually briefer than in secondary care. There has been no recent comprehensive review comparing their effectiveness for common mental health problems. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of different types of brief psychological therapy administered within primary care across and between anxiety, depressive and mixed disorders.

METHODS

Meta-analysis and meta-regression of randomized controlled trials of brief psychological therapies of adult patients with anxiety, depression or mixed common mental health problems treated in primary care compared to primary care treatment as usual.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies, involving 3962 patients, were included. Most were of brief cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT; n = 13), counselling (n = 8) or problem solving therapy (PST; n = 12). There was differential effectiveness between studies of CBT, with studies of CBT for anxiety disorders having a pooled effect size [d -1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.31 to -0.80] greater than that of studies of CBT for depression (d -0.33, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.06) or studies of CBT for mixed anxiety and depression (d -0.26, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.08). Counselling for depression and mixed anxiety and depression (d -0.32, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.11) and problem solving therapy (PST) for depression and mixed anxiety and depression (d -0.21, 95% CI -0.37 to -0.05) were also effective. Controlling for diagnosis, meta-regression found no difference between CBT, counselling and PST.

CONCLUSIONS

Brief CBT, counselling and PST are all effective treatments in primary care, but effect sizes are low compared to longer length treatments. The exception is brief CBT for anxiety, which has comparable effect sizes.

Psychological treatment of depression in primary care: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although most depressive disorders are treated in primary care and several studies have examined the effects of psychological treatment in primary care, hardly any meta-analytic research has been conducted in which the results of these studies are integrated.

AIM

To integrate the results of randomised controlled trials of psychological treatment of depression in adults in primary care, and to compare these results to psychological treatments in other settings.

DESIGN OF STUDY

A meta-analysis of studies examining the effects of psychological treatments of adult depression in primary care.

SETTING

Primary care.

METHOD

An existing database of studies on psychological treatments of adult depression that was built on systematic searches in PubMed, PsychINFO, EMBASE, and Dissertation Abstracts International was used. Randomised trials were included in which the effects of psychological treatments on adult primary care patients with depression were compared to a control condition.

RESULTS

In the 15 included studies, the standardised mean effect size of psychological treatment versus control groups was 0.31 (95% CI = 0.17 to 0.45), which corresponds with a numbers-needed-to-treat (NNT) of 5.75. Studies in which patients were referred by their GP for treatment had significantly higher effect sizes (d = 0.43; NNT = 4.20) than studies in which patients were recruited through systematic screening (d = 0.13, not significantly different from zero; NNT = 13.51).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the number of studies was relatively low and the quality varied, psychological treatment of depression was found to be effective in primary care, especially when GPs refer patients with depression for treatment.

Characteristics of effective psychological treatments of depression: a metaregression analysis

Although many meta-analyses have shown that psychological therapies are effective in the treatment of depression, no comprehensive metaregression analysis has been conducted to examine which characteristics of the intervention, target population, and study design are related to the effects. The authors conducted such a metaregression analysis with 83 studies (135 comparisons) in which a psychological treatment was compared with a control condition. The mean effect size of all comparisons was 0.69 (95% confidence interval = 0.60-0.79). In multivariate analyses, several variables were significant: Studies using problem-solving interventions and those aimed at women with postpartum depression or specific populations had higher effect sizes, whereas studies with students as therapists, those in which participants were recruited from clinical populations and through systematic screening, and those using care-as-usual or placebo control groups had lower effect sizes.

On-site mental health workers delivering psychological therapy and psychosocial interventions to patients in primary care: effects on the professional practice of primary care providers

BACKGROUND

Mental health problems are common in primary care and mental health workers (MHWs) are increasingly working in this setting delivering psychological therapy and psychosocial interventions to patients. In addition to treating patients directly, the introduction of on-site MHWs represents an organisational change that may lead to changes in the clinical behaviour of primary care providers (PCPs).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of on-site MHWs delivering psychological therapy and psychosocial interventions in primary care on the clinical behaviour of primary care providers (PCPs).

SEARCH STRATEGY

The following sources were searched in 1998: the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CounselLit, NPCRDC skill-mix in primary care bibliography, and reference lists of articles. Additional searches were conducted in February 2007 using the following sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials, controlled before and after studies, and interrupted time series analyses of MHWs working alongside PCPs in primary care settings. The outcomes included objective measures of PCP behaviours such as consultation rates, prescribing, and referral.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed study quality.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-two studies were included in the review. There was evidence that MHWs caused significant reductions in PCP consultations (standardised mean difference -0.17, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.05), psychotropic prescribing (relative risk 0.67, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.79), prescribing costs (standardised mean difference -0.22, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.07), and rates of mental health referral (relative risk 0.13, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.20) for the patients they were seeing. In controlled before and after studies, the addition of MHWs to a practice did not affect prescribing behaviour towards the wider practice population and there was no consistent pattern to the impact on referrals in the wider patient population.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides some evidence that MHWs working in primary care to deliver psychological therapy and psychosocial interventions cause a significant reduction in PCP behaviours such as consultations, prescribing, and referrals to specialist care. However, the changes are modest in magnitude, inconsistent, do not generalise to the wider patient population, and their clinical or economic significance is unclear.

Non-pharmacological treatment of psychiatrists in addition to the prescribing of an antidepressant drug

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for the treatment of depression regularly emphasize that pharmacotherapy of depression should be accompanied by supportive counseling and other psychotherapeutic interventions. It is unknown which role psychiatrists in routine care give to such verbal therapies.

METHODS

In a drug utilization study of venlafaxine, psychiatrists in private practice and in hospitals were asked to tell what non-pharmacological therapies they saw as an important part of the treatment of the present depressive episode. Additionally patient characteristics, treatment variables, setting characteristics and physician characteristics were assessed.

RESULTS

Psychiatrists reported some kind of verbal therapies in 19.0% of outpatients and 36.8% of inpatients. Verbal therapies were reported more often for younger patients, who got more double diagnoses and were more severely ill. Patients with verbal therapies got more psychotropic medication. In the inpatient setting verbal therapies were related to generally more treatment overall and a higher rate of treatment response. In both treatment settings verbal therapies were related to lower rates of discontinuation of the antidepressant.

CONCLUSION

Verbal interactions are part of any patient-physician encounter and should be theory guided as part of the therapeutic process in the treatment of depressive disorders. Under this assumption the rate of patients for which psychiatrists reported some kind of verbal therapy as explicit part of their treatment could be higher. More research is needed on patient guidance, counseling and supportive psychotherapy in psychiatry.

Psychosocial and pharmacological interventions for depressed adults in primary care: a critical review

Primary care settings are the principal context for treating clinical depression, with researchers beginning to explore the efficacy of psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for depression within this infrastructure. Feasibility and process variables also are being assessed, including issues of cost-effectiveness, viability of collaborative care models, predictors of treatment outcome, and effectiveness of treatment providers without specialized mental health training. The Agency for Health Care Policy and Research and American Psychiatric Association initially released guidelines for the treatment of depression in primary care [American Psychiatric Association, 1993. Practice Guidelines for major depressive disorder in adults. American Journal of Psychiatry, 150, 1-26., American Psychiatric Association, 2000. Practice Guideline for the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder (revision). American Journal of Psychiatry, 157, 1-45], however, a vast literature has accumulated over the past several years, calling for a systematic re-evaluation of the status of depression treatment in primary care. The present study provides a contemporary review of outcome data for psychosocial and pharmacological interventions in primary care and extends beyond AHCPR guidelines insofar as focusing on feasibility and process variables, including the training and proficiency of primary care treatment providers, cost-effectiveness of primary care interventions, and predictors of treatment response and relapse. Based on current guidelines, problem-solving therapy (PST-PC), interpersonal psychotherapy, and pharmacotherapy would be considered efficacious interventions for major depression, with cognitive-behavioral and cognitive therapy considered possibly efficacious. Psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy generally are of comparable efficacy, and both modalities are superior to usual care in treating depression. Methodological limitations and directions for future research are discussed.

Short-term psychodynamic psychotherapies for common mental disorders

BACKGROUND

Over the past 40 years, short-term psychodynamic psychotherapies (STPP) for a broad range of psychological and somatic disorders have been developed and studied. Four published meta-analyses of STPP, using different methods and samples, have found conflicting results.

OBJECTIVES

This review evaluated the efficacy of STPP relative to minimal treatment and non-treatment controls for adults with common mental disorders.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched CCDANCTR-Studies and CCDANCTR-References on 25/4/2005, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, DARE and Biological Abstracts were also searched. We contacted triallists and checked references from papers retrieved.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCT) of adults with common mental disorders, in which a brief psychodynamic therapy lasting less than 40 hours in total, and provided in individual format, were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three reviewers working in pairs evaluated studies. Studies were selected only if pairs of reviewers agreed they met inclusion criteria. A third reviewer was consulted if two reviewers could not reach consensus. Data were collected and entered into Review Manager. Study quality was assessed and scored by pairs of raters. Publication bias was assessed using a funnel plot. Sensitivity analyses were also conducted.

MAIN RESULTS

23 studies of 1431 randomised patients with common mental disorders were included. These studies evaluated STPP for general, somatic, anxiety, and depressive symptom reduction, as well as social adjustment. Outcomes for most categories of disorder suggested significantly greater improvement in the treatment versus the control groups, which were generally maintained in medium and long term follow-up. However, only a small number of studies contributed data for each category of disorder, there was significant heterogeneity between studies, and results were not always maintained in sensitivity analyses.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

STPP shows promise, with modest to moderate, often sustained gains for a variety of patients. However, given the limited data and heterogeneity between studies, these findings should be interpreted with caution. Furthermore, variability in treatment delivery and treatment quality may limit the reliability of estimates of effect for STPP. Larger studies of higher quality and with specific diagnoses are warranted.

Effectiveness and cost effectiveness of counselling in primary care

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of mental health and psychosocial problems in primary care is high. This review examines the clinical and cost-effectiveness of psychological therapies provided in primary care by counsellors.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of counselling in primary care by reviewing cost and outcome data in randomised controlled trials for patients with psychological and psychosocial problems considered suitable for counselling.

SEARCH STRATEGY

To update the review, the following electronic databases were searched on 25-10-2005: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycLIT, CINAHL, the Cochrane Controlled Trials register and the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis (CCDAN) trials registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All controlled trials comparing counselling in primary care with other treatments for patients with psychological and psychosocial problems considered suitable for counselling. Trials completed before the end of June 2005 were included in the review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted using a standardised data extraction sheet. Trials were rated for quality using CCDAN criteria, to assess the extent to which their design and conduct were likely to have prevented systematic error. Continuous measures of outcome were combined using standardised mean differences. An overall effect size was calculated for each outcome with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Continuous data from different measuring instruments were transformed into a standard effect size by dividing mean values by standard deviations. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken to test the robustness of the results. Economic analyses were summarised in narrative form.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight trials were included in the review. The analysis found significantly greater clinical effectiveness in the counselling group compared with usual care in the short-term (standardised mean difference -0.28, 95% CI -0.43 to -0.13, n = 772, 6 trials) but not the long-term (standardised mean difference -0.09, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.10, n = 475, 4 trials). Levels of satisfaction with counselling were high. There was some evidence that the overall costs of counselling and usual care were similar.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Counselling is associated with modest improvement in short-term outcome compared to usual care, but provides no additional advantages in the long-term. Patients are satisfied with counselling. Although some types of health care utilisation may be reduced, counselling does not seem to reduce overall healthcare costs.

Depression and randomized, controlled trials: problems and solutions

Research into what works in depression is in trouble. All treatments appear equally effective and what happens in research trials does not seem to translate into clinical practice or, to put it another way, clinical practice is not reflected in randomized controlled trials. We run the risk of designing cosmetic trials with no real relationship to clinical services that only serve to demonstrate that new treatments are effective in artificial settings. This article outlines possible reasons for this, which include how depression is diagnosed, how people are recruited into trials, the design of trials and how outcomes are assessed. The solutions to these problems involve changing how patients are recruited, considering other trial designs and using different outcome measures.

Cost-effectiveness of preventing depression in primary care patients: randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the cost-effectiveness of preventing mental disorders.

AIMS

To study the cost-effectiveness of care as usual plus minimal contact psychotherapy relative to usual care alone in preventing depressive disorder.

METHOD

An economic evaluation was conducted alongside a randomised clinical trial. Primary care patients with sub-threshold depression were assigned to minimal contact psychotherapy plus usual care (n=107) or to usual care alone (n=109).

RESULTS

Primary care patients with sub-threshold depression benefited from minimal contact psychotherapy as it reduced the risk of developing a full-blown depressive disorder from 18% to 12%. In addition, this intervention had a 70% probability of being more cost-effective than usual care alone. A sensitivity analysis indicated the robustness of these results.

CONCLUSIONS

Over 1 year adjunctive minimal contact psychotherapy improved outcomes and generated lower costs. This intervention is therefore superior to usual care alone in terms of cost-effectiveness.

Size and burden of depressive disorders in Europe

We review epidemiological studies of depression in Europe. Community surveys are essential. Methodological differences in survey methods, instruments, nuances in language and translation limit comparability, but consistent findings are emerging. Western European countries show 1 year prevalence of major depression of around 5%, with two-fold variation, probably methodological, and higher prevalences in women, the middle-aged, less privileged groups, and those experiencing social adversity. There is high comorbidity with other psychiatric and physical disorders. Depression is a major cause of disability. Incidence has been less studied and lifetime incidence is not clear, with longitudinal studies required. There is pressing need for prevalence studies from Eastern Europe. The considerable differences in health care systems among European countries may impact on proportions of depressives receiving treatment and its adequacy, particularly in the key area of primary care, and require further study. There is a need for public health programmes aimed at improving treatment, reducing rates and consequences of depressive disorders.

Evidence of cost-effective treatments for depression: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

High levels of public spending, rising costs of treatments and scarcity of mental health resources have intensified the need for information on the cost-effectiveness of interventions for depression. There have been few reviews that consider the cost-effectiveness of all treatments for depression together.

METHODS

Systematic review of published economic evaluations of interventions for depression to identify where evidence of cost-effectiveness exists and where ambiguity remains.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight papers met the criteria and were included in the review. The quality of the evaluations varied greatly. Evidence establishing the cost-effectiveness of interventions for depression is accumulating; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) and the newer antidepressants venlafaxine, mirtazepine and nefazodone appear cost-effective compared with older drugs. Despite the availability of high quality economic evaluations of psychological therapies compared to usual care, there is limited evidence of their cost-effectiveness particularly when compared directly to pharmacotherapies. Changes to health systems have been found to be cost-effective in some patient groups, but there is no evidence that screening in primary care populations is a cost-effective strategy.

LIMITATIONS

Vastly different interventions, outcome measures and cost perspectives meant a meta-analysis of costs and effects was not considered possible.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of available evidence, it is not possible to identify the most cost-effective strategy for alleviating the symptoms of depression, although the SSRIs and newer antidepressants consistently appear more cost-effective than tricyclic antidepressants in many patient groups. Better quality economic evidence is needed.