Efficacy of a specific model for cognitive-behavioral therapy among panic disorder patients with agoraphobia: a randomized clinical trial

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Psychotherapies are the treatment of choice for panic disorder, but which should be considered as first-line treatment is yet to be substantiated by evidence.

AIMS

To examine the most effective and accepted psychotherapy for the acute phase of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia via a network meta-analysis.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to examine the most effective and accepted psychotherapy for the acute phase of panic disorder. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CENTRAL, from inception to 1 Jan 2021 for RCTs. Cochrane and PRISMA guidelines were used. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). The protocol was published in a peer-reviewed journal and in PROSPERO (CRD42020206258).

RESULTS

We included 136 RCTs in the systematic review. Taking into consideration efficacy (7352 participants), acceptability (6862 participants) and the CINeMA confidence in evidence appraisal, the best interventions in comparison with treatment as usual (TAU) were cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) (for efficacy: standardised mean differences s.m.d. = -0.67, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.39; CINeMA: moderate; for acceptability: relative risk RR = 1.21, 95% CI -0.94 to 1.56; CINeMA: moderate) and short-term psychodynamic therapy (for efficacy: s.m.d. = -0.61, 95% CI -1.15 to -0.07; CINeMA: low; for acceptability: RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.54-1.54; CINeMA: moderate). After removing RCTs at high risk of bias only CBT remained more efficacious than TAU.

CONCLUSIONS

CBT and short-term psychodynamic therapy are reasonable first-line choices. Studies with high risk of bias tend to inflate the overall efficacy of treatments. Results from this systematic review and network meta-analysis should inform clinicians and guidelines.

Effect of a Biofeedback Intervention on Heart Rate Variability in Individuals With Panic Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Some individuals with panic disorder (PD) display reduced heart rate variability (HRV), which may result in an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality. Heart rate variability-biofeedback (HRV-BF) training has been shown to improve the modulation of the autonomic activity. Therefore, this randomized controlled trial was conducted to investigate the effect of a 4-week HRV-BF intervention in individuals with PD. HRV-BF training improved the modulation of the autonomic activity. Therefore, with this randomized controlled trial, we aimed to investigate the effect of a 4-week HRV-BF intervention in people with PD.

METHODS

Thirty-six women and 16 men with PD (mean age = 35.85 [15.60] years) were randomly allocated either to HRV-BF with 0.1-Hz breathing as intervention group or to HRV-Sham-BF as active control group. HRV-BF was performed for 4 weeks, whereas HRV was measured both during a short-term resting condition and during a paced breathing condition before and after intervention.

RESULTS

HRV-BF with 0.1-Hz breathing increased HRV and reduced panic symptoms in individuals with PD. HRV-BF with 0.1-Hz breathing demonstrated an increase in the time and frequency domain parameters of HRV during the short-term resting condition (ΔPost-Pre root mean square successive differences: 5.87 [14.03] milliseconds; ΔPost-Pre standard deviation of all NN intervals: 11.63 [17.06] milliseconds; ΔPost-Pre total power: 464.88 [1825.47] milliseconds2; ΔPost-Pre power in low-frequency range 0.04-0.15 Hz: 312.73 [592.71] milliseconds2), a decrease in the heart rate during the paced breathing condition (ΔPost-Pre: -5.87 [9.14] beats/min), and a decrease in the Panic and Agoraphobia Scale (ΔPost-Pre: -3.64 [6.30]). There was no intervention effect in the HRV-Sham-BF group.

CONCLUSIONS

HRV-BF as a noninvasive and nonpharmacological treatment seems to be an important intervention option to improve reduced HRV and decrease panic symptoms in individuals with PD. Future studies are needed to establish whether these effects translate to reductions in the risk of cardiovascular disease in PD.

A feasibility study of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of individual cognitive behavioral therapy for panic disorder in a Japanese clinical setting: an uncontrolled pilot study

Background

In Japan, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for panic disorder (PD) is not well established. Therefore, a feasibility study of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of CBT for PD in a Japanese clinical setting is urgently required. This was a pilot uncontrolled trial and the intervention consisted of a 16-week CBT program. The primary outcome was Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) scores. Quality of life was assessed using the EuroQol’s EQ-5D questionnaire. Assessments were conducted at baseline, 8 weeks, and at the end of the study. Fifteen subjects completed outcome measures at all assessment points.

Results

At post-CBT, the mean reduction in PDSS scores from baseline was −6.6 (95 % CI 3.80 to −9.40, p < 0.001) with a Cohen’s d = 1.77 (95 % CI 0.88–2.55). Ten (66.7 %) participants achieved a 40 % or greater reduction in PDSS. By calculating areas under the curve for EQ-5D index changes, we estimated that patients gained a minimum of 0.102 QALYs per 1 year due to the CBT.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated that individual CBT for PD may be useful in Japanese clinical settings but further randomized control trials are needed.

Trial registration: UMIN-CTR UMIN000022693 (retrospectively registered)

Adding psychotherapy to antidepressant medication in depression and anxiety disorders: a meta-analysis

We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials in which the effects of treatment with antidepressant medication were compared to the effects of combined pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy in adults with a diagnosed depressive or anxiety disorder. A total of 52 studies (with 3,623 patients) met inclusion criteria, 32 on depressive disorders and 21 on anxiety disorders (one on both depressive and anxiety disorders). The overall difference between pharmacotherapy and combined treatment was Hedges' g = 0.43 (95% CI: 0.31-0.56), indicating a moderately large effect and clinically meaningful difference in favor of combined treatment, which corresponds to a number needed to treat (NNT) of 4.20. There was sufficient evidence that combined treatment is superior for major depression, panic disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). The effects of combined treatment compared with placebo only were about twice as large as those of pharmacotherapy compared with placebo only, underscoring the clinical advantage of combined treatment. The results also suggest that the effects of pharmacotherapy and those of psychotherapy are largely independent from each other, with both contributing about equally to the effects of combined treatment. We conclude that combined treatment appears to be more effective than treatment with antidepressant medication alone in major depression, panic disorder, and OCD. These effects remain strong and significant up to two years after treatment. Monotherapy with psychotropic medication may not constitute optimal care for common mental disorders.