CBT to reduce healthcare use for medically unexplained symptoms: systematic review and meta-analysis

An interdisciplinary multimodal integrative healthcare program for somatic symptom disorder, with predominant (spinal) pain

OBJECTIVE

Although multimodal interventions are generally recommended in patients with long-term somatic symptom disorders (SSD), available evidence is limited. The current study evaluates the effectiveness of an outpatient secondary care interdisciplinary multimodal integrative healthcare program for patients with SSD and predominant (spinal) pain.

METHOD

The healthcare program consisted of two active treatment phases: main 20-week program and a 12-month relapse prevention program. Participants were 4453 patients diagnosed with SSD. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQoL) assessed using the RAND-36 (i.e., mental/physical component summary) and secondary outcomes included physical and psychological symptoms assessed using the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI) and RAND-36 subscales. Mixed linear models were used to examine the effects of the multimodal healthcare program on primary/secondary outcomes over four time points: before start 20-week program (T0), halfway 20-week program (T1), end of 20-week program (T2) and end of relapse prevention program (T3).

RESULTS

Significant improvements were found from T0 to T2 for all primary variables (i.e., mental/physical component summary) and secondary variables (i.e., BSI/RAND-36 subscales), which were maintained until the end of the relapse prevention program (T3).

CONCLUSION

An interdisciplinary multimodal integrative treatment for SSD is effective for improving HRQoL and reducing physical and psychological symptoms.

Somatosensory amplification moderates the efficacy of internet-delivered CBT for somatic symptom distress in emerging adults: Exploratory analysis of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

While studies mainly provide positive evidence for the efficacy of internet-delivered cognitive-behavioral therapy (ICBT) for various persistent somatic symptoms, it remains largely unclear for whom these interventions work or not. This exploratory analysis aimed to identify moderators for the outcome between ICBT for somatic symptom distres and a waitlist control group (WL) in a vulnerable target group of emerging adults.

METHODS

Based on data from a randomized controlled trial on 156 university students with varying degrees of somatic symptom distress who were allocated to either an eight-week, therapist guided ICBT (iSOMA) or to the WL, we examined pretreatment demographic characteristics, health-related variables (e.g., somatic symptom duration), mental distress (e.g., depression, anxiety) and cognitive-emotional factors (emotional reactivity, somatosensory amplification) as candidate moderators of the outcome, somatic symptom distress (assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire, PHQ-15) from pre- to posttreatment.

RESULTS

Somatosensory amplification (assessed by the Somatosensory Amplification Scale, SSAS) moderated the outcome in favor of iSOMA (B = -0.17, SE = 0.08, p = 0.031), i.e., higher pretreatment somatosensory amplification was associated with better outcome in the active compared to the control intervention. No significant moderation effects were found among demographic characteristics, health-related variables, or mental distress.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that an internet-delivered CBT for somatic symptom distress should be preferred over no active treatment particularly in individuals with moderate to high levels of somatosensory amplification, which as a next step should be tested against further treatments and in clinical populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00014375).

Cognitive-behavioural therapy compared with standardised medical care for adults with dissociative non-epileptic seizures: the CODES RCT

BACKGROUND

Dissociative (non-epileptic) seizures are potentially treatable by psychotherapeutic interventions; however, the evidence for this is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of dissociative seizure-specific cognitive-behavioural therapy for adults with dissociative seizures.

DESIGN

This was a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel-arm, mixed-methods randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

This took place in 27 UK-based neurology/epilepsy services, 17 liaison psychiatry/neuropsychiatry services and 18 cognitive-behavioural therapy services.

PARTICIPANTS

Adults with dissociative seizures in the previous 8 weeks and no epileptic seizures in the previous year and meeting other eligibility criteria were recruited to a screening phase from neurology/epilepsy services between October 2014 and February 2017. After psychiatric assessment around 3 months later, eligible and interested participants were randomised between January 2015 and May 2017.

INTERVENTIONS

Standardised medical care consisted of input from neurologists and psychiatrists who were given guidance regarding diagnosis delivery and management; they provided patients with information booklets. The intervention consisted of 12 dissociative seizure-specific cognitive-behavioural therapy 1-hour sessions (plus one booster session) that were delivered by trained therapists, in addition to standardised medical care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was monthly seizure frequency at 12 months post randomisation. The secondary outcomes were aspects of seizure occurrence, quality of life, mood, anxiety, distress, symptoms, psychosocial functioning, clinical global change, satisfaction with treatment, quality-adjusted life-years, costs and cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

In total, 698 patients were screened and 368 were randomised (standardised medical care alone, n = 182; and cognitive-behavioural therapy plus standardised medical care, n = 186). Primary outcome data were obtained for 85% of participants. An intention-to-treat analysis with multivariate imputation by chained equations revealed no significant between-group difference in dissociative seizure frequency at 12 months [standardised medical care: median of seven dissociative seizures (interquartile range 1-35 dissociative seizures); cognitive-behavioural therapy and standardised medical care: median of four dissociative seizures (interquartile range 0-20 dissociative seizures); incidence rate ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.56 to 1.09; p = 0.144]. Of the 16 secondary outcomes analysed, nine were significantly better in the arm receiving cognitive-behavioural therapy at a p-value < 0.05, including the following at a p-value ≤ 0.001: the longest dissociative seizure-free period in months 7-12 inclusive post randomisation (incidence rate ratio 1.64, 95% confidence interval 1.22 to 2.20; p = 0.001); better psychosocial functioning (Work and Social Adjustment Scale, standardised treatment effect -0.39, 95% confidence interval -0.61 to -0.18; p < 0.001); greater self-rated and clinician-rated clinical improvement (self-rated: standardised treatment effect 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.16 to 0.62; p = 0.001; clinician rated: standardised treatment effect 0.37, 95% confidence interval 0.17 to 0.57; p < 0.001); and satisfaction with treatment (standardised treatment effect 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.27 to 0.73; p < 0.001). Rates of adverse events were similar across arms. Cognitive-behavioural therapy plus standardised medical care produced 0.0152 more quality-adjusted life-years (95% confidence interval -0.0106 to 0.0392 quality-adjusted life-years) than standardised medical care alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (cost per quality-adjusted life-year) for cognitive-behavioural therapy plus standardised medical care versus standardised medical care alone based on the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version, and imputed data was £120,658. In sensitivity analyses, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged between £85,724 and £206,067. Qualitative and quantitative process evaluations highlighted useful study components, the importance of clinical experience in treating patients with dissociative seizures and potential benefits of our multidisciplinary care pathway.

LIMITATIONS

Unlike outcome assessors, participants and clinicians were not blinded to the interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant additional benefit of dissociative seizure-specific cognitive-behavioural therapy in reducing dissociative seizure frequency, and cost-effectiveness over standardised medical care was low. However, this large, adequately powered, multicentre randomised controlled trial highlights benefits of adjunctive dissociative seizure-specific cognitive-behavioural therapy for several clinical outcomes, with no evidence of greater harm from dissociative seizure-specific cognitive-behavioural therapy.

FUTURE WORK

Examination of moderators and mediators of outcome.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN05681227 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02325544.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 43. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A Conditional Process Model to Explain Somatization During Coronavirus Disease 2019 Epidemic: The Interaction Among Resilience, Perceived Stress, and Sex

Background

More than 15% of Chinese respondents reported somatic symptoms in the last week of January 2020. Promoting resilience is a possible target in crisis intervention that can alleviate somatization.

Objectives

This study aims to investigate the relationship between resilience and somatization, as well as the underlying possible mediating and moderating mechanism, in a large sample of Chinese participants receiving a crisis intervention during the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic.

Methods

Participants were invited online to complete demographic information and questionnaires. The Symptom Checklist-90 somatization subscale, 10-item Connor–Davidson resilience scale, and 10-item Perceived Stress Scale were measured.

Results

A total of 2,557 participants were included. Spearman correlation analysis revealed that lower resilience was associated with more somatic symptoms (p < 0.001). The conditional process model was proved (indirect effect = −0.01, 95% confidence interval = [−0.015, −0.002]). The interaction effects between perceived stress and sex predicted somatization (b = 0.05, p = 0.006).

Conclusion

Resilience is a key predictor of somatization. The mediating effects of perceived stress between resilience and somatization work in the context of sex difference. Sex-specific intervention by enhancing resilience is of implication for alleviating somatization during the coronavirus disease 2019 epidemic.

Treating medically unexplained symptoms via improving access to psychological therapy (IAPT): major limitations identified

BACKGROUND

Improving Access to Psychological Therapies is a UK Government funded initiative to widen access to psychological treatment for a range of common mental health complaints, such as depression and anxiety. More recently, the service has begun to treat patients with medically unexplained symptoms. This paper reports on a review of treatment protocols and early treatment data for medically unexplained symptoms, specifically the illness myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome.

MAIN TEXT

A series of seven core problems and failings are identified, including an unproven treatment rationale, a weak and contested evidence-base, biases in treatment promotion, exaggeration of recovery claims, under-reporting of drop-out rates, and a significant risk of misdiagnosis and inappropriate treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a pressing need for independent oversight of this service, specifically evaluation of service performance and methods used to collect and report treatment outcomes. This service offers uniform psycho-behavioural therapy that may not meet the needs of many patients with medically unexplained health complaints. Psychotherapy should not become a default when patients' physical symptoms remain unexplained, and patients should be fully informed of the rationale behind psychotherapy, before agreeing to take part. Patients who reject psychotherapy or do not meet selection criteria should be offered appropriate medical and psychological support.