| 1. |
- Cuijpers, Pim, et al.
(författare)
-
Psychological treatment of depression in primary care : a meta-analysis
- 2009
-
Ingår i: British Journal of General Practice. - 0960-1643 .- 1478-5242. ; 59:559, s. 120-127
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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.
|
|
| 2. |
- Doukani, Asmae, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of the Working Alliance in Blended Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Treatment as Usual for Depression in Europe: Secondary Data Analysis of the E-COMPARED Randomized Controlled Trial
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of Medical Internet Research. - : JMIR PUBLICATIONS, INC. - 1438-8871. ; 26
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Increasing interest has centered on the psychotherapeutic working alliance as a means of understanding clinical change in digital mental health interventions in recent years. However, little is understood about how and to what extent a digital mental health program can have an impact on the working alliance and clinical outcomes in a blended (therapist plus digital program) cognitive behavioral therapy (bCBT) intervention for depression. Objective: This study aimed to test the difference in working alliance scores between bCBT and treatment as usual (TAU), examine the association between working alliance and depression severity scores in both arms, and test for an interaction between system usability and working alliance with regard to the association between working alliance and depression scores in bCBT at 3 -month assessments. Methods: We conducted a secondary data analysis of the E -COMPARED (European Comparative Effectiveness Research on Blended Depression Treatment versus Treatment -as -usual) trial, which compared bCBT with TAU across 9 European countries. Data were collected in primary care and specialized services between April 2015 and December 2017. Eligible participants aged 18 years or older and diagnosed with major depressive disorder were randomized to either bCBT (n=476) or TAU (n=467). bCBT consisted of 6-20 sessions of bCBT (involving face-to-face sessions with a therapist and an internet-based program). TAU consisted of usual care for depression. The main outcomes were scores of the working alliance (Working Alliance Inventory -Short Revised-Client [WAI-SR-C]) and depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire -9 [PHQ-9]) at 3 months after randomization. Other variables included system usability scores (System Usability Scale -Client [SUS -C]) at 3 months and baseline demographic information. Data from baseline and 3 -month assessments were analyzed using linear regression models that adjusted for a set of baseline variables. Results: Of the 945 included participants, 644 (68.2%) were female, and the mean age was 38.96 years (IQR 38). bCBT was associated with higher composite WAI-SR-C scores compared to TAU ( B =5.67, 95% CI 4.48-6.86). There was an inverse association between WAI-SR-C and PHQ-9 in bCBT ( B =-0.12, 95% CI -0.17 to -0.06) and TAU ( B =-0.06, 95% CI -0.11 to -0.02), in which as WAI-SR-C scores increased, PHQ-9 scores decreased. Finally, there was a significant interaction between SUS -C and WAI-SR-C with regard to an inverse association between higher WAI-SR-C scores and lower PHQ-9 scores in bCBT ( b =-0.030, 95% CI -0.05 to -0.01; P =.005). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to show that bCBT may enhance the client working alliance when compared to evidence -based routine care for depression that services reported offering. The working alliance in bCBT was also associated with clinical improvements that appear to be enhanced by good program usability. Our findings add further weight to the view that the addition of internet-delivered CBT to face-to-face CBT may positively augment experiences of the working alliance.
|
|
