| 1. |
- Cuijpers, Pim, et al.
(författare)
-
The effects of psychotherapies for major depression in adults on remission, recovery and improvement: A meta-analysis
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Journal of Affective Disorders. - : Elsevier. - 0165-0327 .- 1573-2517. ; 159, s. 118-126
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Standardised effect sizes have been criticized because they are difficult to interpret and offer little clinical information. This meta-analyses examine the extent of actual improvement, the absolute numbers of patients no longer meeting criteria for major depression, and absolute rates of response and remission. Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of 92 studies with 181 conditions (134 psychotherapy and 47 control conditions) with 6937 patients meeting criteria for major depressive disorder. Within these conditions, we calculated the absolute number of patients no longer meeting criteria for major depression, rates of response and remission, and the absolute reduction on the BDI, BDI-II and HAM-D. Results: After treatment, 62% of patients no longer met criteria for MDD in the psychotherapy conditions. However, 43% of participants in the control conditions and 48% of people in the care-as-usual conditions no longer met criteria for MDD, suggesting that the additional value of psychotherapy compared to care-as-usual would be 14%. For response and remission, comparable results were found, with less than half of the patients meeting criteria for response and remission after psychotherapy. Additionally, a considerable proportion of response and remission was also found in control conditions. In the psychotherapy conditions, scores on the BDl were reduced by 13.42 points, 15.12 points on the BDI-II, and 10.28 points on the HAM-D. In the control conditions, these reductions were 4.56, 4.68, and 5.29. Discussion: Psychotherapy contributes to improvement in depressed patients, but improvement in control conditions is also considerable.
|
|
| 2. |
- van Ballegooijen, Wouter, et al.
(författare)
-
Adherence to Internet-based and face-to-face cognitive behavioural therapy for depression : a meta-analysis
- 2014
-
Ingår i: PLOS ONE. - : Public Library of Science. - 1932-6203. ; 9:7, s. e100674-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Internet-based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) is an effective and acceptable treatment for depression, especially when it includes guidance, but its treatment adherence has not yet been systematically studied. We conducted a meta-analysis, comparing the adherence to guided iCBT with the adherence to individual face-to-face CBT.METHODS: Studies were selected from a database of trials that investigate treatment for adult depression (see www.evidencebasedpsychotherapies.org), updated to January 2013. We identified 24 studies describing 26 treatment conditions (14 face-to-face CBT, 12 guided iCBT), by means of these inclusion criteria: targeting depressed adults, no comorbid somatic disorder or substance abuse, community recruitment, published in the year 2000 or later. The main outcome measure was the percentage of completed sessions. We also coded the percentage of treatment completers (separately coding for 100% or at least 80% of treatment completed).RESULTS: We did not find studies that compared guided iCBT and face-to-face CBT in a single trial that met our inclusion criteria. Face-to-face CBT treatments ranged from 12 to 28 sessions, guided iCBT interventions consisted of 5 to 9 sessions. Participants in face-to-face CBT completed on average 83.9% of their treatment, which did not differ significantly from participants in guided iCBT (80.8%, P = .59). The percentage of completers (total intervention) was significantly higher in face-to-face CBT (84.7%) than in guided iCBT (65.1%, P < .001), as was the percentage of completers of 80% or more of the intervention (face-to-face CBT: 85.2%, guided iCBT: 67.5%, P = .003). Non-completers of face-to-face CBT completed on average 24.5% of their treatment, while non-completers of guided iCBT completed on average 42.1% of their treatment.CONCLUSION: We did not find studies that compared guided iCBT and face-to-face CBT in a single trial. Adherence to guided iCBT appears to be adequate and could be equal to adherence to face-to-face CBT.
|
|
