Unique and shared techniques in cognitive-behavioural and short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy: a content analysis of randomised trials on depression

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychotherapeutic interventions assume that specific techniques are used in treatments, which are responsible for changes in the client's symptoms. This assumption also holds true for meta-analyses, where evidence for specific interventions and techniques is compiled. However, it has also been argued that different treatments share important techniques and that an upcoming consensus about useful treatment strategies is leading to a greater integration of treatments. This makes assumptions about the effectiveness of specific interventions ingredients questionable if the shared (common) techniques are more often used in interventions than are the unique techniques. This study investigated the unique or shared techniques in RCTs of cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) and short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (STPP). Psychotherapeutic techniques were coded from 42 masked treatment descriptions of RCTs in the field of depression (1979-2010). CBT techniques were often used in studies identified as either CBT or STPP. However, STPP techniques were only used in STPP-identified studies. Empirical clustering of treatment descriptions did not confirm the original distinction of CBT versus STPP, but instead showed substantial heterogeneity within both approaches. Extraction of psychotherapeutic techniques from the treatment descriptions is feasible and could be used as a content-based approach to classify treatments in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

[Evaluation of the "Schema-focused Emotive Behavioural Therapy" (SET) for Patients with Personality Disorders: Results of a Randomised Controlled Trial.]

The "Schema-focussed Emotive Behavioral Therapy" (SET) was developed by our research group as a new group therapy approach for patients with personality disorders from all clusters (A to C; DSM-IV). It was evaluated in a randomised controlled study (n = 93). Data were collected before and after treatment as well as one year after study entry. A completer analysis was conducted with matched subgroups (n = 60). After therapy, SET patients improved in the outcome domains interactional behavior, strain, and symptomatic complaints (IIP-D, GAF, VEV-VW, BSI-P). Furthermore, they showed a significant lower dropout rate. At the follow-up assessment, Cluster C patients of the experimental group deteriorated with regard to symptomatic complaints (BSI-P). In contrast, cluster B patients improved more over time compared to control subjects. SET seems to be an adequate and effective group therapy with effects that seem to be stable over time, especially for patients with Cluster B diagnosis.

Treatment of adolescents with early-onset schizophrenia spectrum disorders: in search of a rational, evidence-informed approach

Purpose of review: We aimed to review literature on the efficacy and tolerability of psychosocial and psychopharmacological interventions in youth with early-onset schizophrenia spectrum disorders (EOS). A rationale for pragmatic psychopharmacology in EOS, including dosing, switching and adverse effect monitoring and management, is provided. Recent findings: Three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) over the last 8 years demonstrated benefits of psychosocial interventions (i.e. psychoeducation, cognitive remediation, cognitive behavioural therapy) for EOS without clear advantages of one psychosocial treatment over another. Six large, placebo-controlled, short-term RCTs over the last 4 years demonstrated that aripiprazole, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine and risperidone, but not ziprasidone, were superior to placebo. Except for clozapine's superiority in treatment-refractory EOS, efficacy appeared similar across studied first-generation and second-generation antipsychotics, but tolerability varied greatly across individual agents. Summary: Antipsychotics are efficacious in the treatment of EOS. Given the lack of efficacy differences between antipsychotics (except for clozapine for treatment-refractory EOS), we propose that tolerability considerations need to guide choice of antipsychotics. Further and longer-term efficacy and effectiveness studies are urgently needed that should also explore pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic augmentation strategies.

Who stays, who benefits? Predicting dropout and change in cognitive behaviour therapy for psychosis

This study investigates predictors of outcome in a secondary analysis of dropout and completer data from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial comparing CBTp to a wait-list group (Lincoln et al., 2012). Eighty patients with DSM-IV psychotic disorders seeking outpatient treatment were included. Predictors were assessed at baseline. Symptom outcome was assessed at post-treatment and at one-year follow-up. The predictor x group interactions indicate that a longer duration of disorder predicted less improvement in negative symptoms in the CBTp but not in the wait-list group whereas jumping-to-conclusions was associated with poorer outcome only in the wait-list group. There were no CBTp specific predictors of improvement in positive symptoms. However, in the combined sample (immediate CBTp+the delayed CBTp group) baseline variables predicted significant amounts of positive and negative symptom variance at post-therapy and one-year follow-up after controlling for pre-treatment symptoms. Lack of insight and low social functioning were the main predictors of drop-out, contributing to a prediction accuracy of 87%. The findings indicate that higher baseline symptom severity, poorer functioning, neurocognitive deficits, reasoning biases and comorbidity pose no barrier to improvement during CBTp. However, in line with previous predictor-research, the findings imply that patients need to receive treatment earlier.

Clinical effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in routine care: A propensity score based comparison between randomized controlled trials and clinical practice

Background: The efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for the treatment of depressive disorders has been demonstrated in many randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This study investigated whether for CBT similar effects can be expected under routine care conditions when the patients are comparable to those examined in RCTs. Method: N=574 CBT patients from an outpatient clinic were stepwise matched to the patients undergoing CBT in the National Institute of Mental Health Treatment of Depression Collaborative Research Program (TDCRP). First, the exclusion criteria of the RCT were applied to the naturalistic sample of the outpatient clinic. Second, propensity score matching (PSM) was used to adjust the remaining naturalistic sample on the basis of baseline covariate distributions. Matched samples were then compared regarding treatment effects using effect sizes, average treatment effect on the treated (ATT) and recovery rates. Results: CBT in the adjusted naturalistic subsample was as effective as in the RCT. However, treatments lasted significantly longer under routine care conditions. Limitations: The samples included only a limited amount of common predictor variables and stemmed from different countries. There might be additional covariates, which could potentially further improve the matching between the samples. Conclusions: CBT for depression in clinical practice might be equally effective as manual-based treatments in RCTs when they are applied to comparable patients. The fact that similar effects under routine conditions were reached with more sessions, however, points to the potential to optimize treatments in clinical practice with respect to their efficiency.

Cognitive-Behavioural Analysis System of Psychotherapy (CBASP), a drug, or their combination: differential therapeutics for persistent depressive disorder: a study protocol of an individual participant data network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION Despite important advances in psychological and pharmacological treatments of persistent depressive disorders in the past decades, their responses remain typically slow and poor, and differential responses among different modalities of treatments or their combinations are not well understood. Cognitive-Behavioural Analysis System of Psychotherapy (CBASP) is the only psychotherapy that has been specifically designed for chronic depression and has been examined in an increasing number of trials against medications, alone or in combination. When several treatment alternatives are available for a certain condition, network meta-analysis (NMA) provides a powerful tool to examine their relative efficacy by combining all direct and indirect comparisons. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis enables exploration of impacts of individual characteristics that lead to a differentiated approach matching treatments to specific subgroups of patients. METHODS AND ANALYSIS We will search for all randomised controlled trials that compared CBASP, pharmacotherapy or their combination, in the treatment of patients with persistent depressive disorder, in Cochrane CENTRAL, PUBMED, SCOPUS and PsycINFO, supplemented by personal contacts. Individual participant data will be sought from the principal investigators of all the identified trials. Our primary outcomes are depression severity as measured on a continuous observer-rated scale for depression, and dropouts for any reason as a proxy measure of overall treatment acceptability. We will conduct a one-step IPD-NMA to compare CBASP, medications and their combinations, and also carry out a meta-regression to identify their prognostic factors and effect moderators. The model will be fitted in OpenBUGS, using vague priors for all location parameters. For the heterogeneity we will use a half-normal prior on the SD. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION This study requires no ethical approval. We will publish the findings in a peer-reviewed journal. The study results will contribute to more finely differentiated therapeutics for patients suffering from this chronically disabling disorder. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER CRD42016035886.

No association of the neuropeptide Y (Leu7Pro) and ghrelin gene (Arg51Gln, Leu72Met, Gln90Leu) single nucleotide polymorphisms with eating disorders

Genetic factors likely contribute to the biological vulnerability of eating disorders.

Eating disorders in youth: diagnostic variability and predictive validity

The primary aim was to examine the utility of DSM-IV criteria in predicting treatment outcome in a sample of adolescents with eating disorders.

Differences across health care systems in outcome and cost-utility of surgical and conservative treatment of chronic low back pain: a study protocol

BACKGROUND: There is little evidence on differences across health care systems in choice and outcome of the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP) with spinal surgery and conservative treatment as the main options. At least six randomised controlled trials comparing these two options have been performed; they show conflicting results without clear-cut evidence for superior effectiveness of any of the evaluated interventions and could not address whether treatment effect varied across patient subgroups. Cost-utility analyses display inconsistent results when comparing surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP. Due to its higher feasibility, we chose to conduct a prospective observational cohort study. METHODS: This study aims to examine if1. Differences across health care systems result in different treatment outcomes of surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP2. Patient characteristics (work-related, psychological factors, etc.) and co-interventions (physiotherapy, cognitive behavioural therapy, return-to-work programs, etc.) modify the outcome of treatment for CLBP3. Cost-utility in terms of quality-adjusted life years differs between surgical and conservative treatment of CLBP.This study will recruit 1000 patients from orthopaedic spine units, rehabilitation centres, and pain clinics in Switzerland and New Zealand. Effectiveness will be measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) at baseline and after six months. The change in ODI will be the primary endpoint of this study.Multiple linear regression models will be used, with the change in ODI from baseline to six months as the dependent variable and the type of health care system, type of treatment, patient characteristics, and co-interventions as independent variables. Interactions will be incorporated between type of treatment and different co-interventions and patient characteristics. Cost-utility will be measured with an index based on EQol-5D in combination with cost data. CONCLUSION: This study will provide evidence if differences across health care systems in the outcome of treatment of CLBP exist. It will classify patients with CLBP into different clinical subgroups and help to identify specific target groups who might benefit from specific surgical or conservative interventions. Furthermore, cost-utility differences will be identified for different groups of patients with CLBP. Main results of this study should be replicated in future studies on CLBP.