Dataset Information

Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in patients receiving disability benefits: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To systematically summarize the randomized trial evidence regarding the relative effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) in patients with depression in receipt of disability benefits in comparison to those not receiving disability benefits.

Data sources

All relevant RCTs from a database of randomized controlled and comparative studies examining the effects of psychotherapy for adult depression (http://www.evidencebasedpsychotherapies.org), electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PSYCINFO, AMED, CINAHL and CENTRAL) to June 2011, and bibliographies of all relevant articles. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: Adult patients with major depression, randomly assigned to CBT versus minimal/no treatment or care-as-usual.

Study appraisal and synthesis methods

Three teams of reviewers, independently and in duplicate, completed title and abstract screening, full text review and data extraction. We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis to summarize data.

Results

Of 92 eligible trials, 70 provided author contact information; of these 56 (80%) were successfully contacted to establish if they captured receipt of benefits as a baseline characteristic; 8 recorded benefit status, and 3 enrolled some patients in receipt of benefits, of which 2 provided individual patient data. Including both patients receiving and not receiving disability benefits, 2 trials (227 patients) suggested a possible reduction in depression with CBT, as measured by the Beck Depression Inventory, mean difference [MD] (95% confidence interval [CI])?=?-2.61 (-5.28, 0.07), p?=?0.06; minimally important difference of 5. The effect appeared larger, though not significantly, in those in receipt of benefits (34 patients) versus not receiving benefits (193 patients); MD (95% CI)?=?-4.46 (-12.21, 3.30), p?=?0.26.

Conclusions

Our data does not support the hypothesis that CBT has smaller effects in depressed patients receiving disability benefits versus other patients. Given that the confidence interval is wide, a decreased effect is still possible, though if the difference exists, it is likely to be small.

SUBMITTER: Ebrahim S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3510249 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in patients receiving disability benefits: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

Ebrahim Shanil S Montoya Luis L Truong Wanda W Hsu Sandy S Kamal El Din Mostafa M Carrasco-Labra Alonso A Busse Jason W JW Walter Stephen D SD Heels-Ansdell Diane D Couban Rachel R Patelis-Siotis Irene I Bellman Marg M de Graaf L Esther LE Dozois David J A DJ Bieling Peter J PJ Guyatt Gordon H GH

PloS one 20121129 11

<h4>Objectives</h4>To systematically summarize the randomized trial evidence regarding the relative effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) in patients with depression in receipt of disability benefits in comparison to those not receiving disability benefits.<h4>Data sources</h4>All relevant RCTs from a database of randomized controlled and comparative studies examining the effects of psychotherapy for adult depression (http://www.evidencebasedpsychotherapies.org), electronic databa ...[more]

PMID: 23209672

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportancePersonalized treatment choices would increase the effectiveness of internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) for depression to the extent that patients differ in interventions that better suit them.ObjectiveTo provide personalized estimates of short-term and long-term relative efficacy of guided and unguided iCBT for depression using patient-level information.Data sourcesWe searched PubMed, Embase, PsycInfo, and Cochrane Library to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published up to January 1, 2019.Study selectionEligible RCTs were those comparing guided or unguided iCBT against each other or against any control intervention in individuals with depression. Available individual patient data (IPD) was collected from all eligible studies. Depression symptom severity was assessed after treatment, 6 months, and 12 months after randomization.Data extraction and synthesisWe conducted a systematic review and IPD network meta-analysis and estimated relative treatment effect sizes across different patient characteristics through IPD network meta-regression.Main outcomes and measuresPatient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) scores.ResultsOf 42 eligible RCTs, 39 studies comprising 9751 participants with depression contributed IPD to the IPD network meta-analysis, of which 8107 IPD were synthesized. Overall, both guided and unguided iCBT were associated with more effectiveness as measured by PHQ-9 scores than control treatments over the short term and the long term. Guided iCBT was associated with more effectiveness than unguided iCBT (mean difference [MD] in posttreatment PHQ-9 scores, -0.8; 95% CI, -1.4 to -0.2), but we found no evidence of a difference at 6 or 12 months following randomization. Baseline depression was found to be the most important modifier of the relative association for efficacy of guided vs unguided iCBT. Differences between unguided and guided iCBT in people with baseline symptoms of subthreshold depression (PHQ-9 scores 5-9) were small, while guided iCBT was associated with overall better outcomes in patients with baseline PHQ-9 greater than 9.Conclusions and relevanceIn this network meta-analysis with IPD, guided iCBT was associated with more effectiveness than unguided iCBT for individuals with depression, benefits were more substantial in individuals with moderate to severe depression. Unguided iCBT was associated with similar effectiveness among individuals with symptoms of mild/subthreshold depression. Personalized treatment selection is entirely possible and necessary to ensure the best allocation of treatment resources for depression.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Cognitive behavioural therapies (CBTs) are one of the most effective treatments for major depression. However, ~50% of individuals do not adequately respond to intervention and of those who do remit from a depressive episode, over 50% will experience later relapse. Identification of patient-level factors which moderate treatment response may ultimately help to identify cognitive barriers that could be targeted to improve treatment efficacy. This individual patient data meta-analysis explores one such potential moderator-the ability to retrieve specific, detailed memories of the autobiographical past-as cognitive-based therapeutic techniques draw heavily on the ability to use specific autobiographical information to challenge the dysfunctional beliefs which drive depression. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We have formed a collaborative network which will contribute known datasets. This will be supplemented by datasets identified through literature searches in Medline, PsycInfo, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and WHO trials database between December 2018 and February 2019. Inclusion criteria are delivery of a cognitive or cognitive behavioural therapy for major depression, and measurement of autobiographical memory retrieval at preintervention. Primary outcomes are depressive symptoms and clinician-rated diagnostic status at postintervention, along with autobiographical memory specificity at postintervention. Secondary outcomes will consider each of these variables at follow-up. All analyses will be completed using random-effects models employing restricted maximum likelihood estimation. Risk of bias in included studies will be measured using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. Study results will contribute to better understanding of the role of autobiographical memory in patient response to CBTs, and may help to inform personalised medicine approaches to treatment of depression. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42018109673.

Project description:BackgroundMajor depressive disorder is a chronic condition; its prevalence is expected to grow with the aging trend of high-income countries. Internet-based cognitive-behavioral therapy has proven efficacy in treating major depressive disorder.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of implementing a community internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy intervention (Super@, the Spanish program for the MasterMind project) for treating major depressive disorder.MethodsThe cost-effectiveness of the Super@ program was assessed with the Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing tool, using a 3-state Markov model. Data from the cost and effectiveness of the intervention were prospectively collected from the implementation of the program by a health care provider in Badalona, Spain; the corresponding data for usual care were gathered from the literature. The health states, transition probabilities, and utilities were computed using Patient Health Questionnaire-9 scores.ResultsThe analysis was performed using data from 229 participants using the Super@ program. Results showed that the intervention was more costly than usual care; the discounted (3%) and nondiscounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were €29,367 and €26,484 per quality-adjusted life-year, respectively (approximately US $35,299 and $31,833, respectively). The intervention was cost-effective based on the €30,000 willingness-to-pay threshold typically applied in Spain (equivalent to approximately $36,060). According to the deterministic sensitivity analyses, the potential reduction of costs associated with intervention scale-up would reduce the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the intervention, although it remained more costly than usual care. A discount in the incremental effects up to 5% exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000.ConclusionsThe Super@ program, an internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy intervention for treating major depressive disorder, cost more than treatment as usual. Nevertheless, its implementation in Spain would be cost-effective from health care and societal perspectives, given the willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 compared with treatment as usual.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Adults with major depressive disorder frequently do not achieve remission with an initial treatment. Addition of psychotherapy for patients who do not achieve remission with antidepressant medication alone can target residual symptoms and protect against recurrence, but the utility of adding antidepressant medication after nonremission with cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) has received little study. The authors aimed to evaluate the acute and long-term outcomes resulting from both sequences of combination treatments. METHODS:Previously untreated adults with major depression who were randomly assigned to receive escitalopram, duloxetine, or CBT monotherapy and completed 12 weeks of treatment without achieving remission entered an additional 12 weeks of combination treatment. For patients who did not achieve remission with CBT, escitalopram was added (CBT plus medication group) to their treatment, and for those who did not achieve remission with an antidepressant, CBT was added (medication plus CBT group) to their treatment. Patients who responded to the combination treatment entered an 18-month follow-up phase to assess risk of recurrence. RESULTS:A total of 112 patients who did not achieve remission with a monotherapy entered combination treatment (41 who responded to monotherapy but did not achieve remission and 71 who did not respond to monotherapy). Overall, remission rates after subsequent combination therapy were significantly higher among patients who responded to monotherapy but did not achieve remission (61%) than among patients who did not respond to monotherapy (41%). Among patients who responded to monotherapy but did not achieve remission, the remission rate in the CBT plus medication group (89%) was higher than in the medication plus CBT group (53%). However, among patients whose depression did not respond to monotherapy, rates of response and remission were similar between the treatment arms. Higher levels of anxiety, both prior to monotherapy and prior to beginning combination treatment, predicted poorer outcomes for both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS:The order in which CBT and antidepressant medication were sequentially combined did not appear to affect outcomes. Addition of an antidepressant is an effective approach to treating residual symptoms for patients who do not achieve remission with CBT, as is adding CBT after antidepressant monotherapy. Patients who do not respond to one treatment modality warrant consideration for addition of the alternative modality.

Project description:BackgroundInternet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (iCBT) has been demonstrated to be cost- and clinically effective. There is a need, however, for increased therapist contact for some patient groups. Combining iCBT with traditional face-to-face (FtF) consultations in a blended format may produce a new treatment format (B-CBT) with multiple benefits from both traditional CBT and iCBT, such as individual adaptation, lower costs than traditional therapy, wide geographical and temporal availability, and possibly lower threshold to implementation.ObjectiveThe primary aim of this study is to compare directly the clinical effectiveness of B-CBT with FtF-CBT for adult major depressive disorder.MethodsA 2-arm randomized controlled noninferiority trial compared B-CBT for adult depression with treatment as usual (TAU). The trial was researcher blinded (unblinded for participants and clinicians). B-CBT comprised 6 sessions of FtF-CBT alternated with 6-8 web-based CBT self-help modules. TAU comprised 12 sessions of FtF-CBT. All participants were aged 18 or older and met the diagnostic criteria for major depressive disorder and were recruited via a national iCBT clinic. The primary outcome was change in depression severity on the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Secondary analyses included client satisfaction (8-item Client Satisfaction Questionnaire [CSQ-8]), patient expectancy (Credibility and Expectancy Questionnaire [CEQ]), and working (Working Alliance Inventory [WAI] and Technical Alliance Inventory [TAI]). The primary outcome was analyzed by a mixed effects model including all available data from baseline, weekly measures, 3-, 6, and 12-month follow-up.ResultsA total of 76 individuals were randomized, with 38 allocated to each treatment group. Age ranged from 18 to 71 years (SD 13.96) with 56 (74%) females. Attrition rate was 20% (n=15), which was less in the FtF-CBT group (n=6, 16%) than in the B-CBT group (n=9, 24%). As many as 53 (70%) completed 9 or more sessions almost equally distributed between the groups (nFtF-CBT=27, 71%; nB-CBT=26, 68%). PHQ-9 reduced 11.38 points in the FtF-CBT group and 8.10 in the B-CBT group. At 6 months, the mean difference was a mere 0.17 points. The primary analyses confirmed large and significant within-group reductions in both groups (FtF-CBT: β=-.03; standard error [SE] 0.00; P<.001 and B-CBT: β=-.02; SE 0.00; P<.001). A small but significant interaction effect was observed between groups (β=.01; SE 0.00; P=.03). Employment status influenced the outcome differently between groups, where the B-CBT group was seen to profit more from not being full-time employed than the FtF group.ConclusionsWith large within-group effects in both treatment arms, the study demonstrated feasibility of B-CBT in Denmark. At 6 months' follow-up, there appeared to be no difference between the 2 treatment formats, with a small but nonsignificant difference at 12 months. The study seems to demonstrate that B-CBT is capable of producing treatment effects that are close to FtF-CBT and that completion rates and satisfaction rates were comparable between groups. However, the study was limited by small sample size and should be interpreted with caution.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02796573; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02796573.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.1186/s12888-016-1140-y.

Project description:ObjectiveConsistent evidence suggests residual depressive symptomology are the strongest predictors of depression relapse following cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and antidepressant medications (ADM's). Psychometric network models help detecting and understanding central symptoms that remain post-treatment, along with their complex co-occurrences. However, individual psychometric network studies show inconsistent findings. This systematic review and IPD network analysis aimed to estimate and compare the symptom network structures of residual depressive symptoms following CBT, ADM's, and their combination.MethodsPsycINFO, PsycArticles, and PubMed were systematically searched through October 2020 for studies that have assessed individuals with major depression at post-treatment receiving either CBT and/or ADM's (venlafaxine, escitalopram, mirtazapine). IPD was requested from eligible samples to estimate and compare residual symptom psychometric network models post-CBT and post-ADM's.ResultsIn total, 25 from 663 eligible samples, including 1,389 patients qualified for the IPD. Depressed mood and anhedonia were consistently central residual symptoms post-CBT and post-ADM's. For CBT, fatigue-related and anxiety symptoms were also central post-treatment. A significant difference in network structure across treatments (CBT vs. ADM) was observed for samples measuring depression severity using the MADRS. Specifically, stronger symptom occurrences were present amongst lassitude-suicide post-CBT (vs. ADM's) and amongst lassitude-inability to feel post-ADM's (vs. CBT). No significant difference in global strength was observed across treatments.ConclusionsCore major depression symptoms remain central across treatments, strategies to target these symptoms should be considered. Anxiety and fatigue related complaints also remain central post-CBT. Efforts must be made amongst researchers, institutions, and journals to permit sharing of IPD.Systematic Review Registration: A protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020141663; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=141663).

Dataset Information

Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in patients receiving disability benefits: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

Objectives

Data sources

Study appraisal and synthesis methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for depression in patients receiving disability benefits: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets