Dataset Information

Supportive therapy for schizophrenia.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Supportive therapy is often used in everyday clinical care and in evaluative studies of other treatments.

Objectives

To review the effects of supportive therapy compared with standard care, or other treatments in addition to standard care for people with schizophrenia.

Search methods

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register of trials (November 2012).

Selection criteria

All randomised trials involving people with schizophrenia and comparing supportive therapy with any other treatment or standard care.

Data collection and analysis

We reliably selected studies, quality rated these and extracted data. For dichotomous data, we estimated the risk ratio (RR) using a fixed-effect model with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Where possible, we undertook intention-to-treat analyses. For continuous data, we estimated the mean difference (MD) fixed-effect with 95% CIs. We estimated heterogeneity (I(2) technique) and publication bias. We used GRADE to rate quality of evidence.

Main results

Four new trials were added after the 2012 search. The review now includes 24 relevant studies, with 2126 participants. Overall, the evidence was very low quality.We found no significant differences in the primary outcomes of relapse, hospitalisation and general functioning between supportive therapy and standard care.There were, however, significant differences favouring other psychological or psychosocial treatments over supportive therapy. These included hospitalisation rates (4 RCTs, n = 306, RR 1.82 CI 1.11 to 2.99, very low quality of evidence), clinical improvement in mental state (3 RCTs, n = 194, RR 1.27 CI 1.04 to 1.54, very low quality of evidence) and satisfaction of treatment for the recipient of care (1 RCT, n = 45, RR 3.19 CI 1.01 to 10.7, very low quality of evidence). For this comparison, we found no evidence of significant differences for rate of relapse, leaving the study early and quality of life.When we compared supportive therapy to cognitive behavioural therapy CBT), we again found no significant differences in primary outcomes. There were very limited data to compare supportive therapy with family therapy and psychoeducation, and no studies provided data regarding clinically important change in general functioning, one of our primary outcomes of interest.

Authors' conclusions

There are insufficient data to identify a difference in outcome between supportive therapy and standard care. There are several outcomes, including hospitalisation and general mental state, indicating advantages for other psychological therapies over supportive therapy but these findings are based on a few small studies where we graded the evidence as very low quality. Future research would benefit from larger trials that use supportive therapy as the main treatment arm rather than the comparator.

SUBMITTER: Buckley LA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6486211 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:The health benefits of physical activity and exercise are well documented and these effects could help people with schizophrenia. OBJECTIVES:To determine the mental health effects of exercise/physical activity programmes for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses. SEARCH STRATEGY:We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (December 2008) which is based on regular searches of CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and PsycINFO. We also inspected references within relevant papers. SELECTION CRITERIA:We included all randomised controlled trials comparing any intervention where physical activity or exercise was considered to be the main or active ingredient with standard care or other treatments for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like illnesses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:We independently inspected citations and abstracts, ordered papers, quality assessed and data extracted. For binary outcomes we calculated a fixed-effect risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI). Where possible, the weighted number needed to treat/harm statistic (NNT/H) and its 95% confidence interval (CI), was also calculated. For continuous outcomes, endpoint data were preferred to change data. We synthesised non-skewed data from valid scales using a weighted mean difference (WMD). MAIN RESULTS:Three randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Trials assessed the effects of exercise on physical and mental health. Overall numbers leaving the trials were similar. Two trials (Beebe 2005 and Marzaloni 2008) compared exercise to standard care and both found exercise to significantly improve negative symptoms of mental state (Mental Health Inventory Depression: 1RCT, n=10, MD 17.50 CI 6.70 to 28.30, PANNS negative: 1RCT, n=10, MD -8.50 CI -11.11 to -5.89). No absolute effects were found for positive symptoms of mental state. Physical health improved significantly in the exercise group compared to those in standard care (1RCT, n=13, MD 79.50 CI 33.82 to 125.18), but no effect on peoples' weight/BMI was apparent. Duraiswamy 2007 compared exercise with yoga and found that yoga had a better outcome for mental state (PANNS total: 1RCT, n=41, MD 14.95 CI 2.60 to 27.30). The same trial also found those in the yoga group had significantly better quality of life scores (WHOQOL Physical: 1RCT, n=41, MD -9.22 CI -18.86 to 0.42). Adverse effects (AIMS total scores) were, however, similar. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Results of this Cochrane review are similar to existing reviews that have examined the health benefits of exercise in this population (Faulkner 2005). Although studies included in this review are small and used various measures of physical and mental health, results indicated that regular exercise programmes are possible in this population, and that they can have healthful effects on both the physical and mental health and well-being of individuals with schizophrenia. Larger randomised studies are required before any definitive conclusions can be drawn.

Project description:ContextOlder patients with depression and executive dysfunction represent a population with significant disability and a high likelihood of failing pharmacotherapy.ObjectivesTo examine whether problem-solving therapy (PST) reduces disability more than does supportive therapy (ST) in older patients with depression and executive dysfunction and whether this effect is mediated by improvement in depressive symptoms.DesignRandomized controlled trial.SettingWeill Cornell Medical College and University of California at San Francisco.ParticipantsAdults (aged >59 years) with major depression and executive dysfunction recruited between December 2002 and November 2007 and followed up for 36 weeks. Intervention Twelve sessions of PST modified for older depressed adults with executive impairment or ST. Main Outcome Measure Disability as quantified using the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II.ResultsOf 653 individuals referred to this study, 221 met the inclusion criteria and were randomized to receive PST or ST. Both PST and ST led to comparable improvement in disability in the first 6 weeks of treatment, but a more prominent reduction was noted in PST participants at weeks 9 and 12. The difference between PST and ST was greater in patients with greater cognitive impairment and more previous episodes. Reduction in disability paralleled reduction in depressive symptoms. The therapeutic advantage of PST over ST in reducing depression was, in part, due to greater reduction in disability by PST. Although disability increased during the 24 weeks after the end of treatment, the advantage of PST over ST was retained.ConclusionsThese results suggest that PST is more effective than ST in reducing disability in older patients with major depression and executive dysfunction, and its benefits were retained after the end of treatment. The clinical value of this finding is that PST may be a treatment alternative in an older patient population likely to be resistant to pharmacotherapy.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00052091.

Project description:PURPOSE:Breast cancer (BC) is a risk factor for major depressive disorder (MDD), yet little research has tested the efficacy of different psychotherapies for depressed women with BC. This study, the largest to date, compared outcomes of three evidence-based, 12-week therapies in treating major depressive disorder among women with breast cancer. METHODS:This randomized trial compared interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT), problem solving therapy (PST), and brief supportive psychotherapy (BSP). Conducted at the outpatient clinic of the New York State Psychiatric Institute/Columbia University, the trial offered bilingual treatment by treatment-specific psychotherapists supervised by treatment experts. The primary outcome was change in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) at 12 weeks. Secondary outcomes included other validated patient-reported outcomes for depression and quality of life. RESULTS:Of 179 women with breast cancer screening positive for depression at the Columbia Cancer Center, 134 eligible patients signed informed treatment consent. Half of patients were Hispanic and economically disadvantaged. Most women had stage I (35.2%) or II (36.9%) BC; 9% had stage IV. The three brief psychotherapies showed similar improvements on the HAM-D, with large pre-post effect sizes (d?~?1.0); a priori defined response rates were 35% for IPT, 50% for PST and 31% for BSP, and remission rates 25%, 30% and 27%, respectively. The three treatments also showed similar improvements in the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire. Dropout was high, ranging from 37 to 52% across treatments. Predictors of dropout included having?<?16 years of education and annual family income <?$20,000. CONCLUSIONS:Among patients who completed treatment, all three psychotherapies were associated with similar, meaningful improvements in depression. Physical distance between the oncology and psychiatric treatment sites might have contributed to high dropout. This study suggests various psychotherapy approaches may benefit patients with breast cancer and major depression.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Major depressive disorder represents (MDD) a major cause of disability and disease burden. Beside antidepressant medication, psychotherapy is a key approach of treatment. Schema therapy has been shown to be effective in the treatment of psychiatric disorders, especially personality disorders, in a variety of settings and patient groups. Nevertheless, there is no evidence on its effectiveness for MDD in an inpatient nor day clinic setting and little is known about the factors that drive treatment response in such a target group. METHODS:In the current protocol, we outline OPTIMA (OPtimized Treatment Identification at the MAx Planck Institute): a single-center randomized controlled trial of schema therapy as a treatment approach for MDD in an inpatient and day clinic setting. Over the course of 7 weeks, we compare schema therapy with cognitive behavioral therapy and individual supportive therapy, conducted in individual and group sessions and with no restrictions regarding concurrent antidepressant medication, thus approximating real-life treatment conditions. N?=?300 depressed patients are included. All study therapists undergo a specific training and supervision and therapy adherence is assessed. Primary outcome is depressive symptom severity as self-assessment (Beck Depression Inventory-II) and secondary outcomes are clinical ratings of MDD (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale), recovery rates after 7 weeks according to the Munich-Composite International Diagnostic Interview, general psychopathology (Brief Symptom Inventory), global functioning (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule), and clinical parameters such as dropout rates. Further parameters on a behavioral, cognitive, psychophysiological, and biological level are measured before, during and after treatment and in 2 follow-up assessments after 6 and 24?months after end of treatment. DISCUSSION:To our knowledge, the OPTIMA-Trial is the first to investigate the effectiveness of schema therapy as a treatment approach of MDD, to investigate mechanisms of change, and explore predictors of treatment response in an inpatient and day clinic setting by using such a wide range of parameters. Insights from OPTIMA will allow more integrative approaches of psychotherapy of MDD. Especially, the identification of intervention-specific markers of treatment response can improve evidence-based clinical decision for individualizing treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Identifier on clinicaltrials.gov : NCT03287362 ; September, 12, 2017.