Literature DB >> 33947374

The D*Phase-study: study protocol for a pragmatic two-phased, randomised controlled (non-inferiority) trial that addresses treatment non-response and compares cognitive behavioural therapy and short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy for major depression.

M F Miggiels1,2, P M Ten Klooster3, S Bremer-Hoeve4,5, J J M Dekker5,6, M J H Huibers5,7, E Reefhuis4, H L Van7, M K van Dijk4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several evidence-based psychotherapeutic treatment options are available for depression, but the treatment results could be improved. The D*Phase study directly compares short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy (SPSP) and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). The objectives are 1. to investigate if, from a group level perspective, SPSP is not inferior to CBT in the treatment of major depressive disorder, 2. to build a model that may help predict the optimal type of treatment for a specific individual; and 3. to determine whether a change of therapist or a change of therapist and treatment method are effective strategies to deal with non-response. Furthermore (4.), the effect of the therapeutic alliance, treatment integrity and therapist allegiance on treatment outcome will be investigated.
METHOD: In this pragmatic randomised controlled trial, 308 patients with a primary diagnosis of MDD are being recruited from a specialised mental health care institution in the Netherlands. In the first phase, patients are randomised 1:1 to either SPSP or CBT. In case of treatment non-response, a second phase follows in which non-responders from treatment phase one are randomised 1:1:1 to one of three groups: continuing the initial treatment with the same therapist, continuing the initial treatment with another therapist or continuing the other type of treatment with another therapist. In both treatment phases, patients are offered sixteen twice-weekly psychotherapy sessions. The primary outcome is an improvement in depressive symptoms. Process variables, working alliance and depressive symptoms, are frequently measured. Comprehensive assessments take place before the start of the first phase (at baseline), in week one, two and four during the treatment, and directly after the treatment (week eight). DISCUSSION: While the naturalistic setting of the study involves several challenges, we expect, by focusing on a large and diverse number of research variables, to generate important knowledge that may help enhance the effect of psychotherapeutic treatment for MDD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was registered on 26 August 2016 with the Netherlands Trial Register, part of the Dutch Cochrane Centre (NL5753), https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/5753.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Allegiance; Cognitive behavioural therapy; Depression; Non-response; Prescriptive factors; Psychodynamic psychotherapy; Treatment integrity; Working alliance

Year:  2021        PMID: 33947374     DOI: 10.1186/s12888-021-03156-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Psychiatry        ISSN: 1471-244X            Impact factor:   3.630


  49 in total

1.  How important are the common factors in psychotherapy? An update.

Authors:  Bruce E Wampold
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 49.548

2.  Psychotherapists' personal identities, theoretical orientations, and professional relationships: elective affinity and role adjustment as modes of congruence.

Authors:  Erkki Heinonen; David Elliot Orlinsky
Journal:  Psychother Res       Date:  2013-07-08

3.  Evidence-based therapy relationships: research conclusions and clinical practices.

Authors:  John C Norcross; Bruce E Wampold
Journal:  Psychotherapy (Chic)       Date:  2011-03

Review 4.  The Role of Common Factors in Psychotherapy Outcomes.

Authors:  Pim Cuijpers; Mirjam Reijnders; Marcus J H Huibers
Journal:  Annu Rev Clin Psychol       Date:  2018-12-14       Impact factor: 18.561

Review 5.  The effects of psychotherapies for major depression in adults on remission, recovery and improvement: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Pim Cuijpers; Eirini Karyotaki; Erica Weitz; Gerhard Andersson; Steven D Hollon; Annemieke van Straten
Journal:  J Affect Disord       Date:  2014-02-24       Impact factor: 4.839

6.  The effects of cognitive behavioral therapy as an anti-depressive treatment is falling: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tom J Johnsen; Oddgeir Friborg
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2015-05-11       Impact factor: 17.737

7.  The efficacy of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy in treating depressive and anxiety disorders: a meta-analysis of direct comparisons.

Authors:  Pim Cuijpers; Marit Sijbrandij; Sander L Koole; Gerhard Andersson; Aartjan T Beekman; Charles F Reynolds
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 49.548

Review 8.  Patient preference for psychological vs pharmacologic treatment of psychiatric disorders: a meta-analytic review.

Authors:  R Kathryn McHugh; Sarah W Whitton; Andrew D Peckham; Jeffrey A Welge; Michael W Otto
Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 4.384

Review 9.  Who benefits from psychotherapies for adult depression? A meta-analytic update of the evidence.

Authors:  Pim Cuijpers; Eirini Karyotaki; Mirjam Reijnders; Marcus J H Huibers
Journal:  Cogn Behav Ther       Date:  2018-01-18

Review 10.  Comparative efficacy of seven psychotherapeutic interventions for patients with depression: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jürgen Barth; Thomas Munder; Heike Gerger; Eveline Nüesch; Sven Trelle; Hansjörg Znoj; Peter Jüni; Pim Cuijpers
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2013-05-28       Impact factor: 11.069

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.