These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Systematic reviews of randomised clinical trials examining the effects of psychotherapeutic interventions versus "no intervention" for acute major depressive disorder and a randomised trial examining the effects of "third wave" cognitive therapy versus mentalization-based treatment for acute major depressive disorder.
    Author: Jakobsen JC.
    Journal: Dan Med J; 2014 Oct; 61(10):B4942. PubMed ID: 25283628.
    Abstract:
    Major depressive disorder afflicts an estimated 17% of individuals during their lifetimes at tremendous suffering and costs. Cognitive therapy and psychodynamic therapy may be effective treatment options for major depressive disorder, but the effects have only had limited assessment in systematic reviews. The two modern forms of psychotherapy, "third wave" cognitive therapy and mentalization-based treatment, have both gained some ground as treatments of psychiatric disorders. No randomised trial has compared the effects of these two interventions for major depressive disorder. We performed two systematic reviews with meta-analyses and trial sequential analyses using The Cochrane Collaboration methodology examining the effects of cognitive therapy and psycho-dynamic therapy for major depressive disorder. We developed a thorough treatment protocol for a randomised trial with low risks of bias (systematic error) and low risks of random errors ("play of chance") examining the effects of third wave' cognitive therapy versus mentalization-based treatment for major depressive disorder. We conducted a randomised trial according to good clinical practice examining the effects of "third wave" cognitive therapy versus mentalisation-based treatment for major depressive disorder. The first systematic review included five randomised trials examining the effects of psychodynamic therapy versus "no intervention' for major depressive disorder. Altogether the five trials randomised 365 participants who in each trial received similar antidepressants as co-interventions. All trials had high risk of bias. Four trials assessed "interpersonal psychotherapy" and one trial "short psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy". Both of these interventions are different forms of psychodynamic therapy. Meta-analysis showed that psychodynamic therapy significantly reduced depressive symptoms on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) compared with "no intervention" (mean difference -3.01 (95% confidence interval -3.98 to -2.03; p = 0.00001), no significant heterogeneity between trials). Trial sequential analysis confirmed this result. The second systematic review included 12 randomised trials examining the effects of cognitive therapy versus "no intervention" for major depressive disorder. Altogether a total of 669 participants were randomised. All trials had high risk of bias. Meta-analysis showed that cognitive therapy significantly reduced depressive symptoms on the HDRS compared with "no intervention" (four trials; mean difference -3.05 (95% confidence interval, -5.23 to -0.87; p = 0.006)). Trial sequential analysis could not confirm this result. The trial protocol showed that it seemed feasible to conduct a randomised trial with low risks of bias and low risks of random errors examining the effects of "third wave" cognitive therapy versus mentalization-based therapy in a setting in the Danish healthcare system. It turned out to be much more difficult to recruit participants in the randomised trial than expected. We only included about half of the planned participants. The results from the randomised trial showed that participants randomised to "third wave" therapy compared with participants randomised to mentalization-based treatment had borderline significantly lower HDRS scores at 18 weeks in an unadjusted analysis (mean difference -4.14 score; 95% CI -8.30 to 0.03; p = 0.051). In the adjusted analysis, the difference was significant (p = 0.039). Five (22.7%) of the participants randomised to "third wave" cognitive therapy had remission at 18 weeks versus none of the participants randomised to mentalization-based treatment (p = 0.049). Sequential analysis showed that these findings could be due to random errors. No significant differences between the two groups was found regarding Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI II), Symptom Checklist 90 Revised (SCL 90-R), and The World Health Organization-Five Well-being Index 1999 (WHO 5). We concluded that cognitive therapy and psychodynamic therapy might be effective interventions for depression measured on HDRS and BDI, but the review results might be erroneous due to risks of bias and random errors. Furthermore, the effects seem relatively small. The trial protocol showed that it was possible to develop a protocol for a randomised trial examining the effects of "third wave" cognitive therapy versus mentalization-based treatment with low risks of bias and low risks of random errors. Our trial results showed that "third wave" cognitive therapy might be a more effective intervention for depressive symptoms measured on the HDRS compared with mentalization-based treatment. The two interventions did not seem to differ significantly regarding BDI II, SCL 90-R, and WHO 5. More randomised trials with low risks of bias and low risks of random errors are needed to assess the effects of cognitive therapy, psychodynamic therapy, "third wave" cognitive therapy, and mentalization-based treatment.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]