Helpful Factors in the Treatment of Depression from the Patient's, Carer's and Professional's Perspective: A Concept Map Study

A blended module (STAIRS) to promote functional and personal recovery in patients with a major depressive disorder in remission: study protocol of a concurrent mixed methods randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Despite the availability of a wide variety of evidence-based treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD), many patients still experience impairments in their lives after remission. Programs are needed that effectively support patients in coping with these impairments. The program Storytelling and Training to Advance Individual Recovery Skills (STAIRS) was developed to address this need and combines the use of peer contact, expert-by-experience guidance, family support and professional blended care. The aim of the planned study is (1) to assess the efficacy of the STAIRS program in patients with remitted MDD, (2) to investigate patients' subjective experiences with STAIRS, and (3) to evaluate the program's cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

A concurrent mixed-methods randomized controlled trial design will be used. Patients aged between 18 and 65 years with remitted MDD (N = 140) will be randomized to either a group receiving care as usual (CAU) + the STAIRS-program or a control group receiving CAU + some basic psychoeducation. Quantitative efficacy data on functional and personal recovery and associated aspects will be collected using self-report questionnaires at the start of the intervention, immediately following the intervention, and at the six-month follow-up. Insights into patients' experiences on perceived effects and the way in which different program elements contribute to this effect, as well as the usability and acceptability of the program, will be gained by conducting qualitative interviews with patients from the experimental group, who are selected using maximum variation sampling. Finally, data on healthcare resource use, productivity loss and quality of life will be collected and analysed to assess the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of the STAIRS-program.

DISCUSSION

Well-designed recovery-oriented programs for patients suffering from MDD are scarce. If efficacy and cost-effectiveness are demonstrated with this study and patients experience the STAIRS program as usable and acceptable, this program can be a valuable addition to CAU. The qualitative interviews may give insights into what works for whom, which can be used to promote implementation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on 1 July 2021, registration number NCT05440812.

Effectiveness of a self-management training for patients with chronic and treatment resistant anxiety or depressive disorders on quality of life, symptoms, and empowerment: results of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Anxiety and depressive disorders are common mental disorders. A substantial part of patients does not achieve symptomatic remission after treatment in specialized services. Current care as usual (CAU) for these patients consists of long-term supportive contacts. Termination of CAU is often not considered to be an option due to persistent symptoms, a low level of functioning, and the absence of further treatment options. A new intervention, ZemCAD, offers a program focused on rehabilitation and self-management, followed by referral back to primary care.

METHODS

This multicenter randomized controlled trial was carried out in twelve specialized outpatient mental health care services in the Netherlands. Consenting and eligible patients were invited for the MINI interview and the baseline questionnaire. Assessments were done at 6 (T1), 12 (T2) and 18 (T3) months post baseline. We used linear mixed model analysis (LMM) to ascertain the effectiveness of the ZemCAD group relative to the CAU group on quality of life, symptom severity and empowerment.

RESULTS

In total 141 patients were included. The results at 18-month follow-up regarding to quality of life and symptom severity, showed no significant differences between the ZemCAD group and the CAU group, except on the 'social relationships'-domain (d = 0.37). With regard to empowerment a significant difference between both groups was observed in the total empowerment score and one empowerment dimension (d = 0.45 and d = 0.39, respectively). After the ZemCAD intervention, more patients went from specialized outpatient mental health services back to a less specialized health care setting with less intensive treatment, such as primary care.

CONCLUSION

The findings in this study suggest that patients with chronic and treatment-resistant anxiety and depression using the ZemCAD intervention improve on empowerment but not on symptom severity or quality of life. Since little is known about the effects of rehabilitation and self-management in patients with chronic and treatment resistant anxiety and depressive disorders, this is a first attempt to provide a proof-of-concept study in this under-researched but important field.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register: NTR3335 , registered 7 March 2012.

Patients' perspectives on treatment with Metacognitive Training for Depression (D-MCT): Results on acceptability

BACKGROUND

Our understanding of how patients perceive and evaluate treatment for depression is scarce. Because dropout rates are high among individuals in treatment for depression, it is necessary to expand the focus of research to patients' perspectives on the treatment they receive. The aim of the two studies presented was to evaluate patient acceptance of Metacognitive Training for Depression (D-MCT), a highly standardized group intervention.

METHODS

Acceptability was evaluated in an open case series (Study 1, N = 70) and a randomized controlled trial (RCT; Study 2, N = 84). In both studies, participants rated their subjective appraisal on a 15-item questionnaire after administration of eight D-MCT modules. In Study 1, a subsample of patients also evaluated modules individually after each session. In Study 2, ratings were compared to an active control intervention (walking and psychoeducation sessions), and assessment was repeated at 6-months follow-up.

RESULTS

High rates of acceptance of the D-MCT were demonstrated in both studies immediately after treatment (post-assessment). In addition, the RCT showed better evaluations for the D-MCT than for the control condition at post-assessment as well as at 6-months follow-up. Weekly session evaluations in Study 1 indicated good acceptance for individual modules.

LIMITATIONS

Evaluations could only be obtained from completers; blinding of patients and therapists was not possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of the two studies suggest that D-MCT represents a promising group treatment in terms of patient acceptance and provide an example of how patients' feedback may be used to improve treatment.