Depressed patients' preferences for type of psychotherapy: a preliminary study

The D*Phase-study: Comparing short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy and cognitive behavioural therapy for major depressive disorder in a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Given both the large volume and manifold preferences of patients with depression, the availability of various effective treatments is important. Psychodynamic psychotherapy (PDT) has received less research in comparison to cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for major depressive disorder (MDD). This study aimed to establish whether short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy (SPSP) is non-inferior to CBT in the treatment of MDD.

METHODS

A non-inferiority trial was conducted in a Dutch mental health setting, with 290 patients randomised to receive 16 sessions of either CBT or SPSP, over eight weeks. Primary outcome was depressive symptom severity assessed using the self-rated Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS-SR). The non-inferiority margin was prespecified as a - 5 post-treatment difference on the IDS-SR. Secondary outcome measures were functional impairment caused by symptoms assessed using the Sheehan disability scale (SDS), and wellbeing measured by the Mental Health Continuum-Short Form (MHC-SF).

RESULTS

Both intention-to-treat (baseline-adjusted mean difference 1.62, 95 % CI -1.82 to 5.05) and per-protocol analyses (mean difference 2.54; 95 % CI -0.63 to 5.72) showed SPSP to be non-inferior to CBT in reducing depressive symptoms. SPSP showed slightly but significantly higher remission rates and wellbeing scores.

LIMITATIONS

Patients opting for other therapies or medication did not take part in the trial. Follow-up measures or clinician-rated questionnaires were not included.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings support SPSP as a viable treatment option for MDD, expanding the available choices for patients and broadening treatment options.

Individuals fearing positivity do not perceive positive affect treatments as strong fits: A novel experimental finding and replication

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Positive affect treatments, which hold great promise to connect with those who are otherwise resistant to depression treatments, attempt to upregulate positive emotions. These treatments have potential advantages over standard therapies because they target cross-diagnostic core symptoms (e.g., anhedonia) that may respond better to interventions aimed at increased positivity. However, the extent to which these treatments are a perceived fit by individuals for whom they were developed (i.e., individuals who are afraid of, avoid, or experience less positivity) is unclear.

METHODS

We conducted two independent studies utilizing a cross-sectional, experimental design to examine perceived treatment fit. Participants (Study 1: N = 416; Study 2: N = 321) read counterbalanced treatment descriptions of (1) positive affect treatment and (2) psychodynamic psychotherapy and answered questions regarding perceived treatment fit, effectiveness, and preference of the two treatments.

RESULTS

Our findings suggest that individuals fearful of happiness perceived a prospective depression treatment specifically targeting positivity as a poorer fit, demonstrating an opposite pattern to the overall samples' treatment preference in both studies. Thus, as predicted by Reward Devaluation Theory, those fearing positivity exhibited avoidance behaviors for treatments that are to an extent designed, and might otherwise be most effective, for them.

LIMITATIONS

The current study utilized a college student sample.

CONCLUSION

These empirical findings may ultimately inform psychoeducation of why positive affect treatments, which are in direct contrast with clients' preferences, may be the very treatments they need the most.

Understanding Treatment Preferences of Australian Patients Living with Treatment-Resistant Depression

BACKGROUND

There is evidence of improved adherence and treatment outcomes when patients' treatment preferences are considered, and shared decision making is utilized.

PURPOSE

We aimed to better understand treatment preferences among Australians with treatment-resistant depression (TRD), focusing on the specific treatment attributes that people value (such as effectiveness, risk of side effects and cost) and their relative importance. The risk-benefit trade-offs that characterize treatment choices were also examined.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An online survey of 75 patients with experience of TRD was conducted, consisting of two discrete choice experiment (DCE) components - a medication DCE and a treatment plan DCE. Participants were able to prioritize and trade off different features of medications and treatment plans. Additional questions aimed to better define this population group, which in Australia is poorly understood.

RESULTS

In both DCEs, two distinct latent classes were identified. In the medication DCE, the classes were distinguished by willingness to consider new treatment alternatives. Participants in class 1 were reluctant to give up current treatment, while those in the slightly larger class 2 preferred new treatment options. In both classes, treatment effectiveness and cost were the greatest contributors to preference. Similar behavior was seen in the treatment plan DCE, with the larger class more likely to choose a new plan over their current treatment arrangement. Participants preferred medications that were low-cost, taken orally, had a high percentage improvement in mood symptoms, high rate of remission and low risk of weight gain. A similar result was found in preferences for treatment plans such that plans with the greatest effectiveness and lowest cost were most favorable.

CONCLUSION

Patient preferences should routinely be considered and discussed to guide informed decisions regarding the value of new and existing medications for TRD and how they sit in the context of treatment plans.

What format of treatment do patients with emotional disorders prefer and why? Implications for public mental health settings and policies

OBJECTIVE

We analyzed the preference of three psychological intervention formats-individual, group, and online-in a sample of 267 patients with a primary diagnosis of emotional disorder in Spanish public mental health settings.

METHOD

We studied patients' preferences considering sociodemographic characteristics, diagnoses, history of psychological treatments, number of sessions, and satisfaction with past interventions.

RESULTS

Most participants (85.4%) preferred psychological treatment in an individual format, 14.2% in group, and 0.4% online. When comparing the people who chose individual and group treatment, no demographic or clinical differences were found. The arguments against group format were the lack of privacy and expression difficulties. Regarding online format, these included being considered impersonal and ineffective.

CONCLUSION

The rejection of group and online psychotherapy formats allows us to define the actions we should carry out in public mental health settings to improve the acceptance of more cost-effective therapy formats.