Ellen Driessen

The efficacy of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy for depression: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES The efficacy of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (STPP) for depression is debated. Recently, a number of large-scale and high-quality studies have been conducted. We examined the efficacy of STPP by updating our 2010 meta-analysis. RESULTS After a thorough literature search, 54 studies (33 randomized clinical trials) totaling 3946 subjects were included. STPP was significantly more effective than control conditions at post-treatment on depression, general psychopathology and quality of life measures (d=0.49 to 0.69). STPP pre-treatment to post-treatment changes (d=0.57 to 1.18) indicated significant improvements on all outcome measures, which either significantly improved further (d=0.20 to 1.04) or were maintained from post-treatment to follow-up. No significant differences were found between individual STPP and other psychotherapies at post-treatment (d=-0.14) and follow-up (d=-0.06) in analyses that were adequately powered to detect a clinically relevant difference. STPP was significantly more efficacious than other psychotherapies on anxiety measures at both post-treatment (d=0.35) and follow-up (d=0.76). CONCLUSION We found clear indications that STPP is effective in the treatment of depression in adults. Although more high-quality studies are needed, particularly to assess the efficacy of STPP compared to control conditions at follow-up and to antidepressants, these findings add to the evidence-base of STPP for depression.

Cognitive behavioral therapy for mood disorders: efficacy, moderators and mediators.

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is efficacious in the acute treatment of depression and may provide a viable alternative to antidepressant medication (ADM) for even more severely depressed unipolar patients when implemented in a competent fashion. CBT also may be of use as an adjunct to medication treatment of bipolar patients, although there have been few studies and they are not wholly consistent. CBT does seem to have an enduring effect that protects against subsequent relapse and recurrence following the end of active treatment, which is not the case for medications. Single studies that require replication suggest that patients who are married or unemployed or who have more antecedent life events may do better in CBT than in ADM, as might patients who are free from comorbid Axis II disorders, whereas patients with comorbid Axis II disorders seem to do better in ADM than in CBT. There also are indications that CBT may work through processes specified by theory to produce change in cognition that in turn mediate subsequent change in depression and freedom from relapse following treatment termination, although evidence in that regard is not yet conclusive.

The efficacy of non-directive supportive therapy for adult depression: A meta-analysis

The effects of non-directive supportive therapy (NDST) for adult depression have been examined in a considerable number of studies, but no meta-analysis of these studies has been conducted. We selected 31 studies on NDST from a comprehensive database of trials, examining psychotherapies for adult depression, and conducted meta-analyses in which NDST was compared with control groups, other psychotherapies and pharmacotherapy. We found that NDST is effective in the treatment of depression in adults (g=0.58; 95% CI: 0.45-0.72). NDST was less effective than other psychological treatments (differential effect size g=-0.20; 95% CI: -0.32 to -0.08, p<0.01), but these differences were no longer present after controlling for researcher allegiance. We estimated that extra-therapeutic factors (those processes operating in waiting-list and care-as-usual controls) were responsible for 33.3% of the overall improvement, non-specific factors (the effects of NDST compared with control groups) for 49.6%, and specific factors (the effects of NDST compared with other therapies) for 17.1%. NDST has a considerable effect on symptoms of depression. Most of the effect of therapy for adult depression is realized by non-specific factors, and our results suggest that the contribution of specific effects is limited at best.

Does Pretreatment Severity Moderate the Efficacy of Psychological Treatment of Adult Outpatient Depression? A Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE It is widely believed that psychological treatment has little effect on more severely depressed patients. This study assessed whether pretreatment severity moderates psychological treatment outcome relative to controls by means of meta-analyses. METHOD We included 132 studies (10,134 participants) from a database of studies (www.evidencebasedpsychotherapies.org) in which the effects of psychological treatment on adult outpatients with a depressive disorder or an elevated level of depressive symptoms were compared with a control condition in a randomized controlled trial. Two raters independently extracted outcome data and rated study characteristics. We conducted metaregression analyses assessing whether mean pretreatment depression scores predicted psychological treatment versus control condition posttreatment effect size and subgroup analyses summarizing the results of studies reporting within-study analyses of depression severity and psychological treatment outcome. RESULTS Psychological treatment was found to be consistently superior to control conditions (d = 0.40-0.88). We found no indication that pretreatment mean depression scores predicted psychological treatment versus control condition posttreatment effect size, even after adjusting for relevant study characteristics. However, among the smaller subset of studies that reported within-study severity analyses, posttreatment effect sizes were higher for high-severity patients (d = 0.63) than for low-severity patients (d = 0.22) when psychological treatment was efficacious relative to a more stringent control. CONCLUSION Contrary to conventional wisdom, our findings suggest that when compared with control conditions, psychological treatment might be more efficacious for high-severity than for low-severity patients. Because the number of studies reporting within-study severity analyses is small, we recommend that future studies routinely report tests for Severity × Treatment interactions.

The efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychodynamic therapy in the outpatient treatment of major depression: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE The efficacy of psychodynamic therapies for depression remains open to debate because of a paucity of high-quality studies. The authors compared the efficacy of psychodynamic therapy with that of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), hypothesizing nonsignificant differences and the noninferiority of psychodynamic therapy relative to CBT. METHOD A total of 341 adults who met DSM-IV criteria for a major depressive episode and had Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) scores ≥14 were randomly assigned to 16 sessions of individual manualized CBT or short-term psychodynamic supportive therapy. Severely depressed patients (HAM-D score >24) also received antidepressant medication according to protocol. The primary outcome measure was posttreatment remission rate (HAM-D score ≤7). Secondary outcome measures included mean posttreatment HAM-D score and patient-rated depression score and 1-year follow-up outcomes. Data were analyzed with generalized estimating equations and mixed-model analyses using intent-to-treat samples. Noninferiority margins were prespecified as an odds ratio of 0.49 for remission rates and a Cohens d value of 0.30 for continuous outcome measures. RESULTS No statistically significant treatment differences were found for any of the outcome measures. The average posttreatment remission rate was 22.7%. Noninferiority was shown for posttreatment HAM-D and patient-rated depression scores but could not be demonstrated for posttreatment remission rates or any of the follow-up measures. CONCLUSIONS The findings extend the evidence base of psychodynamic therapy for depression but also indicate that time-limited treatment is insufficient for a substantial number of patients encountered in psychiatric outpatient clinics.

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy versus Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy in the outpatient treatment of depression: a randomized controlled trial

BackgroundPrevious research has shown that Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy (SPSP) is an effective alternative to pharmacotherapy and combined treatment (SPSP and pharmacotherapy) in the treatment of depressed outpatients. The question remains, however, how Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy compares with other established psychotherapy methods. The present study compares Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy to the evidence-based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in terms of acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy in the outpatient treatment of depression. Moreover, this study aims to identify clinical predictors that can distinguish patients who may benefit from either of these treatments in particular. This article outlines the study protocol. The results of the study, which is being currently carried out, will be presented as soon as they are available.Methods/DesignAdult outpatients with a main diagnosis of major depressive disorder or depressive disorder not otherwise specified according to DSM-IV criteria and mild to severe depressive symptoms (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score ≥ 14) are randomly allocated to Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy or Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Both treatments are individual psychotherapies consisting of 16 sessions within 22 weeks. Assessments take place at baseline (week 0), during the treatment period (week 5 and 10) and at treatment termination (week 22). In addition, a follow-up assessment takes place one year after treatment start (week 52). Primary outcome measures are the number of patients refusing treatment (acceptability); the number of patients terminating treatment prematurely (feasibility); and the severity of depressive symptoms (efficacy) according to an independent rater, the clinician and the patient. Secondary outcome measures include general psychopathology, general psychotherapy outcome, pain, health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Clinical predictors of treatment outcome include demographic variables, psychiatric symptoms, cognitive and psychological patient characteristics and the quality of the therapeutic relationship.DiscussionThis study evaluates Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy as a treatment for depressed outpatients by comparing it to the established evidence-based treatment Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Specific strengths of this study include its strong external validity and the clinical relevance of its research aims. Limitations of the study are discussed.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trails ISRCTN31263312

Emerging evidence for intensive short-term dynamic psychotherapy with personality disorders and somatic disorders.

CME EducationaL Objectives 1. Review the outcome evidence of prior meta-analytic reviews of intensive short-term dynamic psychotherapy (ISTDP). 2. Provide an additional meta-analysis of ISTDP for the treatment of personality and somatic disorders. 3. Suggest areas for future study in the use of psychodynamic psychotherapy for personality and somatic disorders. The literature reviewing studies of psychodynamic psychotherapy clearly demonstrates evidence for the efficacy of both short-term and long-term models. Meta-analytic reviews synthesizing effects across different psychodynamic psychotherapy formats have been conducted for common mental disorders, depression, depression in the setting of personality disorder, personality disorders, and somatic disorders. Psychodynamic psychotherapy demonstrates superiority to control condition, and no significant difference to other formal psychotherapies, including cognitive behavioral therapies. Building upon a recently published systematic review and meta-analysis,11 the aim of this article is to further examine the evidence for a contemporary psychodynamic psychotherapy treatment protocol, intensive short-term dynamic psychotherapy (ISTDP), in the treatment of personality and somatic disorders.

Differential efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy and psychodynamic therapy for major depression: a study of prescriptive factors.

BACKGROUND Minimal efficacy differences have been found between cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and psychodynamic therapies for depression, but little is known about patient characteristics that might moderate differential treatment effects. We aimed to generate hypotheses regarding such potential prescriptive factors. METHOD We conducted post-hoc model-based recursive partitioning analyses alongside a randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy of CBT and short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy (SPSP). Severely depressed patients received additional antidepressant medication. We included 233 adults seeking treatment for a major depressive episode in psychiatric outpatient clinics, who completed post-treatment assessment. Post-treatment mean Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores constituted the main outcome measure. RESULTS While treatment differences (CBT v. SPSP) were minimal in the total sample of patients (d = 0.04), model-based recursive partitioning indicated differential treatment efficacy in certain subgroups of patients. SPSP was found more efficacious among moderately depressed patients receiving psychotherapy only who showed low baseline co-morbid anxiety levels (d = -0.40) and among severely depressed patients receiving psychotherapy and antidepressant medication who reported a duration of the depressive episode of ⩾1 year (d = -0.31), while CBT was found more efficacious for such patients reporting a duration <1 year (d = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS Our findings are observational and need validation before they can be used to guide treatment selection, but suggest that knowledge of prescriptive factors can help improve the efficacy of psychotherapy for depression. Depressive episode duration and co-morbid anxiety level should be included as stratification variables in future randomized clinical trials comparing CBT and psychodynamic therapy.

Moderation of the Alliance-Outcome Association by Prior Depressive Episodes: Differential Effects in Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy and Short-Term Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy

Prior studies have suggested that the association between the alliance and depression improvement varies as a function of prior history of depression. We sought to replicate these findings and extend them to short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy (SPSP) in a sample of patients who were randomized to one of these treatments and were administered the Helping Alliance Questionnaire (N=282) at Week 5 of treatment. Overall, the alliance was a predictor of symptom change (d=0.33). In SPSP, the alliance was a modest but robust predictor of change, irrespective of prior episodes (d=0.25-0.33). By contrast, in CBT, the effects of the alliance on symptom change were large for patients with 0 prior episodes (d=0.86), moderate for those with 1 prior episode (d=0.49), and small for those with 2+ prior episodes (d=0.12). These findings suggest a complex interaction between patient features and common vs. specific therapy processes. In CBT, the alliance relates to change for patients with less recurrent depression whereas other CBT-specific processes may account for change for patients with more recurrent depression.

Cognitive-behavioral versus psychodynamic therapy for major depression: secondary outcomes of a randomized clinical trial

Objective: In a randomized clinical trial, we compared the efficacy of cognitive–behavioral therapy (CBT) and psychodynamic therapy for adult outpatient depression on measures of psychopathology, interpersonal functioning, pain, and quality of life. Method: There were 341 Dutch adults (70.1% female, mean age = 38.9, SD = 10.3) meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition (DSM–IV) criteria for a major depressive episode and with a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) score ≥14, who were randomized to 16 sessions of individual manualized CBT or short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy. Severely depressed patients (HAM-D >24) received additional antidepressant medication according to a protocol. Outcome measures included the Brief Symptom Inventory, Beck Anxiety Inventory, Outcome Questionnaire, a visual analogue scale for pain, and EuroQol. Data were analyzed with mixed model analyses using intention-to-treat samples. Noninferiority margins were prespecified as Cohen’s d = −0.30. Results: Across treatment conditions, 45–60% of the patients who completed posttreatment assessment showed clinically meaningful change for most outcome measures. We found no significant differences between the treatment conditions on any of the outcome measures at both posttreatment and follow-up. Noninferiority of psychodynamic therapy to CBT was shown for posttreatment and follow-up anxiety measures as well as for posttreatment pain and quality of life measures, but could not be consistently demonstrated for the other outcomes. Conclusions: This is the first study that shows that psychodynamic therapy can be at least as efficacious as CBT for depression on important aspects of patient functioning other than depressive symptom reduction. These findings extend the evidence-base of psychodynamic therapy for depression, but replication is needed by means of rigorously designed noninferiority trials.