Cognitive behavioural therapy and short-term psychoanalytical psychotherapy versus a brief psychosocial intervention in adolescents with unipolar major depressive disorder (IMPACT): a multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blind, randomised controlled superiority trial.

$\textbf{BACKGROUND}$: Psychological treatments for adolescents with unipolar major depressive disorder are associated with diagnostic remission within 28 weeks in 65-70% of patients. We aimed to assess the medium-term effects and costs of psychological therapies on maintenance of reduced depression symptoms 12 months after treatment. $\textbf{METHODS}$: We did this multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blind, randomised controlled superiority trial (IMPACT) at 15 National Health Service child and adolescent mental health service (CAMHS) clinics in three regions in England. Adolescent patients (aged 11-17 years) with a diagnosis of DSM IV major depressive disorder were randomly assigned (1:1:1), via a web-based randomisation service, to receive cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or short-term psychoanalytical therapy versus a reference brief psychological intervention. Randomisation was stochastically minimised by age, sex, self-reported depression sum score, and region. Patients and clinicians were aware of group allocation, but allocation was concealed from outcome assessors. Patients were followed up and reassessed at weeks 6, 12, 36, 52, and 86 post-randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported depression symptoms at weeks 36, 52, and 86, as measured with the self-reported Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ). Because our aim was to compare the two psychological therapies with the brief psychosocial intervention, we first established whether CBT was inferior to short-term psychoanalytical psychotherapy for the same outcome. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN83033550. $\textbf{FINDINGS}$: Between June 29, 2010, and Jan 17, 2013, we randomly assigned 470 patients to receive the brief psychosocial intervention (n=158), CBT (n=155), or short-term psychoanalytical therapy (n=157); 465 patients comprised the intention-to-treat population. 392 (84%) patients had available data for primary analysis by the end of follow-up. Treatment fidelity and differentiation were established between the three interventions. The median number of treatment sessions differed significantly between patients in the brief psychosocial intervention group (n=6 [IQR 4-11]), CBT group (n=9 [5-14]), and short-term psychoanalytical therapy group (n=11 [5-23]; p<0·0001), but there was no difference between groups in the average duration of treatment (27·5 [SD 21·5], 24·9 [17·7], 27·9 [16·8] weeks, respectively; Kruskal-Wallis p=0·238). Self-reported depression symptoms did not differ significantly between patients given CBT and those given short-term psychoanalytical therapy at weeks 36 (treatment effect 0·179, 95% CI -3·731 to 4·088; p=0·929), 52 (0·307, -3·161 to 3·774; p=0·862), or 86 (0·578, -2·948 to 4·104; p=0·748). These two psychological treatments had no superiority effect compared with brief psychosocial intervention at weeks 36 (treatment effect -3·234, 95% CI -6·611 to 0·143; p=0·061), 52 (-2·806, -5·790 to 0·177; p=0·065), or 86 (-1·898, -4·922 to 1·126; p=0·219). Physical adverse events (self-reported breathing problems, sleep disturbances, drowsiness or tiredness, nausea, sweating, and being restless or overactive) did not differ between the groups. Total costs of the trial interventions did not differ significantly between treatment groups. $\textbf{INTERPRETATION}$: We found no evidence for the superiority of CBT or short-term psychoanalytical therapy compared with a brief psychosocial intervention in maintenance of reduced depression symptoms 12 months after treatment. Short-term psychoanalytical therapy was as effective as CBT and, together with brief psychosocial intervention, offers additional patient choice for psychological therapy, alongside CBT, for adolescents with moderate to severe depression who are attending routine specialist CAMHS clinics.National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, and the Department of Health

Informing the personalisation of interventions for parents of children with conduct problems: a qualitative study

Background: Parenting programmes aim to alleviate behavioural problems in children, including conduct disorder. This study was part of a multi-phase mixed-methods project seeking to extend the reach of parenting programmes for the treatment of conduct problems through developing an evidence base to inform a personalised approach. It explored the narratives of parents of children with behavioural and conduct problems about parenting programmes to identify how such programmes could be personalised in order to extend their reach to parents and children who do not currently benefit. Methods: Face-to-face semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 42 parents, who had different experiences of parenting programmes. Interviews were conversational and informed by a topic guide. Analysis of transcripts of audio-recorded interviews drew on inductive thematic approaches and was framed largely within a phenomenological perspective. Results: Parents’ accounts demonstrated three themes: 1) a personalised approach needs to include the child; 2) a supportive school matters; and, 3) the programme needs to feel personal. Parents were more likely to have a positive experience at a parenting programme, and for their child to demonstrate positive behavioural changes, when they felt their concerns were validated within the group and they also felt supported by the child’s teachers. Parents whose children had been assessed prior to undertaking the programme were also more likely to perceive the programme to be beneficial, compared to parents who felt their child’s individual issues were never considered. Conclusions: Our findings point to the potential for personalised approaches to extend the reach of parenting programmes to parents and children who do not currently benefit from such programmes. Important in personalising parenting programmes is assessing children before parents are referred, to directly work with children as well as parents, and to work collaboratively with parents and children to identify which families are most suited to group support or one-to-one support and how this may change depending on circumstances

Major paternal depression and child consultation for developmental and behavioural problems

Background: It is well established that maternal depression is associated with enhanced child consultation for developmental and behaviour problems, but there is a dearth of research on paternal depression and child outcome. Aim: To assess the association of major paternal depressed mood and child consultation for developmental and behaviour problems. Design of study: Cross-sectional study. Setting: General practices in London and Hertfordshire, UK. Method: Fathers of children aged 4–6 years were recruited via 13 general practices. A sample of 248 biological father and mother dyads completed measures on depressive syndrome (Patient Health Questionnaire), child consultations with health professionals for developmental and behaviour problems, fathering, couple relationship quality, alcohol misuse, other psychiatric impairment, and sociodemographic factors. Results: Eight out of 248 fathers (3%) had a major depressive syndrome. Sixty-five out of 247 (26%) fathers reported they were responsible for taking their child to see the doctor at least half the time compared with mothers. Children of fathers with a major depressive syndrome were almost nine times more likely to have consulted a health professional for speech and language problems (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 8.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.99 to 37.67, P = 0.004) and seven times more likely to have consulted for externalising behaviour problems (adjusted OR = 6.98, 95% CI = 1.00 to 48.76, P = 0.05). Conclusion: Children of fathers with major depression were more likely to consult for speech and language problems and externalising behaviour problems. A longitudinal study is recommended to identify causal mechanisms

Cognitive behavioural therapy and short-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy versus brief psychosocial intervention in adolescents with unipolar major depression (IMPACT): a multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blind, randomised controlled trial

Background: Although there are effective psychological treatments for unipolar major depression in adolescents, whether or not one or more of the available therapies maintain reduced depressive symptoms 1 year after the end of treatment is not known. This is a non-trivial issue because maintaining lowered depressive symptoms below a clinical threshold level reduces the risk for diagnostic relapse into the adult years. Objective: To determine whether or not either of two specialist psychological treatments, cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) or short-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy (STPP), is more effective than a reference brief psychosocial intervention (BPI) in maintaining reduction of depression symptoms in the year after treatment. Design: Observer-blind, parallel-group, pragmatic superiority randomised controlled trial. Setting: A total of 15 outpatient NHS clinics in the UK from East Anglia, north-west England and North London. Participants: Adolescents aged 11-17 years with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition major depression including those with suicidality, depressive psychosis and conduct disorder. Patients were randomised using stochastic minimisation controlling for age, sex and self-reported depression sum score; 470 patients were randomised and 465 were included in the analyses. Interventions: In total, 154 adolescents received CBT, 156 received STPP and 155 received BPI. The trial lasted 86 weeks and study treatments were delivered in the first 36 weeks, with 52 weeks of follow-up. Main outcome measures: Mean sum score on self-reported depressive symptoms (primary outcome) at final study assessment (nominally 86 weeks, at least 52 weeks after end of treatment). Secondary measures were change in mean sum scores on self-reported anxiety symptoms and researcher-rated Health of the Nation scales for children and adolescents measuring psychosocial function. Following baseline assessment, there were a further five planned follow-up reassessments at nominal time points of 6, 12, 52 and 86 weeks post randomisation. Results: There were non-inferiority effects of CBT compared with STPP [treatment effect by final follow-up =-0.578, 95% confidence interval (CI)-2.948 to 4.104; p = 0.748]. There were no superiority effects for the two specialist treatments (CBT + STPP) compared with BPI (treatment effect by final follow-up =-1.898, 95% CI-4.922 to 1.126; p = 0.219). At final assessment there was no significant difference in the mean depressive symptom score between treatment groups. There was an average 49-52% reduction in depression symptoms by the end of the study. There were no differences in total costs or quality-of-life scores between treatment groups and prescribing a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) during treatment or follow-up did not differ between the therapy arms and, therefore, did not mediate the outcome. Conclusions: The three psychological treatments differed markedly in theoretical and clinical approach and are associated with a similar degree of clinical improvement, cost-effectiveness and subsequent maintenance of lowered depressive symptoms. Both STPP and BPI offer an additional patient treatment choice, alongside CBT, for depressed adolescents attending specialist Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services. Further research should focus on psychological mechanisms that are associated with treatment response, the maintenance of positive effects, determinants of non-response and whether or not brief psychotherapies are of use in primary care and community settings. Limitations: Neither reason for SSRI prescribing or monitoring of medication compliance was controlled for over the course of the study, and the economic results were limited by missing data.</p

Cognitive behavioural therapy and short-term psychoanalytical psychotherapy versus a brief psychosocial intervention in adolescents with unipolar major depressive disorder (IMPACT): a multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blind, randomised controlled superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Psychological treatments for adolescents with unipolar major depressive disorder are associated with diagnostic remission within 28 weeks in 65-70% of patients. We aimed to assess the medium-term effects and costs of psychological therapies on maintenance of reduced depression symptoms 12 months after treatment. METHODS: We did this multicentre, pragmatic, observer-blind, randomised controlled superiority trial (IMPACT) at 15 National Health Service child and adolescent mental health service (CAMHS) clinics in three regions in England. Adolescent patients (aged 11-17 years) with a diagnosis of DSM IV major depressive disorder were randomly assigned (1:1:1), via a web-based randomisation service, to receive cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or short-term psychoanalytical therapy versus a reference brief psychological intervention. Randomisation was stochastically minimised by age, sex, self-reported depression sum score, and region. Patients and clinicians were aware of group allocation, but allocation was concealed from outcome assessors. Patients were followed up and reassessed at weeks 6, 12, 36, 52, and 86 post-randomisation. The primary outcome was self-reported depression symptoms at weeks 36, 52, and 86, as measured with the self-reported Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ). Because our aim was to compare the two psychological therapies with the brief psychosocial intervention, we first established whether CBT was inferior to short-term psychoanalytical psychotherapy for the same outcome. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials, number ISRCTN83033550. FINDINGS: Between June 29, 2010, and Jan 17, 2013, we randomly assigned 470 patients to receive the brief psychosocial intervention (n=158), CBT (n=155), or short-term psychoanalytical therapy (n=157); 465 patients comprised the intention-to-treat population. 392 (84%) patients had available data for primary analysis by the end of follow-up. Treatment fidelity and differentiation were established between the three interventions. The median number of treatment sessions differed significantly between patients in the brief psychosocial intervention group (n=6 [IQR 4-11]), CBT group (n=9 [5-14]), and short-term psychoanalytical therapy group (n=11 [5-23]; p<0·0001), but there was no difference between groups in the average duration of treatment (27·5 [SD 21·5], 24·9 [17·7], 27·9 [16·8] weeks, respectively; Kruskal-Wallis p=0·238). Self-reported depression symptoms did not differ significantly between patients given CBT and those given short-term psychoanalytical therapy at weeks 36 (treatment effect 0·179, 95% CI -3·731 to 4·088; p=0·929), 52 (0·307, -3·161 to 3·774; p=0·862), or 86 (0·578, -2·948 to 4·104; p=0·748). These two psychological treatments had no superiority effect compared with brief psychosocial intervention at weeks 36 (treatment effect -3·234, 95% CI -6·611 to 0·143; p=0·061), 52 (-2·806, -5·790 to 0·177; p=0·065), or 86 (-1·898, -4·922 to 1·126; p=0·219). Physical adverse events (self-reported breathing problems, sleep disturbances, drowsiness or tiredness, nausea, sweating, and being restless or overactive) did not differ between the groups. Total costs of the trial interventions did not differ significantly between treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: We found no evidence for the superiority of CBT or short-term psychoanalytical therapy compared with a brief psychosocial intervention in maintenance of reduced depression symptoms 12 months after treatment. Short-term psychoanalytical therapy was as effective as CBT and, together with brief psychosocial intervention, offers additional patient choice for psychological therapy, alongside CBT, for adolescents with moderate to severe depression who are attending routine specialist CAMHS clinics. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) programme, and the Department of Health

In Context: Lessons About Adolescent Unipolar Depression From the Improving Mood With Psychoanalytic and Cognitive Therapies Trial

This review paper summarizes the results of the Improving Mood with Psychoanalytic and Cognitive Therapies (IMPACT) study and its implications for psychological treatment of adolescents with moderate to severe unipolar major depression. IMPACT was a pragmatic, superiority, randomized controlled trial conducted in the United Kingdom, which compared the clinical and cost-effectiveness of short-term psychoanalytic therapy (STPP), cognitive−behavioral therapy (CBT), and a brief psychosocial intervention (BPI) in reducing depression symptoms in 465 adolescents with unipolar major depression, aged 11 to 17 years. Although this was a clinically heterogeneous group of adolescents, some symptoms (eg, sleep and concentration difficulties, irritability/anger) were common and disabling. The trial reported no significant difference among the 3 treatments in reducing depression symptoms. One year after treatment, 84% of participants showed improvement in depressive symptoms (<50% of baseline symptoms) and improved psychosocial functioning, achieving this through different symptom reduction trajectories. Although participants attended fewer treatment sessions than planned, the 3 treatments were delivered with fidelity to their respective models. Ending treatment without therapist agreement occurred in 37% of cases. This was not associated with outcomes by treatment group. Adolescents emphasized the importance of the therapeutic relationship in all 3 treatments. Results suggest that although most adolescents respond to time-limited, structured psychological therapy, subgroups of depressed adolescents are likely to need additional treatment or support. These include adolescents who live in complex circumstances and/or who believe that their needs are not met in therapy, some who stop treatment early, and the 16% to 18% of adolescents who do not respond to treatment

A modified video-feedback intervention for carers of foster children aged 6 years and under with reactive attachment disorder : a feasibility study and pilot RCT

BACKGROUND: Looked-after children are at risk of suboptimal attachment patterns and reactive attachment disorder. However, access to interventions varies widely and there are no evidence-based interventions for this disorder. OBJECTIVES: (1) To adapt an existing video-feedback intervention to meet the specific needs of foster children in the UK with reactive attachment symptoms, (2) to conduct a case series to road-test the treatment manual and study procedures, (3) to conduct a scoping study of the key hurdles in a pilot trial and (4) to conduct a pilot randomised controlled trial of the adapted intervention to determine the feasibility of a future full-scale trial. DESIGN: This was a mixed-methods study. The adapted treatment manual was developed with expert input and tested on a small case series. Qualitative interviews with key stakeholders were used in the scoping study in preparation for the trial and later with foster carers who received the new intervention. The final stage was a feasibility and pilot randomised controlled trial of the new intervention, compared with usual care. Researchers assessing the outcomes were blinded to group assignment. SETTING: The study was set in outpatient child and adolescent mental health services and partner social services departments. Sites included urban and rural/semirural areas. PARTICIPANTS: Participants were foster carers with children aged ≤ 6 years presenting with difficulties in the domain of reactive attachment disorder. Key stakeholders included children's services managers and mental health service practitioners in the scoping study. Foster carers who received the modified intervention participated in qualitative interviews. INTERVENTION: The video-feedback intervention to promote positive parenting and sensitive discipline is an extensively evaluated and effective treatment approach. This intervention was modified (based on the adapted version for foster care in the Netherlands) to suit the needs of young children with reactive attachment symptoms in foster care in the UK and was delivered to improve the sensitive responding of foster carers, foster carer-child relationships and child outcomes. The modified intervention was delivered in-home by trained mental health professionals over a period of 4-6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The main outcome was reactive attachment symptom scores on the Disturbances of Attachment Interview. RESULTS: A series of minor changes to the intervention programme were introduced, which focused on improving its suitability for the UK foster care context. Challenges in recruitment meant that, despite numerous modifications to the protocol and the inclusion of additional sites, only 30 families (target, n = 40) were recruited to the randomised controlled trial (15 allocated to each group). However, most other trial parameters were deemed feasible and acceptable, particularly the high levels of data and treatment completeness. All randomised families were available for baseline analyses, but two in the treatment arm were not available for post-treatment analyses. The revised intervention was positively received by practitioners and foster carers. LIMITATIONS: Only three-quarters of the target sample size was recruited. Furthermore, the sites' own exclusion of potential participants and the low return rates of screening questionnaires raise the possibility of non-randomness of non-responses. CONCLUSION: A larger-scale trial may be feasible, but only if recruitment barriers can be overcome. Dedicated resources to support recruitment within local authorities and wider inclusion criteria are recommended. Central resourcing of intervention capacity to supplement NHS staff is also recommended. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered as ISRCTN18374094. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research ( NIHR ) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 35. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information

Prognostic Implications for Adolescents With Depression Who Drop Out of Psychological Treatment During a Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: High therapy dropout rates among adolescents have been reported, but little is known about whether dropout is associated with poor outcomes. This study aimed to examine clinical outcomes in adolescents with depression who dropped out of psychological therapy and to determine whether this varied by treatment type. METHOD: Data were drawn from the Improving Mood with Psychoanalytic and Cognitive Therapies (IMPACT) study, a randomized controlled trial, comparing a brief psychosocial intervention, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and short-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy in the treatment of adolescent major depression. The sample comprised 406 adolescents with a diagnosis of major depression, 169 of whom dropped out of treatment before the planned end of therapy. Primary outcome was self-report Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ); secondary outcomes were Health of the Nation Outcome Scale for Children and Adolescents, Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale, Modified Leyton Obsessional Inventory, and clinical diagnosis. RESULTS: During follow-up, there was a nonsignificant trend for dropouts to report higher depressive symptoms than completers. However, modeling showed insufficient evidence for an association between dropout and outcomes. CONCLUSION: In contrast to studies of adult therapy, there was no strong evidence that adolescent patients who dropped out had poorer clinical outcomes compared with those who completed therapy, when dropout was defined as ending treatment without agreement of the therapist. This challenges us to understand why adolescents stop going to therapy, how dropout should be defined, and whether what is prescribed is what is always needed. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: Improving Mood and Preventing Relapse With Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy and Cognitive Behavior Therapy; http://www.isrctn.com/; 83033550