Stepped care treatment for depression and anxiety in primary care. a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Depressive and anxiety disorders are common in general practice but not always treated adequately. Introducing stepped care might improve this. In this randomized trial we examined the effectiveness of such a stepped care model.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study population consisted of primary care attendees aged 18-65 years with minor or major DSM-IV depressive and/or anxiety disorders, recruited through screening. We randomized 120 patients to either stepped care or care as usual. The stepped care program consisted of (1) <it>watchful waiting</it>, (2) <it>guided self-help</it>, (3) short face-to-face <it>Problem Solving Treatment </it>and (4) <it>pharmacotherapy and/or specialized mental health care</it>. Patients were assessed at baseline and after 8, 16 and 24 weeks.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Symptoms of depression and anxiety decreased significantly over time for both groups. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (IDS: <it>P </it>= 0.35 and HADS: <it>P </it>= 0.64). The largest, but not significant, effect (<it>d </it>= -0.21) was found for anxiety on T3. In both groups approximately 48% of the patients were recovered from their DSM-IV diagnosis at the final 6 months assessment.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In summary we could not demonstrate that stepped care for depression and anxiety in general practice was more effective than care as usual. Possible reasons are discussed.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trails: <a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN17831610">ISRCTN17831610</a>.</p

Self-Guided Psychological Treatment for Depressive Symptoms: A Meta-Analysis

Background: A number of trials have examined the effects of self-guided psychological intervention, without any contact between the participants and a therapist or coach. The results and sizes of these trials have been mixed. This is the first quantitative meta-analysis, aimed at organizing and evaluating the literature, and estimating effect size. Method: We conducted systematic literature searches in PubMed, PsycINFO and Embase up to January 2010, and identified additional studies through earlier meta-analyses, and the references of included studies. We identified seven randomized controlled trials that met our inclusion criteria, with a total of 1,362 respondents. The overall quality of the studies was high. A post-hoc power calculation showed that the studies had sufficient statistical power to detect an effect size of d = 0.19. Results: The overall mean effect size indicating the difference between self-guided psychological treatment and control groups at post-test was d = 0.28 (pless than0.001), which corresponds to a NNT of 6.41. At 4 to 12 months follow-up the effect size was d = 0.23. There was no indication for significant publication bias. Conclusions: We found evidence that self-guided psychological treatment has a small but significant effect on participants with increased levels of depressive symptomatology.Original Publication:Pim Cuijpers, Tara Donker, Robert Johansson, David C. Mohr, Annemieke van Straten and Gerhard Andersson, Self-Guided Psychological Treatment for Depressive Symptoms: A Meta-Analysis, 2011, PLoS ONE, (6), 6.http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0021274Copyright: Public Library of Science (PLoS)http://www.plos.org

Stepped care for depression and anxiety: from primary care to specialized mental health care: a randomised controlled trial testing the effectiveness of a stepped care program among primary care patients with mood or anxiety disorders

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Mood and anxiety disorders are highly prevalent and have a large impact on the lives of the affected individuals. Therefore, optimal treatment of these disorders is highly important. In this study we will examine the effectiveness of a stepped care program for primary care patients with mood and anxiety disorders. A stepped care program is characterized by different treatment steps that are arranged in order of increasing intensity. METHODS: This study is a randomised controlled trial with two conditions: stepped care and care as usual, whereby the latter forms the control group. The stepped care program consists of four evidence based interventions: (1) Watchful waiting, (2) Guided self-help, (3) Problem Solving Treatment and (4) Medication and/or specialized mental health care. The study population consists of primary care attendees aged 18-65 years. Screeners are sent to all patients of the participating general practitioners. Individuals with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental disorders (DSM) diagnosis of major depression, dysthymia, panic disorder (with or without agoraphobia), generalized anxiety disorder, or social phobia are included as well as individuals with minor depression and anxiety disorders. Primary focus is the reduction of depressive and anxiety symptoms. Both conditions are monitored at 8, 16 and 24 weeks. DISCUSSION: This study evaluates the effectiveness of a stepped care program for patients with depressive and anxiety disorder. If effective, a stepped care program can form a worthwhile alternative for care as usual. Strengths and limitations of this study are discussed. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trails: ISRCTN1783161