Current definitions of “transdiagnostic” in treatment development: A search for consensus

Research in psychopathology has identified psychological processes that are relevant across a range of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) mental disorders, and these efforts have begun to produce treatment principles and protocols that can be applied transdiagnostically. However, review of recent work suggests that there has been great variability in conceptions of the term “transdiagnostic” in the treatment development literature. We believe that there is value in arriving at a common understanding of the term “transdiagnostic.” The purpose of the current manuscript is to outline three principal ways in which the term “transdiagnostic” is currently used, to delineate treatment approaches that fall into these three categories, and to consider potential advantages and disadvantages of each approachFirst author draf

Development of a single-session, transdiagnostic preventive intervention for young adults at risk for emotional disorders

Cognitive-behavioral prevention programs have demonstrated efficacy in reducing subclinical symptoms of anxiety and depression, and there is some evidence to suggest that they can lower the risk of future disorder onset. However, existing interventions tend to be relatively lengthy and target specific disorders or problem areas, both of which limit their potential for widespread dissemination. To address these limitations, we aimed to develop a single-session, transdiagnostic preventive intervention based on the Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders for young adults at risk for developing anxiety and/or depressive disorders within a college setting. Results from this proof-of-concept study indicated that the intervention was viewed as highly satisfactory and acceptable. The intervention also was successful at delivering adaptive emotion management skills in its 2-hr workshop format. Future studies evaluating the efficacy of this novel transdiagnostic, emotion-focused prevention program are warranted.Accepted manuscrip

The unified protocol for transdiagnostic treatment of emotional disorders compared with diagnosis-specific protocols for anxiety disorders a randomized clinical trial

IMPORTANCE: Transdiagnostic interventions have been developed to address barriers to the dissemination of evidence-based psychological treatments, but only a few preliminary studies have compared these approaches with existing evidence-based psychological treatments. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders (UP) is at least as efficacious as single-disorder protocols (SDPs) in the treatment of anxiety disorders. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From June 23, 2011, to March 5, 2015, a total of 223 patients at an outpatient treatment center with a principal diagnosis of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, generalized anxiety disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, or social anxiety disorder were randomly assigned by principal diagnosis to the UP, an SDP, or a waitlist control condition. Patients received up to 16 sessions of the UP or an SDP for 16 to 21 weeks. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, after treatment, and at 6-month follow-up. Analysis in this equivalence trial was based on intention to treat. INTERVENTIONS: The UP or SDPs. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Blinded evaluations of principal diagnosis clinical severity rating were used to evaluate an a priori hypothesis of equivalence between the UP and SDPs. RESULTS: Among the 223 patients (124 women and 99 men; mean [SD] age, 31.1 [11.0] years), 88 were randomized to receive the UP, 91 to receive an SDP, and 44 to the waitlist control condition. Patients were more likely to complete treatment with the UP than with SDPs (odds ratio, 3.11; 95% CI, 1.44-6.74). Both the UP (Cohen d, −0.93; 95% CI, −1.29 to −0.57) and SDPs (Cohen d, −1.08; 95% CI, −1.43 to −0.73) were superior to the waitlist control condition at acute outcome. Reductions in clinical severity rating from baseline to the end of treatment (β, 0.25; 95% CI, −0.26 to 0.75) and from baseline to the 6-month follow-up (β, 0.16; 95% CI, −0.39 to 0.70) indicated statistical equivalence between the UP and SDPs. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The UP produces symptom reduction equivalent to criterion standard evidence-based psychological treatments for anxiety disorders with less attrition. Thus, it may be possible to use 1 protocol instead of multiple SDPs to more efficiently treat the most commonly occurring anxiety and depressive disorders.This study was funded by grant R01 MH090053 from the National Institute of Mental Health. (R01 MH090053 - National Institute of Mental Health)First author draf