Stratified care vs stepped care for depression : a cluster randomized clinical trial

Importance: Depression is a major cause of disability worldwide. Although empirically supported treatments are available, there is scarce evidence on how to effectively personalize psychological treatment selection. Objective: To compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of 2 treatment selection strategies: stepped care and stratified care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multisite, cluster randomized clinical trial recruited participants from the English National Health Service from July 5, 2018, to February 1, 2019. Thirty clinicians working across 4 psychological therapy services were randomly assigned to provide stratified (n = 15) or stepped (n = 15) care. In stepped care, patients sequentially access low-intensity guided self-help followed by high-intensity psychotherapy. In stratified care, patients are matched with either low- or high-intensity treatments at initial assessment. Data were analyzed from May 18, 2020, to October 13, 2021, using intention-to-treat principles. Interventions: All clinicians used the same interview schedule to conduct initial assessments with patients seeking psychological treatment for common mental disorders, but those in the stratified care group received a personalized treatment recommendation for each patient generated by a machine learning algorithm. Eligible patients received either stratified or stepped care (ie, treatment as usual). Main Outcomes and Measures: The preregistered outcome was posttreatment reliable and clinically significant improvement (RCSI) of depression symptoms (measured using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire). The RCSI outcome was compared between groups using logistic regression adjusted for baseline severity. Cost-effectiveness analyses compared incremental costs and health outcomes of the 2 treatment pathways. Results: A total of 951 patients were included (618 women among 950 with data available [65.1%]; mean [SD] age, 38.27 [14.53] years). The proportion of cases of RCSI was significantly higher in the stratified care arm compared with the stepped care arm (264 of 505 [52.3%] vs 134 of 297 [45.1%]; odds ratio, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.04-1.87]; P = .03). Stratified care was associated with a higher mean additional cost per patient (£104.5 [95% CI, £67.5-£141.6] [$139.83 (95$90.32-$189.48)]; P < .001) because more patients accessed high-intensity treatments (332 of 583 [56.9%] vs 107 of 368 [29.1%]; χ2 = 70.51; P < .001), but this additional cost resulted in an approximately 7% increase in the probability of RCSI. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cluster randomized clinical trial of adults with common mental disorders, stratified care was efficacious and cost-effective for the treatment of depression symptoms compared with stepped care. Stratified care can improve depression treatment outcomes at a modest additional cost. Trial Registration: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN1110618

Implementing precision methods in personalizing psychological therapies: barriers and possible ways forward

This is the final version. Available on open access from Elsevier via the DOI in this recordData availability: No data was used for the research described in the article.Highlights: • Personalizing psychological treatments means to customize treatment for individuals to enhance outcomes. • The application of precision methods to clinical psychology has led to data-driven psychological therapies. • Applying data-informed psychological therapies involves clinical, technical, statistical, and contextual aspects

Prognosis Moderates the Engagement-Outcome Relationship in Unguided cCBT for Depression: A proof of concept for the Prognosis Moderation Hypothesis.

Objective: Understanding how treatments work is a goal of psychotherapy research, however the strength of relationships between therapy processes and outcomes is inconsistent. DeRubeis, Cohen, et al. (2014) proposed that process-outcome relationships are moderated by patient characteristics. These "patient response patterns" (PRPs) indicate individuals' responsiveness to the active ingredients of treatment. Given the same quality of therapy, one individual may receive more benefit than another depending on their PRP. The "prognosis moderation hypothesis" states that PRPs can be defined by pretreatment prognostic indicators. Medium prognosis groups ("pliant-like") will have stronger process-outcome relationships than good ("easy-like") or poor ("challenging-like") groups. Method: N = 190 individuals received unguided computerized CBT. They were 58% women, aged 44.7 years. Engagement with the cCBT program was the process variable. PRPs were defined by predicted scores from a prognostic regression model. Outcomes were BDI scores at 3, 6, and 12 months. "Easy-like," "pliant-like" and "challenging-like" groups were created and the engagement-outcome relationship was assessed as a function of group. Results: Engagement-outcome correlations by PRP were: easy-like, r = -.27 (p <.05); pliant-like, r = -.36 (p <.01); and challenging-like, r =.05 (p =.70). The pliant-like group was found to be the only moderator of the engagement-outcome relationship. Results were similar at 6 months but faded at 12. Conclusions: The engagement-outcome relationship varied as a function of prognosis, providing support for the prognosis moderation hypothesis. The "pliant-like" group appeared most sensitive to treatment procedures. Future research is needed to refine the methods for identifying PRPs

Dysfunctional attitudes or extreme response style as predictors of depressive relapse and recurrence after mobile cognitive therapy for recurrent depression

Background: According to previous research, dysfunctional attitudes and/or scoring extreme on the end-point anchors of questionnaires of dysfunctional thinking predict depressive relapse/recurrence. Evidence that these two methods represent a risk for depressive relapse/recurrence is however mixed, due to differential or poorly defined concepts. The current study aimed to test the two methods. Methods: Remitted recurrently depressed patients with low residual depressive symptoms (N = 264) were recruited as part of a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of mobile Cognitive Therapy for recurrent depression versus treatment as usual. In the current secondary analysis, Cox regression models were conducted to test dysfunctional attitudes and extreme responding variables (assessed on the Dysfunctional Attitudes Scale [DAS]) as predictors of depressive relapse/recurrence within two years after randomization. Results: Data from 255 participants were analyzed. Results showed that DAS total scores at baseline significantly predicted depressive relapse/recurrence (Hazard Ratio [HR] = 1.01, p =.042). An index that reflects endorsement of habitual relative to functional responses was a significant predictor of depressive relapse/recurrence (HR = 2.11, p =.029). Limitations: The current study employed a single measure to identify extreme responses and dysfunctional attitudes. Secondly, various statistical analyses were performed without correcting for multiple testing, which in turn increased the likelihood to finding significant results. Conclusions: Current study confirmed both methods: People who scored higher on the DAS or had relatively more habitual than functional responses on the extreme positive ends of the DAS had a decreased time to depressive relapse/recurrence