Exploring the clinical outcome of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for bipolar and unipolar depressive patients in routine clinical practice: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) has been adopted as an evidence-based treatment for unipolar depressive disorder (UDD). Although MBCT has not been included in the treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder (BD), MBCT is regularly being offered to patients with BD in routine clinical practice. In this pilot study we used routine outcome monitoring (ROM) data to explore whether there are indications that patients with BD might benefit less from MBCT than patients with UDD in terms of feasibility and effectiveness. METHODS: The study population consisted of patients with BD (n = 30) or UDD (n = 501) who received MBCT at the Radboudumc Centre for Mindfulness in Nijmegen, the Netherlands. Patients completed self-report measures of depressive symptom severity, worry, well-being, mindfulness skills and self-compassion pre- and post MBCT as part of the ROM. RESULTS: There were significant less patients with BD who decided to start MBCT after intake than patients with UDD. No differences in dropout between groups were found. Results showed significant moderate to large improvements in both groups after MBCT, while no differences between groups were found, on all outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that there are no indications that MBCT, when delivered in heterogeneous patient groups in routine clinical practice, is less beneficial for patients with BD than patients with UDD in terms of feasibility and effectiveness. This lends support to conduct an adequately powered RCT to examine the (cost-)effectiveness of MBCT in BD as the next step before implementing MBCT on a larger scale in patients with BD.

Consolidation and prediction of long-term treatment effect of group and online mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for distressed cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Group face-to-face and individual internet-based mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT and eMBCT) have been demonstrated to reduce psychological distress for distressed cancer patients in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). This study focused on the long-term effects of this RCT during the nine-month follow-up period, and on possible predictors, moderators and working mechanisms. METHODS: Distressed cancer patients (n = 245) were randomized to MBCT or eMBCT. Data were collected at baseline, post-treatment, three- and nine-month follow-up. Data were analyzed with linear mixed effect models and (hierarchical) linear regressions. RESULTS: Analyses revealed long-term reductions in psychological distress and rumination, and long-term increases in positive mental health and mental health-related quality of life (QoL) in both interventions over the course of the nine-month follow-up. Interestingly, patients reported less psychological distress in the follow-up period after eMBCT in comparison to MBCT. Less psychological distress, rumination and neuroticism, and more extraversion and agreeableness at baseline predicted less psychological distress at the nine-month follow-up after both interventions. Less mindful and conscientious patients at baseline benefited more from eMBCT than from MBCT. Regarding working mechanisms, changes in mindfulness skills, fear of cancer recurrence and rumination during both interventions predicted less psychological distress at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest most improvements in cancer patients' increase over time after both interventions. Furthermore, patients seemed to benefit more from eMBCT than MBCT based on psychological distress levels, especially those patients with low levels of mindfulness skills and conscientiousness.

Exploring associations between psychiatric disorder, psychological distress, and health care utilization in cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: The mental burden of cancer might elicit additional health care utilization. However, it is unclear how psychiatric disorder and psychological distress relate to health care utilization. Therefore, this study explores associations between psychiatric disorder, psychological distress, and health care utilization. It was hypothesized that presence of psychiatric disorder and psychological distress was associated with increased health care utilization and costs. METHODS: The current study consisted of secondary analyses of baseline data of a larger randomized controlled trial. Two hundred forty-five mixed-cancer patients with at least mild symptoms of psychological distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-T ≥ 11) were mainly recruited via online media, participating centers and patient associations. Patients were assessed with Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders (SCID-I) for depressive, anxiety, and/or adjustment disorder. Psychological distress was measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Retrospective self-reported health care utilization in the past 3 months was collected. Associations between predictors and health care utilization in terms of incidence rate ratios (IRR) and costs per category (mental, primary, somatic, and complementary) were assessed by negative binomial, logistic, and gamma regression. RESULTS: Eighty-nine (36.3%) patients suffered from psychiatric disorder, which was associated with mental health care utilization (IRR = 1.63) and costs (OR = 3.11). We observed a nonsignificant trend of somatic health care utilization in patients with psychiatric disorder. Psychological distress was associated with mental health care utilization (IRR = 1.09) and costs (OR = 1.09). Psychological distress was also associated with complementary health care utilization (IRR = 1.03). CONCLUSION: Psychiatric disorder and psychological distress were associated with mental health care use and costs. Psychological distress was associated with complementary health care use. Adequate assessment and referral to mental health care might prevent unnecessary health care utilization.

Study protocol of a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of group and individual internet-based Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy with treatment as usual in reducing psychological distress in cancer patients: the BeMind study.

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness-based interventions have shown to reduce psychological distress in cancer patients. The accessibility of mindfulness-based interventions for cancer patients could be further improved by providing mindfulness using an individual internet-based format. The aim of this study is to test the effectiveness of a Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) group intervention for cancer patients in comparison with individual internet-based MBCT and treatment as usual (TAU). METHODS/DESIGN: A three-armed multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing group-based MBCT to individual internet-based MBCT and TAU in cancer patients who suffer from at least mild psychological distress (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) ≥ 11). Measurements will be conducted prior to randomization (baseline), post-treatment and at 3 months and 9 months post-treatment. Participants initially allocated to TAU are subsequently randomized to either group- or individual internet-based MBCT and will receive a second baseline measurement after 3 months. Thus, the three-armed comparison will have a time span of approximately 3 months. The two-armed intervention comparison includes a 9-month follow-up and will also consist of participants randomized to the intervention after TAU. Primary outcome will be post-treatment psychological distress (HADS). Secondary outcomes are fear of cancer recurrence (Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory), rumination (Rumination and Reflection Questionnaire), positive mental health (Mental Health Continuum - Short Form), and cost-effectiveness (health-related quality of life (EuroQol -5D and Short Form-12) and health care usage (Trimbos and iMTA questionnaire on Costs associated with Psychiatric illness). Potential predictors: DSM-IV-TR mood/anxiety disorders (SCID-I) and neuroticism (NEO-Five Factor Inventory) will be measured. Mediators of treatment effect: mindfulness skills, (Five-Facets of Mindfulness Questionnaire- Short Form), working alliance (Working Alliance Inventory) and group cohesion (Group Cohesion Questionnaire) will also be measured. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide valuable information on the clinical and cost-effectiveness of group versus internet-based MBCT versus TAU for distressed cancer patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02138513. Registered 6 May 2014.