Moderation of the Alliance-Outcome Association by Prior Depressive Episodes: Differential Effects in Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy and Short-Term Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy.

Prior studies have suggested that the association between the alliance and depression improvement varies as a function of prior history of depression. We sought to replicate these findings and extend them to short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy (SPSP) in a sample of patients who were randomized to one of these treatments and were administered the Helping Alliance Questionnaire (N=282) at Week 5 of treatment. Overall, the alliance was a predictor of symptom change (d=0.33). In SPSP, the alliance was a modest but robust predictor of change, irrespective of prior episodes (d=0.25-0.33). By contrast, in CBT, the effects of the alliance on symptom change were large for patients with 0 prior episodes (d=0.86), moderate for those with 1 prior episode (d=0.49), and small for those with 2+ prior episodes (d=0.12). These findings suggest a complex interaction between patient features and common vs. specific therapy processes. In CBT, the alliance relates to change for patients with less recurrent depression whereas other CBT-specific processes may account for change for patients with more recurrent depression.

Therapist-rated outcomes in a randomized clinical trial comparing cognitive behavioral therapy and psychodynamic therapy for major depression.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of psychodynamic therapy (PDT) for depression is debated due to a paucity of high-quality studies. We compared short psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy (SPSP) to cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in a randomized clinical trial. We used therapist-rated outcomes to examine how the course of change during treatment could be best represented and to compare treatment efficacy, hypothesizing non-significant differences. METHODS: Three hundred and forty-one adults meeting DSM-IV criteria for a depressive episode and with Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) scores ≥14 were randomized to 16 sessions of individual manualized CBT or SPSP. Severely depressed patients (HAM-D>24) received additional antidepressant medication. After each session, therapists rated the Clinical Global Impression Scale subscales 'Severity of Illness' (CGI-S) and 'Global Improvement' (CGI-I), and the DSM-IV Axis V Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF). We fitted growth curves using mixed model analyses with intention-to-treat samples. RESULTS: CGI-S and GAF scores during treatment were best represented by a linear symptom decrease. CGI-I scores were best represented by an S-shaped curve with relative more improvement in the first and last phases than in the middle phase of treatment. No significant post-treatment treatment differences were found. A non-significant trend for a treatment effect on CGI-S scores vanished when controlling for therapist gender and profession. LIMITATIONS: Therapists were not specifically trained for CGI and GAF assessments. CONCLUSIONS: These findings add to the evidence-base of PDT for depression. Therapist characteristics and differences between severity and improvement measures might influence ratings and need to be taken into account when using therapist-rated outcome measures.

Is the alliance always a predictor of change in psychotherapy for depression?

OBJECTIVE: Although without a doubt alliance has a consistent impact on outcome, to date it remains unclear whether alliance directly accounts for symptom change. METHOD: Using data from a randomized clinical trial, the alliance-outcome timeline was analyzed. The Relationship factor of the Helping Alliance Questionnaire I (measured twice, middle and late during treatment) was used. RESULTS: Regression and mixed model analyses showed that alliance did not predict subsequent symptom change as measured by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale beyond prior symptom change and the alliance course was not predicted by early symptom change. CONCLUSIONS: These results lead to the question whether alliance directly accounts for subsequent change or moderates change via technique, transference phenomena, therapist competences and patient characteristics.

The efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychodynamic therapy in the outpatient treatment of major depression: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of psychodynamic therapies for depression remains open to debate because of a paucity of high-quality studies. The authors compared the efficacy of psychodynamic therapy with that of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), hypothesizing nonsignificant differences and the noninferiority of psychodynamic therapy relative to CBT. METHOD: A total of 341 adults who met DSM-IV criteria for a major depressive episode and had Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) scores ≥14 were randomly assigned to 16 sessions of individual manualized CBT or short-term psychodynamic supportive therapy. Severely depressed patients (HAM-D score >24) also received antidepressant medication according to protocol. The primary outcome measure was posttreatment remission rate (HAM-D score ≤7). Secondary outcome measures included mean posttreatment HAM-D score and patient-rated depression score and 1-year follow-up outcomes. Data were analyzed with generalized estimating equations and mixed-model analyses using intent-to-treat samples. Noninferiority margins were prespecified as an odds ratio of 0.49 for remission rates and a Cohen's d value of 0.30 for continuous outcome measures. RESULTS: No statistically significant treatment differences were found for any of the outcome measures. The average posttreatment remission rate was 22.7%. Noninferiority was shown for posttreatment HAM-D and patient-rated depression scores but could not be demonstrated for posttreatment remission rates or any of the follow-up measures. CONCLUSIONS: The findings extend the evidence base of psychodynamic therapy for depression but also indicate that time-limited treatment is insufficient for a substantial number of patients encountered in psychiatric outpatient clinics.

What is the best sequential treatment strategy in the treatment of depression? Adding pharmacotherapy to psychotherapy or vice versa?

BACKGROUND: Insufficient response to monotreatment for depression is a common phenomenon in clinical practice. Even so, evidence indicating how to proceed in such cases is sparse. METHODS: This study looks at the second phase of a sequential treatment algorithm, in which 103 outpatients with moderately severe depression were initially randomized to either short-term supportive psychodynamic therapy (PDT) or antidepressants. Patients who reported less than 30% symptom improvement after 8 weeks were offered combined treatment. Outcome measures were the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), the Clinical Global Impression of Severity and Improvement, the SCL-90 depression subscale and the EuroQOL questionnaire. RESULTS: Despite being nonresponsive, about 40% of patients preferred to continue with monotherapy. At treatment termination, patients initially randomized to PDT had improved more than those initially receiving antidepressants, as indicated by the HAM-D and the EuroQOL, independently of whether the addition was accepted or not. CONCLUSIONS: Starting with psychotherapy may be preferable in mildly and moderately depressed outpatients. For patients who receive either PDT or antidepressants, combined therapy after early nonresponse seems to be helpful. Nevertheless, this sequential strategy is not always preferred by patients.

Psychometric properties of the Helping Alliance Questionnaire-I in psychodynamic psychotherapy for major depression.

The psychometric properties of the Helping Alliance Questionnaire-I were analyzed at two times in short-term psychoanalytic supportive psychotherapy for outpatient depression. Exploratory factor analysis conducted in 142 patients generated a model that was confirmed in a different validation sample (n=106) using confirmatory factor analysis. Two factors were found to have satisfactory psychometric properties and a consistent structure over time: relationship and internal change. The authors conclude that reporting on the HAQ-I with separate scores for these individual aspects of alliance offers a more precise assessment and is preferable to using a single general alliance score.

Patient preference compared with random allocation in short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy with indicated addition of pharmacotherapy for depression.

Depressed patients randomized to psychotherapy were compared with those who had been chosen for psychotherapy in a treatment algorithm, including addition of an antidepressant in case of early nonresponse. There were no differences between randomized and by-preference patients at baseline in adherence and outcome. About half of the early nonresponders refused the additional medication. However, no clear effect of medication addition on ultimate outcome could be demonstrated. In total, 37% of the patients achieved remission. The study suggested that randomization of patients does not induce a great influence on outcome. It might be warranted to continue an initially ineffective psychotherapy for depression, because a considerable number of patients do have a pattern of delayed response.

Predictive value of object relations for therapeutic alliance and outcome in psychotherapy for depression: an exploratory study.

The concept of object relations has been shown to be relevant for the process and outcome of psychodynamic psychotherapies. However, little is known about its relevance for the psychotherapeutic treatment of depression. In this study, we explored the predictive value of object relational functioning (ORF) for the therapeutic alliance and outcome of short-term psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy in patients with mild to moderately severe depression. The ORF of 81 patients was rated by using the Developmental Profile. The overall maturity of ORF measured at baseline was higher in patients who showed a better treatment response. In multiple regression analysis, the adaptive level of individuation appeared to be specifically predictive of outcome. Patients with a recurrent depression showed less mature levels of ORF, lower adaptive levels and a higher score on the symbiotic level. No association was found between ORF and therapeutic alliance during treatment. In contrast to the single measure of alliance early in therapy, the growth of the alliance was related to outcome. The study indicated the relevance of ORF for depression and established that it is distinctive from the actual therapeutic alliance.

Does early response predict outcome in psychotherapy and combined therapy for major depression?

BACKGROUND: To examine the predictive value of early response for final outcome of psychotherapy and combined therapy in major depression. METHODS: Mild- to moderately depressed patients were treated with either Short-Term Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy (SPSP) (N=63) only, or combined with an antidepressant (N=127). Early response was defined as a reduction of more than 25% on the HAM-D-17 after 2 months. Outcome was determined in terms of complete nonresponse and remission rates. Associations between early response and outcome were examined using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: In SPSP, early nonresponse was clearly related to final nonresponse (OR=3.57). Nevertheless, remission was not predicted by early response, and 26% of the early nonresponders ultimately achieved remission. In combined therapy, both final nonresponse (OR 7.13) and remission (OR 3.66) were associated with early nonresponse. LIMITATIONS: In this study, SPSP was the only psychotherapy examined. The design did not provide feedback to the therapist of the independently measured depression score after two months. CONCLUSION: Although a number of early nonresponsive patients will achieve remission, this study points out that these patients are at risk factor for ultimate treatment failure. This could be an indication for clinicians to adapt their treatment strategy.

Short psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy, antidepressants, and their combination in the treatment of major depression: a mega-analysis based on three randomized clinical trials.

The efficacy of Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy (SPSP) has not yet been compared with pharmacotherapy. A mega-analysis based on three original Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) was performed. Patients with (mild to moderate) major depressive disorder were randomized in (24 weeks) SPSP (n = 97), pharmacotherapy (n = 45), or their combination (n = 171). Efficacy was assessed by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), Clinical Global Impression of Severity and of Improvement (CGI-S), the Symptom Checklist (SCL; depression subscale) and the Quality of Life Depression Scale (QLDS). Pearson chi(2) calculations were used to compare success rates. Analyses of covariance (ANCOVAs) were used to test inter-group differences. Success rates indicated that independent observers (HDRS) found no differences in symptom reduction between SPSP and pharmacotherapy (P = 0.214), but therapists (CGI-S, P = 0.026), and patients (SCL, P = 0.036) favored SPSP. Combined therapy was found superior to pharmacotherapy by all three (patients (P = 0.000), therapists (P = 0.024), independent observers (P = 0.024)). Independent observers (P = 0.062) and therapists (P = 0.430) found no differences between combined therapy and SPSP, but patients (P = 0.016) found combined therapy to be superior. As far as quality of life is concerned, success rates indicated that patients (QLDS) found no differences between SPSP and pharmacotherapy (P = 0.073) or between SPSP and combined therapy (P = 0.217). However, they found combined therapy superior to pharmacotherapy (P = 0.015). The results of the mega-analysis suggest that combined therapy is more efficacious than pharmacotherapy. SPSP and pharmacotherapy seem equally efficacious, except for some indications that patients and therapists favor SPSP for symptom reduction. Combined therapy and SPSP also seem equally efficacious, except that patients think that the first is better in symptom reduction.

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy versus Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy in the outpatient treatment of depression: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous research has shown that Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy (SPSP) is an effective alternative to pharmacotherapy and combined treatment (SPSP and pharmacotherapy) in the treatment of depressed outpatients. The question remains, however, how Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy compares with other established psychotherapy methods. The present study compares Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy to the evidence-based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in terms of acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy in the outpatient treatment of depression. Moreover, this study aims to identify clinical predictors that can distinguish patients who may benefit from either of these treatments in particular. This article outlines the study protocol. The results of the study, which is being currently carried out, will be presented as soon as they are available. METHODS/DESIGN: Adult outpatients with a main diagnosis of major depressive disorder or depressive disorder not otherwise specified according to DSM-IV criteria and mild to severe depressive symptoms (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score > or = 14) are randomly allocated to Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy or Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Both treatments are individual psychotherapies consisting of 16 sessions within 22 weeks. Assessments take place at baseline (week 0), during the treatment period (week 5 and 10) and at treatment termination (week 22). In addition, a follow-up assessment takes place one year after treatment start (week 52). Primary outcome measures are the number of patients refusing treatment (acceptability); the number of patients terminating treatment prematurely (feasibility); and the severity of depressive symptoms (efficacy) according to an independent rater, the clinician and the patient. Secondary outcome measures include general psychopathology, general psychotherapy outcome, pain, health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Clinical predictors of treatment outcome include demographic variables, psychiatric symptoms, cognitive and psychological patient characteristics and the quality of the therapeutic relationship. DISCUSSION: This study evaluates Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy as a treatment for depressed outpatients by comparing it to the established evidence-based treatment Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Specific strengths of this study include its strong external validity and the clinical relevance of its research aims. Limitations of the study are discussed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trails ISRCTN31263312.

Does adding psychotherapy to pharmacotherapy improve social functioning in the treatment of outpatient depression?

The existence of an overall association between severity of depression and level of social functioning is well documented. To increase the probability of a long-term recovery, a normal level of social functioning is essential. It is currently unknown whether combined therapy has a better outcome than pharmacotherapy with regard to social functioning. In a 6-month randomized clinical trial in outpatients with major depression, all patients studied had a baseline score of at least 14 points on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). The two conditions consist of pharmacotherapy (PhT) (N=84) and combined therapy (CoT), pharmacotherapy plus 16 sessions of short psychodynamic supportive psychotherapy (N=83). Efficacy was assessed using the 17-item HDRS, the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Severity and Improvement scales, the Depression subscale of the Symptom Checklist-90 (SCL-90), the Quality of Life Depression Scale (QLDS), more the Groningen Social Disability Schedule (GSDS). Severity of depression decreased significantly (on the SCL-90 Depression subscale and the QLDS) more in the CoT condition. A larger improvement in social functioning was demonstrated for remitted patients than for nonremitted patients. The number of dimensions of social functioning that had improved significantly was higher in CoT than in PhT. There was a moderate advantage of the CoT condition on both depressive symptoms and level of social functioning in comparison with PhT. We also found a positive association between depression severity and level of social functioning.