Inference-Based Approach versus Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in the Treatment of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder with Poor Insight: A 24-Session Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) with poor insight has severe consequences for patients; nonetheless, no randomized controlled trial has ever been performed to evaluate the effectiveness of any treatment specifically for poor-insight OCD. A new psychotherapy for OCD, the inference-based approach (IBA), targets insight in OCD by strengthening normal sensory-driven reality testing. The goal of the present study is to compare the effectiveness of this new treatment to the effectiveness of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) for patients with OCD with poor insight. METHOD: A randomized controlled trial was conducted, in which 90 patients with OCD with poor insight received either 24 CBT sessions or 24 IBA sessions. The primary outcome measure was the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS). Secondary outcome measures were level of insight, anxiety and depressive symptoms, and quality of life. Mixed-effects models were used to determine the treatment effect. RESULTS: In both conditions, a significant OCD symptom reduction was reached, but no condition effects were established. Post hoc, in a small subgroup of patients with the worst insight (n = 23), it was found that the patients treated with the IBA reached a significantly higher OCD symptom reduction than the patients treated with CBT [estimated marginal mean = -7.77, t(219.45) = -2.4, p = 0.017]. CONCLUSION: Patients with OCD with poor insight improve significantly after psychological treatment. The results of this study suggest that both CBT and the IBA are effective treatments for OCD with poor insight. The IBA might be more promising than CBT for patients with more extreme poor insight.

The effectiveness of the cognitive behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy for chronic depression: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: It is widely agreed that chronic depression is difficult to treat, knowledge about optimal treatment approaches is emerging. METHOD: A multisite randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing the cognitive behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy (CBASP), a psychotherapy model developed specifically to treat chronic depression (n = 67) with care as usual (CAU; evidence-based treatments, n = 72) over a period of 52 weeks, with 23 sessions on average, in 3 outpatient clinics in the Netherlands. In both arms algorithm-based pharmacotherapy was provided. Patients (aged 18-65) met criteria for a DSM-IV diagnosis of major depressive disorder with diagnostic specifiers (chronic, without interepisode recovery) or with co-occurring dysthymic disorder indicating a chronic course. The Inventory for Depressive Symptomatology (IDS) Self-Report was used as the primary outcome measure. Mixed-effects linear regression analysis was used to compare the changes on the IDS scores between CBASP and CAU. The IDS was administered before treatment, and after 8, 16, 32 and 52 weeks. RESULTS: At week 52, patients assigned to CBASP had a greater reduction of depressive symptoms compared to patients assigned to CAU (t = -2.00, p = 0.05). However, CBASP and CAU did not differ from each other on the IDS after 8 weeks (t = 0.49, p = 0.63), 16 weeks (t = -0.03, p = 0.98) and 32 weeks (t = -0.17, p = 0.86) of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This trial shows that CBASP is at least as effective as standard evidence-based treatments for chronic depression. In the long run, CBASP appears to have an added effect.