Investigating non-inferiority of internet-delivered versus face-to-face cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I): a randomised controlled trial (iSleep well).

BACKGROUND: Insomnia is a highly prevalent disorder associated with numerous adverse health outcomes. Cognitive behavioural therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) is recommended as first-line treatment by clinical guidelines but is accessible to only a minority of patients suffering from insomnia. Internet-delivered CBT-I (iCBT-I) could contribute to the widespread dissemination of this first-line treatment. As there is insufficient evidence regarding non-inferiority, this study directly aims to compare therapist-guided internet-delivered versus face-to-face CBT-I in terms of insomnia severity post-treatment. Furthermore, a health-economic evaluation will be conducted, and potential benefits and disadvantages of therapist-guided iCBT-I will be examined. METHODS: This study protocol describes a randomised controlled two-arm parallel-group non-inferiority trial comparing therapist-guided iCBT-I with face-to-face CBT-I in routine clinical care. A total of 422 patients with insomnia disorder will be randomised and treated at 16 study centres throughout Germany. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, 10 weeks after randomisation (post), and 6 months after randomisation (follow-up). The primary outcome is insomnia severity measured using the Insomnia Severity Index. Secondary outcomes include depression-related symptoms, quality of life, fatigue, physical activity, daylight exposure, adverse events related to treatment, and a health-economic evaluation. Finally, potential moderator variables and several descriptive and exploratory outcomes will be assessed (e.g. benefits and disadvantages of internet-delivered treatment). DISCUSSION: The widespread implementation of CBT-I is a significant healthcare challenge. The non-inferiority of therapist-guided iCBT-I versus face-to-face CBT-I will be investigated in an adequately powered sample in routine clinical care, with the same therapeutic content and same level of therapist qualifications provided with both interventions. If this trial demonstrates the non-inferiority of therapist-guided iCBT-I, healthcare providers may be more confident recommending this treatment to their patients, contributing to the wider dissemination of CBT-I. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number in the German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00028153 ( https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00028153 ). Registered on 16th May 2023.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a guided Internet- and mobile-based intervention for the indicated prevention of major depression in patients with chronic back pain-study protocol of the PROD-BP multicenter pragmatic RCT.

BACKGROUND: Reducing the disease burden of major depressive disorder (MDD) is of major public health relevance. The prevention of depression is regarded as one possible approach to reach this goal. People with multiple risk factors for MDD such as chronic back pain and subthreshold depressive symptoms may benefit most from preventive measures. The Internet as intervention setting allows for scaling up preventive interventions on a public mental health level. METHODS: This study is a multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT) of parallel design aiming to investigate the (cost-) effectiveness of an Internet- and mobile-based intervention (IMI) for the prevention of depression in chronic back pain patients (PROD-BP) with subthreshold depressive symptoms. eSano BackCare-DP is a guided, chronic back pain-specific depression prevention intervention based on cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) principles comprising six weekly plus three optional modules and two booster sessions after completion of the intervention. Trained psychologists provide guidance by sending feedback messages after each module. A total of 406 patients with chronic back pain and without a depressive disorder at baseline will be recruited following orthopedic rehabilitation care and allocated to either intervention or treatment-as-usual (TAU). Primary patient-relevant endpoint of the trial is the time to onset of MDD measured by the telephone-administered Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID) at baseline and 1-year post-randomization. Key secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life, depression severity, pain intensity, pain-related disability, ability to work, intervention satisfaction and adherence as well as side effects of the intervention. Online assessments take place at baseline and 9 weeks as well as 6 and 12 months post-randomization. Cox regression survival analysis will be conducted to estimate hazard ratio at 12-month follow-up. Moreover, an economic analysis will be conducted from a societal and public health perspective. DISCUSSION: This is the first study examining an IMI for depression prevention in a sample of chronic pain patients. If this implementation of a depression prevention IMI into orthopedic aftercare proves effective, the intervention could be integrated into routine care with minimal costs and extended for use with other chronic diseases. Results will have implications for researchers, health care providers and public health policy makers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform via the German Clinical Studies Trial Register (DRKS): DRKS00007960 . Registered 12 August 2015.

Economic evidence for the clinical management of major depressive disorder: a systematic review and quality appraisal of economic evaluations alongside randomised controlled trials.

AIMS: The aim of this systematic review of economic evaluations alongside randomised controlled trials (RCTs) was to provide a comprehensive overview of the evidence concerning cost-effectiveness analyses of common treatment options for major depression. METHODS: An existing database was used to identify studies reporting cost-effectiveness results from RCTs. This database has been developed by a systematic literature search in the bibliographic databases of PubMed, PsychINFO, Embase and Cochrane library from database inception to December 2014. We evaluated the quality of economic evaluations using a 10-item short version of the Drummond checklist. Results were synthesised narratively. The risk of bias of the included RCTs was assessed, based on the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool. RESULTS: Fourteen RCTs were included from the 5580 articles screened on titles and abstracts. The methodological quality of the health economic evaluations was relatively high and the majority of the included RCTs had low risk of bias in most of Cochrane items except blinding of participants and personnel. Cognitive behavioural therapy was examined in seven trials as part of a variety of treatment protocols and seems cost-effective compared with pharmacotherapy in the long-term. However cost-effectiveness results for the combination of psychotherapy with pharmacotherapy are conflicting and should be interpreted with caution due to limited comparability between the examined trials. For several treatments, only a single economic evaluation was reported as part of a clinical trial. This was the case for comparisons between different classes of antidepressants, for several types of psychotherapy (behavioural activation, occupational therapy, interpersonal psychotherapy, short-term psychotherapy, psychodynamic psychotherapy, rational emotive behavioural therapy, solution focused therapy), and for transcranial magnetic stimulation v. electroconvulsive therapy. The limited evidence base for these interventions means generalisations, based on economic evaluation alongside clinical trials, cannot easily be made. CONCLUSIONS: There is some economic evidence underpinning many of the common treatment options for major depression. Wide variability was observed in study outcomes, probably attributable to differences in population, interventions or follow-up periods. For many interventions, only a single economic evaluation alongside clinical trials was identified. Thus, significant economic evidence gaps remain in the area of major depressive disorder.