Reasons for low uptake of a psychological intervention offered to cancer survivors with elevated depressive symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: In line with screening guidelines, cancer survivors were consecutively screened on depressive symptoms (as part of standard care), with those reporting elevated levels of symptoms offered psychological care as part of a trial. Because of the low uptake, no conclusions could be drawn about the interventions' efficacy. Given the trial set-up (following screening guidelines and strict methodological quality criteria), we believe that this observational study reporting the flow of participation, reasons for and characteristics associated with nonparticipation, adds to the debate about the feasibility and efficiency of screening guidelines. METHODS: Two thousand six hundred eight medium- to long-term cancer survivors were consecutively screened on depressive symptoms using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). Those with moderate depressive symptoms (PHQ-9 ≥ 10) were contacted and informed about the trial. Patient flow and reasons for nonparticipation were carefully monitored. RESULTS: One thousand thirty seven survivors (74.3%) returned the questionnaire, with 147 (7.6%) reporting moderate depressive symptoms. Of this group, 49 survivors (33.3%) were ineligible, including 26 survivors (17.7%) already receiving treatment and another 44 survivors (30.0%) reporting no need for treatment. Only 25 survivors (1.0%) participated in the trial. CONCLUSION: Of the approached survivors for screening, only 1% was eligible and interested in receiving psychological care as part of our trial. Four reasons for nonparticipation were: nonresponse to screening, low levels of depressive symptoms, no need, or already receiving care. Our findings question whether to spend the limited resources in psycho-oncological care on following screening guidelines and the efficiency of using consecutive screening for trial recruitment in cancer survivors.

Explaining variability in therapist adherence and patient depressive symptom improvement: The role of therapist interpersonal skills and patient engagement.

Understanding why therapists deviate from a treatment manual is crucial to interpret the mixed findings on the adherence-outcome association. The current study aims to examine whether therapists' interpersonal behaviours and patients' active engagement predict treatment outcome and therapist adherence in cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) for depressive symptoms. In addition, the study explores rater's explanations for therapist nonadherence at sessions in which therapist adherence was low. Study participants were 61 patients with diabetes and depressive symptoms who were randomized to either CBT or MBCT. Depressive symptoms were assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory-II. Therapist adherence, therapist interpersonal skills (i.e., empathy, warmth, and involvement), patients' active engagement, and reasons for nonadherence were assessed by two independent raters (based on digital video recordings). Therapist adherence, therapists' interpersonal skills, and patients' active engagement did not predict posttreatment depressive symptom reduction. Patients' active engagement was positively associated with therapist adherence in CBT and in MBCT. This indicates that adherence may be hampered when patients are not actively engaged in treatment. Observed reasons for nonadherence mostly covered responses to patient's in-session behaviour. The variety of reasons for therapist nonadherence might explain why therapist adherence was not associated with outcomes of CBT and MBCT.

Trajectories of Fatigue in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Fatigue is one of the most frequently reported symptoms by patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), both during active disease phases as well as during clinical remission. This study addressed whether different trajectories of fatigue over time can be identified among patients with IBD. Subsequently, we compared the demographic and clinical characteristics between trajectories. METHODS: The current study included 849 patients with IBD diagnosed with either Crohn disease (CD; n = 511) or ulcerative colitis (UC; n = 338) who visited the University Medical Center in Groningen (the Netherlands) at least 3 times during a 9-year follow-up. We conducted latent class growth analyses to identify distinct trajectories. RESULTS: In all patients with IBD (and in the subgroup with CD), we found 5 trajectories for fatigue. In the UC subgroup, we found 4 fatigue trajectories. One trajectory present in both patients with CD (11.45%) and patients with UC (4.75%) was characterized by chronic elevated levels of fatigue across time. Women and parents were more prevalent in trajectories with higher fatigue severity. We also found significant associations among the fatigue trajectories with disease activity and psychological well-being. CONCLUSIONS: The results clearly showed the existence of distinct fatigue paths over time in patients with IBD. Those reporting more chronic elevated levels of fatigue also reported greater disease activity and reduced well-being. Therefore, reducing disease activity may be important for the treatment of fatigue. In addition, given the significant association with well-being, it is possible that reducing fatigue may improve self-reported well-being.

What works best for whom? Cognitive Behavior Therapy and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for depressive symptoms in patients with diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT) and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) have shown to be effective interventions for treating depressive symptoms in patients with diabetes. However, little is known about which intervention works best for whom (i.e., moderators of efficacy). The aim of this study was to identify variables that differentially predicted response to either CBT or MBCT (i.e., prescriptive predictors). METHODS: The sample consisted of 91 adult outpatients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes and comorbid depressive symptoms (i.e., BDI-II ≥ 14) who were randomized to either individual 8-week CBT (n = 45) or individual 8-week MBCT (n = 46). Patients were followed for a year and depressive symptoms were measured at pre-treatment, post-treatment, and at 9-months follow-up. The predictive effect of demographics, depression related characteristics, and disease specific characteristics on change in depressive symptoms was assessed by means of hierarchical regression analyses. RESULTS: Analyses showed that education was the only factor that differentially predicted a decrease in depressive symptoms directly after the interventions. At post-treatment, individuals with higher educational attainment responded better to MBCT, as compared to CBT. Yet, this effect was not apparent at 9-months follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not identify variables that robustly differentially predicted treatment effectiveness of CBT and MBCT, indicating that both CBT and MBCT are accessible interventions that are effective for treating depressive symptoms in broad populations with diabetes. More research is needed to guide patient-treatment matching in clinical practice.

Group and Individual Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) Are Both Effective: a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial in Depressed People with a Somatic Disease.

Depressive symptoms are commonly reported by individuals suffering from a chronic medical condition. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) has been shown to be an effective psychological intervention for reducing depressive symptoms in a range of populations. MBCT is traditionally given in a group format. The aim of the current pilot RCT was to examine the effects of group-based MBCT and individually based MBCT for reducing depressive symptoms in adults suffering from one or more somatic diseases. In this study, 56 people with a somatic condition and comorbid depressive symptoms (i.e., Beck Depression Inventory-II [BDI-II] ≥14) were randomized to group MBCT (n = 28) or individual MBCT (n = 28). Patients filled out questionnaires at three points in time (i.e., pre-intervention, post-intervention, 3 months follow-up). Primary outcome measure was severity of depressive symptoms. Anxiety and positive well-being as well as mindfulness and self-compassion were also assessed. We found significant improvements in all outcomes in those receiving group or individual MBCT, with no significant differences between the two conditions regarding these improvements. Although preliminary (given the pilot nature and lack of control group), results suggest that both group MBCT and individual MBCT are associated with improvements in psychological well-being and enhanced skills of mindfulness and self-compassion in individuals with a chronic somatic condition and comorbid depressive symptoms. Our findings merit future non-inferiority trials in larger samples to be able to draw more firm conclusions about the effectiveness of both formats of MBCT.

Individual mindfulness-based cognitive therapy and cognitive behavior therapy for treating depressive symptoms in patients with diabetes: results of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Depression is a common comorbidity of diabetes, undesirably affecting patients' physical and mental functioning. Psychological interventions are effective treatments for depression in the general population as well as in patients with a chronic disease. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of individual mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) and individual cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in comparison with a waiting-list control condition for treating depressive symptoms in adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, 94 outpatients with diabetes and comorbid depressive symptoms (i.e., Beck Depression Inventory-II [BDI-II] ≥14) were randomized to MBCT (n = 31), CBT (n = 32), or waiting list (n = 31). All participants completed written questionnaires and interviews at pre- and postmeasurement (3 months later). Primary outcome measure was severity of depressive symptoms (BDI-II and Toronto Hamilton Depression Rating Scale). Anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7), well-being (Well-Being Index), diabetes-related distress (Problem Areas In Diabetes), and HbA1c levels were assessed as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Results showed that participants receiving MBCT and CBT reported significantly greater reductions in depressive symptoms compared with patients in the waiting-list control condition (respectively, P = 0.004 and P < 0.001; d = 0.80 and 1.00; clinically relevant improvement 26% and 29% vs. 4%). Both interventions also had significant positive effects on anxiety, well-being, and diabetes-related distress. No significant effect was found on HbA1c values. CONCLUSIONS: Both individual MBCT and CBT are effective in improving a range of psychological symptoms in individuals with type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Cognitive behavioral therapy and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for depressive symptoms in patients with diabetes: design of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms are a common problem in patients with diabetes, laying an additional burden on both the patients and the health care system. Patients suffering from these symptoms rarely receive adequate evidence-based psychological help as part of routine clinical care. Offering brief evidence-based treatments aimed at alleviating depressive symptoms could improve patients' medical and psychological outcomes. However, well-designed trials focusing on the effectiveness of psychological treatments for depressive symptoms in patients with diabetes are scarce. The Mood Enhancement Therapy Intervention Study (METIS) tests the effectiveness of two treatment protocols in patients with diabetes. Individually administered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) and Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) are compared with a waiting list control condition in terms of their effectiveness in reducing the severity of depressive symptoms. Furthermore, we explore several potential moderators and mediators of change underlying treatment effectiveness, as well as the role of common factors and treatment integrity. METHODS/DESIGN: The METIS trial has a randomized controlled design with three arms, comparing CBT and MBCT with a waiting list control condition. Intervention groups receive treatment immediately; the waiting list control group receives treatment three months later. Both treatments are individually delivered in 8 sessions of 45 to 60 minutes by trained therapists. Primary outcome is severity of depressive symptoms. Anxiety, well-being, diabetes-related distress, HbA1c levels, and intersession changes in mood are assessed as secondary outcomes. Assessments are held at pre-treatment, several time points during treatment, at post-treatment, and at 3-months and 9-months follow-up. The study has been approved by a medical ethical committee. DISCUSSION: Both CBT and MBCT are expected to help improve depressive symptoms in patients with diabetes. If MBCT is at least equally effective as CBT, MBCT can be established as an alternative approach to CBT for treating depressive symptoms in patients with diabetes. By analyzing moderators and mediators of change, more information can be gathered for whom and why CBT and MBCT are effective. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT01630512.