Live two-way video versus face-to-face treatment for depression, anxiety, and obsessive-compulsive disorder: A 24-week randomized controlled trial.

AIM: Live two-way video, easily accessible from home via smartphones and other devices, is becoming a new way of providing psychiatric treatment. However, lack of evidence for real-world clinical setting effectiveness hampers its approval by medical insurance in some countries. Here, we conducted the first large-scale pragmatic, randomized controlled trial to determine the effectiveness of long-term treatment for multiple psychiatric disorders via two-way video using smartphones and other devices, which are currently the primary means of telecommunication. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial compared two-way video versus face-to-face treatment for depressive disorder, anxiety disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder in the subacute/maintenance phase during a 24-week period. Adult patients with the above-mentioned disorders were allocated to either a two-way video group (≥50% video sessions) or a face-to-face group (100% in-person sessions) and received standard treatment covered by public medical insurance. The primary outcome was the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey Mental Component Summary (SF-36 MCS) score. Secondary outcomes included all-cause discontinuation, working alliance, adverse events, and the severity rating scales for each disorder. RESULTS: A total of 199 patients participated in this study. After 24 weeks of treatment, two-way video treatment was found to be noninferior to face-to-face treatment regarding SF-36 MCS score (48.50 vs 46.68, respectively; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding most secondary end points, including all-cause discontinuation, treatment efficacy, and satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Two-way video treatment using smartphones and other devices, was noninferior to face-to-face treatment in real-world clinical settings. Modern telemedicine, easily accessible from home, can be used as a form of health care.

Predictors and moderators of outcomes in mindfulness-based cognitive therapy intervention for early breast cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: To deliver mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) efficiently, the present study aimed (1) to identify predictors and moderators of patients who benefit from MBCT for psychological distress and (2) to explore the initial treatment reaction to identify the optimal number of sessions that produce a significant clinical effect. METHODS: This is the secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of MBCT for breast cancer patients (N = 74). We classified the participants into remitters vs. non-remitters, and responder vs. non-responders, according to the total score of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at the end of the intervention. We conducted multivariate analyses to explore for predictors of response and remission. We adopted generalized estimating equations to explore the optimal number of sessions. RESULTS: Sociodemographic and clinical backgrounds did not have significant influence on the treatment outcomes of the MBCT. Better program adherence, which was represented as the participants' better attendance to the MBCT program, was a significant predictor of both remission and response [odds ratio (OR) = 1.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.25-2.89, p = 0.003, and OR = 1.72, 95% CI 1.12-2.65, p = 0.013, respectively]. It was not until seventh session that the remission rate exceeded 50% and the response rate showed significance. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics did not significantly influence the treatment outcomes, while homework minutes and class attendance had significant effects on treatment outcomes. This implies that MBCT is recommended to any cancer patient, if he/she is motivated to the program, regardless of their sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Patients are encouraged to attend a standard MBCT program (eight sessions) and do the assigned homework as intensely as possible. Further studies with larger sample and objective measurements are desired.

Is computerised CBT really helpful for adult depression?-A meta-analytic re-evaluation of CCBT for adult depression in terms of clinical implementation and methodological validity.

BACKGROUND: Depression is a major cause of disability worldwide, and computerised cognitive behavioural therapy (CCBT) is expected to be a more augmentative and efficient treatment. According to previous meta-analyses of CCBT, there is a need for a meta-analytic revaluation of the short-term effectiveness of this therapy and for an evaluation of its long-term effects, functional improvement and dropout. METHODS: Five databases were used (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, CENTRAL and CiNii). We included all RCTs with proper concealment and blinding of outcome assessment for the clinical effectiveness of CCBT in adults (aged 18 and over) with depression. Using Cohen's method, the standard mean difference (SMD) for the overall pooled effects across the included studies was estimated with a random effect model. The main outcome measure and the relative risk of dropout were included in the meta-analysis. RESULTS: Fourteen trials met the inclusion criteria, and sixteen comparisons from these were used for the largest meta-analysis ever. All research used appropriate random sequence generation and Intention-to-Treat analyses (ITT), and employed self-reported measures as the primary outcome. For the sixteen comparisons (2807 participants) comparing CCBT and control conditions, the pooled SMD was -0.48 [95% IC -0.63 to -0.33], suggesting similar effect to the past reviews. Also, there was no significant clinical effect at long follow-up and no improvement of function found. Furthermore, a significantly higher drop-out rate was found for CCBT than for controls. When including studies without BDI as a rating scale and with only modern imputation as sensitivity analysis, the pooled SMD remained significant despite the reduction from a moderate to a small effect. Significant publication bias was found in a funnel plot and on two tests (Begg's p = 0.09; Egger's p = 0.01). Using a trim and fill analysis, the SMD was -0.32 [95% CI -0.49 to -0.16]. CONCLUSION: Despite a short-term reduction in depression at post-treatment, the effect at long follow-up and the function improvement were not significant, with significantly high drop-out. Considering the risk of bias, our meta-analysis implied that the clinical usefulness of current CCBT for adult depression may need to be re-considered downwards in terms of practical implementation and methodological validity.