Effectiveness of family-based therapy for depressive symptoms in children and adolescents: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Early-onset depression contributes significantly to the global health burden and has long-term negative effects. This meta-analysis collates and examines the effectiveness of family-based interventions, where family members are involved in the treatment of depression in children and adolescents. A literature search was performed up to 8th March 2023. Randomised controlled trials of family-based interventions were included for participants aged 3-18 years with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder or dysthymia, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013) or with a score above a cut-off on a standardised self-report depression measure. The overall effect size for treatment versus active control was g = 0.22 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.05-0.50) (nine studies; 659 participants), and for treatment versus non-active control it was g = 0.46 (95% CI: -0.09-1.01) (four studies; 385 participants). Effect sizes were not statistically significant, and heterogeneity was high, ranging between I2 = 64.3-81.1%. Subgroup analysis comparing attachment-based family therapy with family therapy using other theoretical frameworks did not yield a significant difference between the two. The effects of family-based therapies were larger than those in the comparison groups, but family-based therapy did not demonstrate a significant treatment benefit compared to the controls. More randomised controlled trials are warranted, considering that evidence for other psychotherapies for depression in children and adolescents, indicates modest effects. Family-based therapy may be an alternative for children and adolescents whose needs are not addressed by these treatments.

Long-term efficacy of meaning-centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors: 2-Year follow-up results of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Meaning-centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors (MCGP-CS) is an effective intervention to improve personal meaning, psychological well-being, and depressive symptoms until 6 months after the intervention. In this study, the long-term effects of MCGP-CS (i.e., at 1- and 2-year follow-up) on meaning, psychological well-being and posttraumatic growth were assessed, in comparison to supportive group psychotherapy (SGP) and care as usual (CAU). METHODS: Cancer survivors (n = 170) were randomized into MCGP-CS, SGP, or CAU. Assessments were scheduled at baseline, 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postintervention. Outcome measures were the Personal Meaning Profile, Ryff's Scales of Psychological Well-Being (SPWB), the Posttraumatic Growth Inventory, and their subscales. Linear mixed models (LMM) were used and results were both reported on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis, as well as for intervention completers only. RESULTS: LMM and post hoc analyses with Bonferroni correction revealed that MCGP-CS participants reported more improvement on positive relations (subscale of SPWB) than CAU participants of 2-year postintervention (ITT analysis, Cohen's d = .82). Completers also reported more personal growth (subscale of SPWB) after MCGP-CS than after SGP 1-year postintervention (Cohen's d = .94). No long-term effects were found on the other outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: In the 2 years after MCGP-CS, the short-term significant effects on personal meaning and most positive effects related to psychological well-being faded. However, MCGP-CS had a long-term positive effect on positive relations with others and on survivors' sense of personal growth. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register: NTR3571.

Cost-utility analysis of meaning-centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors.

BACKGROUND: Meaning-centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors (MCGP-CS) improves meaning, psychological well-being, and mental adjustment to cancer and reduces psychological distress. This randomized controlled trial was conducted to investigate the cost-utility of MCGP-CS compared with supportive group psychotherapy (SGP) and care-as-usual (CAU). METHODS: In total, 170 patients were randomized to MCGP-CS, SGP, or CAU. Intervention costs, direct medical and nonmedical costs, productivity losses, and health-related quality of life were measured until 6 months follow-up, using the TIC-P, PRODISQ, data from the hospital information system, and the EQ-5D. The cost-utility was calculated by comparing mean cumulative costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). RESULTS: Mean total costs ranged from €4492 (MCGP-CS) to €5304 (CAU). Mean QALYs ranged .507 (CAU) to .540 (MCGP-CS). MCGP-CS had a probability of 74% to be both less costly and more effective than CAU, and 49% compared with SGP. Sensitivity analyses showed these findings are robust. If society is willing to pay €0 for one gained QALY, MCGP-CS has a 78% probability of being cost-effective compared with CAU. This increases to 85% and 92% at willingness-to-pay thresholds of €10 000 and €30 000, which are commonly accepted thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: MCGP-CS is highly likely a cost-effective intervention, meaning that there is a positive balance between the costs and gains of MCGP-CS, in comparison with SGP and CAU.

Moderators of the effects of meaning-centered group psychotherapy in cancer survivors on personal meaning, psychological well-being, and distress.

PURPOSE: There is evidence to support that meaning-centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors (MCGP-CS) is an effective intervention for improving personal meaning and psychological well-being, as well as reducing psychological distress. In order to investigate which subpopulations MCGP-CS specifically benefits, this explorative study aims to analyze potential sociodemographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors that may moderate the effects. METHODS: Cancer survivors (N = 114) were randomly assigned to MCGP-CS, or care as usual (CAU). Potential moderators included age, sex, relationship, education, employment, religion, cancer type, tumor stage, cancer treatment, time since treatment, anxiety, depression, other negative life events, and previous psychological treatment. Outcome measures were the Personal Meaning Profile (PMP), Scales of Psychological Well-Being (SPWB), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Assessment took place at baseline, post-intervention (short-term), and 3- and 6-month follow-ups (long-term). For each moderator, separate short-term and long-term linear mixed models were built. RESULTS: Short-term effect of MCGP-CS was moderated by (male) sex (on HADS-D; F(1,98) = 6.1, p = .015) and (a high level of) depressive symptoms at baseline (on SPWB; F(1,93) = 5.7, p = .019). Long-term effect of MCGP-CS was moderated by (not having received) previous psychological treatment (on HADS-total; F(3253) = 3.4, p = .017). CONCLUSIONS: Most sociodemographic and clinical characteristics do not appear to moderate the positive effect of MCGP-CS on personal meaning. However, MCGP-CS appears to reduce depressive symptoms, particularly in males, and to improve purpose in life of survivors with depressive symptoms. In the long-term, MCGP-CS appears to reduce psychological distress in survivors who had not received psychological treatment in the past year. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NTR3571.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of meaning-centered group psychotherapy in cancer survivors: protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Meaning-focused coping may be at the core of adequate adjustment to life after cancer. Cancer survivors who experience their life as meaningful are better adjusted, have better quality of life and psychological functioning. Meaning-Centered Group Psychotherapy for Cancer Survivors (MCGP-CS) was designed to help patients to sustain or enhance a sense of meaning and purpose in their lives. The aim of the proposed study is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MCGP-CS. METHODS/DESIGN: Survivors diagnosed with cancer in the last 5 years and treated with curative intent, are recruited via several hospitals in the Netherlands. After screening, 168 survivors are randomly assigned to one of the three study arms: 1. Meaning-Centered Group Psychotherapy (MCGP-CS) 2. Supportive group psychotherapy (SGP) 3. Care as usual (CAU). Baseline assessment takes place before randomisation, with follow up assessments post-intervention and at 3, 6 and 12 months follow-up. Primary outcome is meaning making (PMP, PTGI, SPWB). Secondary outcome measures address quality of life (EORTC-30), anxiety and depression (HADS), hopelessness (BHS), optimism (LOT-R), adjustment to cancer (MAC), and costs (TIC-P, EQ-5D, PRODISQ). DISCUSSION: Meaning-focused coping is key to adjustment to life after cancer, however, there is a lack of evidence based psychological interventions in this area. Many cancer survivors experience feelings of loneliness and alienation, and have a need for peer support, therefore a group method in particular, can be beneficial for sustaining or enhancing a sense of meaning. If this MCGP-CS is effective for cancer survivors, it can be implemented in the practice of psycho-oncology care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR3571.

Attachment-Based Family Therapy for Adolescents and Young Adults With Suicide Ideation and Depression.

Background: Suicide ideation among adolescents is difficult to treat. Attachment-based family therapy (ABFT) is a promising evidence-based family intervention developed to decrease depressive symptoms and suicide ideation among adolescents. Aims: This open trial assessed the feasibility of ABFT for adolescents (12-23 years) with suicide ideation and depression in an outpatient community mental health center in the Netherlands, by monitoring treatment compliance and satisfaction, treatment dose, and symptom reduction. Methods: Eligible patients were referred by the multidisciplinary treatment team at the facility. Treatment dose was monitored by the therapist. Depression (CDI-2), family functioning (SRFF), and strengths and difficulties (SDQ) were assessed online before the intervention and at 3, 6, and 9 months after baseline. Suicide ideation (SIQ-JR) was assessed at each therapy session, and a satisfaction questionnaire was administered postintervention. A total of 25 families signed informed consent, received ABFT treatment, and were included in the analyses. The therapists were at beginners' level of ABFT, working under supervision during the trial. Results: The treatment dose was acceptable, though impacted by COVID-related lockdowns, and treatment compliance was 89%. Patients received on average 22 ABFT sessions, and about half of the patients received additional psychotherapy. On average, patients were satisfied with ABFT. There was a significant decrease in suicide ideation postintervention (d = 0.69) and significant effects on the CDI-2, SRFF, and SDQ at follow-up with medium-to-large effect sizes (d = 0.53-0.94). Limitations: These results should be interpreted with considerable caution, as there was no control group to establish the effectiveness of ABFT, and the sample was small. Conclusion: ABFT appears to be a feasible therapy for youth with depression and suicide ideation in an outpatient community mental health setting.

Meaning making in cancer survivors: a focus group study.

BACKGROUND: Confrontation with a life-threatening disease like cancer can evoke existential distress, which can trigger a search for meaning in people after having survived this disease. METHODS: In an effort to gain more insight in the meaning making process, we conducted four focus groups with 23 cancer survivors on this topic. Participants responded to questions about experienced meaning making, perceived changes in meaning making after cancer and the perceived need for help in this area. RESULTS: Most frequently mentioned meaning making themes were relationships and experiences. We found that, in general, cancer survivors experienced enhanced meaning after cancer through relationships, experiences, resilience, goal-orientation and leaving a legacy. Some participants, however, also said to have (also) experienced a loss of meaning in their lives through experiences, social roles, relationships and uncertainties about the future. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that there is a group of cancer survivors that has succeeded in meaning making efforts, and experienced sometimes even more meaning in life than before diagnosis, while there is also a considerable group of survivors that struggled with meaning making and has an unmet need for help with that. The results of this study contribute to develop a meaning centered intervention for cancer survivors.