Clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and process evaluation of group schema therapy for eating disorders: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Eating disorders (EDs), such as (atypical) Anorexia (AN) and Bulimia Nervosa (BN), are difficult to treat, causing socioeconomic impediments. Although enhanced cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT-E) is widely considered clinically effective, it may not be the most beneficial treatment for (atypical) AN and BN patients who do not show a rapid response after the first 4 weeks (8 sessions) of a CBT-E treatment. Alternatively, group schema therapy (GST) may be a valuable treatment for this ED population. Even though GST for EDs has yielded promising preliminary findings, the current body of evidence requires expansion. On top of that, data on cost-effectiveness is lacking. In light of these gaps, we aim to describe a protocol to examine whether GST is more (1) clinically effective and (2) cost-effective than CBT-E for (atypical) AN and BN patients, who do not show a rapid response after the first 4 weeks of treatment. Additionally, we will conduct (3) process evaluations for both treatments. METHODS: Using a multicenter RCT design, 232 Dutch (atypical) AN and BN patients with a CBT-E referral will be recruited from five treatment centers. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness will be measured before treatment, directly after treatment, at 6 and at 12 months follow-up. In order to rate process evaluation, patient experiences and the degree to which treatments are implemented according to protocol will be measured. In order to assess the quality of life and the achievement of personalized goals, interviews will be conducted at the end of treatment. Data will be analyzed, using a regression-based approach to mixed modelling, multivariate sensitivity analyses and coding trees for qualitative data. We hypothesize GST to be superior to CBT-E in terms of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness for patients who do not show a rapid response to the first 4 weeks of a CBT-E treatment. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study protocol describing a multicenter RCT to explore the three aforementioned objectives. Related risks in performing the study protocol have been outlined. The expected findings may serve as a guide for healthcare stakeholders to optimize ED care trajectories. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05812950).

Cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and the budget impact of antidepressants versus preventive cognitive therapy with or without tapering of antidepressants.

BACKGROUND: As depression has a recurrent course, relapse and recurrence prevention is essential.AimsIn our randomised controlled trial (registered with the Nederlands trial register, identifier: NTR1907), we found that adding preventive cognitive therapy (PCT) to maintenance antidepressants (PCT+AD) yielded substantial protective effects versus antidepressants only in individuals with recurrent depression. Antidepressants were not superior to PCT while tapering antidepressants (PCT/-AD). To inform decision-makers on treatment allocation, we present the corresponding cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and budget impact. METHOD: Data were analysed (n = 289) using a societal perspective with 24-months of follow-up, with depression-free days and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) as health outcomes. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated and cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were derived to provide information about cost-effectiveness. The budget impact was examined with a health economic simulation model. RESULTS: Mean total costs over 24 months were €6814, €10 264 and €13 282 for AD+PCT, antidepressants only and PCT/-AD, respectively. Compared with antidepressants only, PCT+AD resulted in significant improvements in depression-free days but not QALYs. Health gains did not significantly favour antidepressants only versus PCT/-AD. High probabilities were found that PCT+AD versus antidepressants only and antidepressants only versus PCT/-AD were dominant with low willingness-to-pay thresholds. The budget impact analysis showed decreased societal costs for PCT+AD versus antidepressants only and for antidepressants only versus PCT/-AD. CONCLUSIONS: Adding PCT to antidepressants is cost-effective over 24 months and PCT with guided tapering of antidepressants in long-term users might result in extra costs. Future studies examining costs and effects of antidepressants versus psychological interventions over a longer period may identify a break-even point where PCT/-AD will become cost-effective.Declaration of interestC.L.H.B. is co-editor of PLOS One and receives no honorarium for this role. She is also co-developer of the Dutch multidisciplinary clinical guideline for anxiety and depression, for which she receives no remuneration. She is a member of the scientific advisory board of the National Insure Institute, for which she receives an honorarium, although this role has no direct relation to this study. C.L.H.B. has presented keynote addresses at conferences, such as the European Psychiatry Association and the European Conference Association, for which she sometimes receives an honorarium. She has presented clinical training workshops, some including a fee. She receives royalties from her books and co-edited books and she developed preventive cognitive therapy on the basis of the cognitive model of A. T. Beck. W.A.N. has received grants from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development and the European Union and honoraria and speakers' fees from Lundbeck and Aristo Pharma, and has served as a consultant for Daleco Pharma.

Disrupting the rhythm of depression: design and protocol of a randomized controlled trial on preventing relapse using brief cognitive therapy with or without antidepressants.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance treatment with antidepressants is the leading strategy to prevent relapse and recurrence in patients with recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) who have responded to acute treatment with antidepressants (AD). However, in clinical practice most patients (up to 70-80%) are not willing to take this medication after remission or take too low dosages. Moreover, as patients need to take medication for several years, it may not be the most cost-effective strategy. The best established effective and available alternative is brief cognitive therapy (CT). However, it is unclear whether brief CT while tapering antidepressants (AD) is an effective alternative for long term use of AD in recurrent depression. In addition, it is unclear whether the combination of AD to brief CT is beneficial. METHODS/DESIGN: Therefore, we will compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of brief CT while tapering AD to maintenance AD and the combination of CT with maintenance AD. In addition, we examine whether the prophylactic effect of CT was due to CT tackling illness related risk factors for recurrence such as residual symptoms or to its efficacy to modify presumed vulnerability factors of recurrence (e.g. rigid explicit and/or implicit dysfunctional attitudes). This is a multicenter RCT comparing the above treatment scenarios. Remitted patients on AD with at least two previous depressive episodes in the past five years (n = 276) will be recruited. The primary outcome is time related proportion of depression relapse/recurrence during minimal 15 months using DSM-IV-R criteria as assessed by the Structural Clinical Interview for Depression. Secondary outcome: economic evaluation (using a societal perspective) and number, duration and severity of relapses/recurrences. DISCUSSION: This will be the first trial to investigate whether CT is effective in preventing relapse to depression in recurrent depression while tapering antidepressant treatment compared to antidepressant treatment alone and the combination of both. In addition, we explore explicit and implicit mediators of CT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR1907.