A quality-based review of randomized controlled trials of cognitive-behavioral therapy for depression: an assessment and metaregression.

OBJECTIVE: The authors assessed the methodological quality of randomized controlled trials of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression using the Randomized Controlled Trial Psychotherapy Quality Rating Scale (RCT-PQRS). They then compared the quality of CBT trials with that of psychodynamic therapy trials, predicting that CBT trials would have higher quality. The authors also sought to examine the relationship between quality and outcome in the CBT trials. METHOD: An independent-samples t test was used to compare CBT and psychodynamic therapy trials for average total quality score. Metaregression was used to examine the relationship between quality score and effect size in the CBT trials. RESULTS: A total of 120 trials of CBT for depression met inclusion criteria. Their mean total quality score on the RCT-PQRS was 25.7 (SD=8.90), which falls into the lower range of adequate quality. In contrast to our prediction, no significant difference was observed in overall quality between CBT and psychodynamic therapy trials. Lower quality was related to both larger effect sizes and greater variability of effect sizes when analyzed across all available comparisons to CBT. CONCLUSIONS: On average, randomized controlled trials of CBT and of psychodynamic therapy did not differ significantly in quality. In CBT trials, low quality appeared to reduce the reliability and validity of trial results. These findings highlight the importance of discerning quality in individual psychotherapy trials and also point toward specific methodological standards for the future.

Chronic forms of major depression are still undertreated in the 21st century: systematic assessment of 801 patients presenting for treatment.

During a multisite, NIMH-sponsored clinical trial entitled, "Research Evaluating the Value of Augmentation of Medication by Psychotherapy" (REVAMP), we assessed the adequacy of prior antidepressant treatment in patients with chronic forms of major depressive disorder using the Antidepressant Treatment History Form (ATHF). We hypothesized that when compared to earlier studies treatment adequacy would not have increased over the past decade. We found that only 33% of the 801 subjects enrolled had ever had a prior adequate trial of antidepressant medication. Patients significantly more likely to have received prior adequate antidepressant trials were older, married, white, had a longer duration of illness, had more melancholic features or met criteria for the melancholic subtype or met lifetime criteria for panic disorder. The hypothesis that rates of treatment adequacy have not significantly increased over the past decade was supported. These results and the consistency of similar results over time point to the dire need for patient and provider education regarding the signs and symptoms of depression and its treatment.