A randomized controlled trial of a preventive intervention for the children of parents with depression: mid-term effects, mediators and moderators.

BACKGROUND: In a parallel randomized controlled trial the effectiveness of the family- and group-based cognitive-behavioural "Gug-Auf" intervention in preventing depression in children of depressed parents was evaluated. We hypothesized that the intervention would be associated with reduced incidence of depression at 15 months as well as with reduced symptom severity at 6, 9, and 15 months. We also explored the role of a number of mediators and moderators. METHODS: Families were included if a parent (n = 100, mean age = 46.06, 61% female) had experienced depression and children (n = 135, aged 8-17 years, 53% female) had no mental illness. Families (91.5% German) were randomly allocated (50:50 block-wise; stratified by child age and parental depression) to the 12-session "GuG-Auf" intervention or no intervention. Outcomes were assessed (on an intention-to-treat basis) at 0-(T1), 6-(T2), 9-(T3) and 15-months (T4) after baseline. Primary outcome (onset of depression; T4) was assessed with standardized (blinded) clinical interviews. Secondary (unblinded) outcome was risk of depression (at T2-T4) indicated by self- and parent-reported symptoms of internalizing, externalizing and depressive disorder. Potential mediators were emotion regulation, attributional style, knowledge of depression and parenting style. Potential moderators were parental depression severity and negative life events. RESULTS: None of the children who received the intervention developed depression, whereas two of those in the control group did. The intervention significantly reduced depression risk (indicated by severity of self-reported internalizing symptoms) at T3 (p = .027, d = -0.45) and T4 (p = .035, d = -0.44). Both groups showed reduced depressive symptoms (p = .029, d = -0.44). Cognitive problem-solving and negative parenting emerged as mediators. There was no evidence that the intervention was associated with parent-reported internalizing symptoms or externalizing symptoms. No adverse events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Children of parents with depression showed an increase in self-reported (but not parent-reported) internalizing symptoms over time. This increase was not present in children who received the GuG-Auf intervention. The intervention was not associated with changes in externalizing symptoms. Conclusions regarding prevention of the onset of depression were not possible. Despite some limitations in the generalizability, these findings contribute to reducing the burden of youth depression. REGISTRATION: The trial was registered on 16/04/2014 at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02115880 ) and study protocol published in BMC Psychiatry ( https://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12888-014-0263-2 ).

A randomised controlled trial of a family-group cognitive-behavioural (FGCB) preventive intervention for the children of parents with depression: short-term effects on symptoms and possible mechanisms.

OBJECTIVE: Parental depression is one of the biggest risk factors for youth depression. This parallel randomized controlled trial evaluates the effectiveness of the German version of the family-group-cognitive-behavioral (FGCB) preventive intervention for children of depressed parents. METHODS: Families with (i) a parent who has experienced depression and (ii) a healthy child aged 8-17 years (mean = 11.63; 53% female) were randomly allocated (blockwise; stratified by child age and parental depression) to the 12-session intervention (EG; n = 50) or no intervention (CG; usual care; n = 50). Self-reported (unblinded) outcomes were assessed immediately after the intervention (6 months). We hypothesized that CG children would show a greater increase in self-reported symptoms of depression (DIKJ) and internalising/externalising disorder (YSR/CBCL) over time compared to the EG. Intervention effects on secondary outcome variables emotion regulation (FEEL-KJ), attributional style (ASF-KJ), knowledge of depression and parenting style (ESI) were also expected. Study protocol (Belinda Platt, Pietsch, Krick, Oort, & Schulte-Körne, 2014) and trial registration (NCT02115880) reported elsewhere. RESULTS: We found significant intervention effects on self-reported internalising ([Formula: see text] = 0.05) and externalising ([Formula: see text] = 0.08) symptoms but did not detect depressive symptoms or parent-reported psychopathology. Parental depression severity did not modify these effects. Both groups showed equally improved knowledge of depression ([Formula: see text] = 0.06). There were no intervention effects on emotion regulation, attributional style or parenting style. CONCLUSION: The German version of the FGCB intervention is effective in reducing symptoms of general psychopathology. There was no evidence that the mechanisms targeted in the intervention changed within the intervention period.

Qualitative evaluation of a preventive intervention for the offspring of parents with a history of depression.

BACKGROUND: Meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials suggest that psychological interventions to reduce children's risk of depression are effective. Nevertheless, these effects are modest and diminish over time. The Medical Research Council recommends a mixed-methods approach to the evaluation of complex interventions. By gaining a more thorough understanding of participants' perspectives, qualitative evaluations of preventive interventions could improve their efficacy, longevity and transfer into clinical practice. METHODS: 18 parents and 22 children who had received a 12-session family- and group-based cognitive-behavioural intervention to prevent youth depression as part of a randomised controlled trial took part in semi-structured interviews or a focus group about aspects which had been perceived as helpful, elements they were still using after the intervention had ended, and suggestions they had for improving the intervention. RESULTS: The chance to openly share and discuss their experiences of depression within and between families was considered helpful by both children and parents. Children benefitted the most from learning coping strategies for dealing with stress and many still used them in everyday life. Parents profited mostly from increasing positive family time, but noted that maintaining new routines after the end of the intervention proved difficult. Participants were generally content with the intervention but commented on how tiring and time consuming it was. CONCLUSIONS: Managing parents' expectations of family-based interventions in terms of their own mental health needs (versus those of their children) and leaving more room for open discussions may result in interventions which are more appealing to participating families. Increasing intervals between sessions may be one means of improving the longevity of interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The original RCT this evaluation is a part of was registered under NCT02115880 .