Do older adults respond to cognitive behavioral therapy as well as younger adults? An analysis of a large, multi-diagnostic, real-world sample.

OBJECTIVES: Older adults (OA; ≥55 years of age) are underrepresented in patients receiving cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). This study evaluates mental health outcomes for OA compared to younger adults (YA; <55 years of age) receiving CBT. DESIGN: This is a pre-post study comparing the effectiveness of CBT for OA (n = 99) and YA (n = 601) in a CBT service located in a university-affiliated tertiary care hospital in Canada. Data was collected between 2001 and 2021. Participants received a mean of 18.5 sessions (SD 10) of standard, evidence-based CBT with treatment integrity checks. The main outcome was clinically significant change, as measured by the Reliable Change Index (RCI). Secondary outcomes were change in the Global Severity Index (GSI-SCL) of the Symptoms Checklist-90 (Revised), and Clinical Global Improvement scores (CGI). RESULTS: The RCI allowed a comparison of treatment efficacy across diagnoses. Both groups experienced similar improvement on the RCI (2.92 [±3.64] vs. 3.15 [±4.86], p = 0.65). Furthermore, 39% of OA and 42% of YA no longer met criteria for their diagnoses. Groups did not differ with respect to changes in the GSI-SCL. The CGI severity comparison suggested that OA had milder illness. In all outcomes (RCI, CGI and GSI-SCL), participants improved over time. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world study analyzed a large sample of OA and YA undergoing CBT for various mental health conditions. Both groups were found to benefit equally.

Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy in Intensive Case Management: A Multimethod Quantitative-Qualitative Study.

Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) has been shown to improve clinical outcomes in schizophrenia and severe and persistent mental illness, but access to it remains limited. One potential way to improve access to CBT is to provide it through intensive case management (ICM) teams. A 90-week quality improvement study was designed to assess if CBT could be implemented in ICM teams. Self-selected ICM clinicians (N=8) implemented CBT with their patients (N=40). These clinicians attended weekly seminars (36 h total) and group supervision (1.5 h/wk). Patient outcomes for this group were compared with those of other clinicians who did not attend the seminars [treatment as usual (TAU) clinicians (N=4)] and their patient population (N=49). Prescore and postscore on the Clinical Global Impressions scale and a quality-of-life scale (Montreal Life Skill Survey) were analyzed for completers in both groups (Clinical Global Impressions scores were analyzed for 25 patients in the CBT group and 29 patients in the TAU group). Weekly session reports by clinicians in the CBT group measured CBT interventions, session focus, and satisfaction with CBT. Qualitative data were obtained from clinicians in the CBT group. After 90 weeks, patients in the CBT group had fewer negative symptoms compared with patients in the TAU group. Our qualitative data describe 2 trajectories of patients: those who improved with CBT and those who did not, and they suggest factors that may impact patient trajectories in CBT. This study suggests that CBT can be used effectively in ICM teams working with patients suffering from severe and persistent mental illness.

Use of a Telerehabilitation Platform in a Stroke Continuum: A Qualitative Study of Patient and Therapist Acceptability.

The purpose of this study was to describe the acceptability of a stroke telerehabilitation platform from the perspective of both patients and therapists. Two public rehabilitation centers participated in a pilot telerehabilitation trial. A theoretical framework was used to conceptualize acceptability. Semi-structured individual interviews with patients and focus groups of therapists were conducted. Most participants and therapists were satisfied with the intervention. Participants emphasized the advantages of staying at home to get their treatments. Therapists were more skeptical at first about their self-efficacy to deliver therapy remotely. There was a consensus among therapists about the need for a combination of telerehabilitation and in-person visits to optimize treatments. While we found overall good acceptability, effectiveness of this technology could be improved via an accessible user interface, complementary rehabilitation material, and ongoing training and technical just-in-time support with therapists.

Why We Still Use "Organic Causes": Results From a Survey of Psychiatrists and Residents.

The diagnostic category of "organic disorders" was officially removed from the psychiatric nosology in DSM-IV, published in 1994. Despite this change, physicians continue to use the term "organic causes" to refer to medical and neurological causes of psychiatric symptoms, and it remains part of the ICD-10 classification. In the context of increasing integration of psychiatric disorders within a medical and neuroscientific framework, the reasons behind the ongoing use of this term (reminiscent of mind-body dualism) have to be clarified. The authors conducted a survey of 391 Canadian psychiatrists and psychiatric residents to understand attitudes and beliefs related to this terminology and then applied qualitative and quantitative analyses. Results showed that the terminology is used by the majority (55.9%) of psychiatrists and residents for two main reasons: out of a habit that begins in residency training and because of the belief that other specialties do not fully understand alternative terminology. The authors found that some psychiatrists are concerned that their patients will not receive adequate investigation unless it is made clear through use of the "organic cause" term that other medical causes of psychiatric symptoms are suspected. Use of the "organic cause" term was predicted by being of younger age, performing emergency department calls, and finding alternative terminology difficult to use. These findings highlight the importance of reflecting on and discussing the effect of this terminology used in psychiatry.