From the Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia; the Corporal Michael J. Crescenz Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia; the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Louisville, Louisville; the Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh; and King's Health Economics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King's College London.
Am J Psychiatry. 2018 Mar 1;175(3):242-250. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2017.17010089. Epub 2017 Oct 3.
The authors evaluated the efficacy and durability of a therapist-supported method for computer-assisted cognitive-behavioral therapy (CCBT) in comparison to standard cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT).
A total of 154 medication-free patients with major depressive disorder seeking treatment at two university clinics were randomly assigned to either 16 weeks of standard CBT (up to 20 sessions of 50 minutes each) or CCBT using the "Good Days Ahead" program. The amount of therapist time in CCBT was planned to be about one-third that in CBT. Outcomes were assessed by independent raters and self-report at baseline, at weeks 8 and 16, and at posttreatment months 3 and 6. The primary test of efficacy was noninferiority on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale at week 16.
Approximately 80% of the participants completed the 16-week protocol (79% in the CBT group and 82% in the CCBT group). CCBT met a priori criteria for noninferiority to conventional CBT at week 16. The groups did not differ significantly on any measure of psychopathology. Remission rates were similar for the two groups (intent-to-treat rates, 41.6% for the CBT group and 42.9% for the CCBT group). Both groups maintained improvements throughout the follow-up.
The study findings indicate that a method of CCBT that blends Internet-delivered skill-building modules with about 5 hours of therapeutic contact was noninferior to a conventional course of CBT that provided over 8 additional hours of therapist contact. Future studies should focus on dissemination and optimizing therapist support methods to maximize the public health significance of CCBT.
作者评估了一种治疗师支持的计算机辅助认知行为疗法(CCBT)与标准认知行为疗法(CBT)相比的疗效和持久性。
共有 154 名寻求两所大学诊所治疗的、无药物治疗的、患有重度抑郁症的患者被随机分配到标准 CBT(最多 20 次,每次 50 分钟)或使用“美好未来”程序的 CCBT。CCBT 中治疗师的时间量计划约为 CBT 的三分之一。在基线、第 8 周和第 16 周以及治疗后 3 个月和 6 个月,由独立评估者和自我报告评估结果。疗效的主要检验是第 16 周汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表的非劣效性。
大约 80%的参与者完成了 16 周的方案(CBT 组为 79%,CCBT 组为 82%)。CCBT 在第 16 周达到了优于传统 CBT 的预先设定标准。两组在任何精神病理学测量上均无显著差异。两组的缓解率相似(意向治疗率,CBT 组为 41.6%,CCBT 组为 42.9%)。两组在整个随访过程中均保持改善。
研究结果表明,将互联网提供的技能培养模块与约 5 小时的治疗接触相结合的 CCBT 方法与提供超过 8 小时额外治疗师接触的传统 CBT 课程相当。未来的研究应集中在传播和优化治疗师支持方法上,以最大限度地提高 CCBT 的公共卫生意义。