Department for Psychotherapy and Biopsychosocial Health, Danube University Krems, Krems an der Donau, Austria.
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany.
J Clin Psychol. 2020 Jul;76(7):1241-1254. doi: 10.1002/jclp.22931. Epub 2020 Jan 30.
Interpersonal problems were examined as moderators of depression outcomes between mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) and cognitive behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy (CBASP) in patients with chronic depression.
Patients received treatment-as-usual and, in addition, were randomized to 8-weeks of MBCT (n = 34) or 8-weeks of CBASP (n = 34). MBCT and CBASP were given in a group format. The Hamilton depression rating scale (HAM-D) was the primary and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) the secondary outcome. The subscales of the Inventory of interpersonal problems (IIP-32) were moderators. Multilevel models were performed.
Higher scores on the "vindictive/self-centered" subscale were associated with a better outcome in MBCT than in CBASP (HAM-D: p < .01; BDI-II: p < .01). Higher scores on the "nonassertive" subscale were associated with a better outcome in CBASP than in MBCT (HAM-D: p < .01; BDI-II: p < .01).
If these results can be replicated in larger trials, MBCT should be preferred to CBASP in chronically depressed patients being vindictive/self-centered, whereas CBASP should be preferred to MBCT in chronically depressed patients being nonassertive.
在慢性抑郁症患者中，人际关系问题被视为正念认知疗法（MBCT）和认知行为分析系统疗法（CBASP）治疗抑郁结果的调节因素。
患者接受常规治疗，此外还随机分为 8 周的 MBCT（n=34）或 8 周的 CBASP（n=34）。MBCT 和 CBASP 以小组形式进行。汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表（HAM-D）是主要结果，贝克抑郁量表第二版（BDI-II）是次要结果。人际关系问题量表（IIP-32）的亚量表是调节因素。采用多水平模型进行分析。
“报复/自我中心”亚量表的得分较高与 MBCT 的治疗效果优于 CBASP 相关（HAM-D：p<.01；BDI-II：p<.01）。“非果断”亚量表的得分较高与 CBASP 的治疗效果优于 MBCT 相关（HAM-D：p<.01；BDI-II：p<.01）。
如果这些结果能在更大规模的试验中得到复制，那么在报复/自我中心的慢性抑郁症患者中，MBCT 应优于 CBASP，而在非果断的慢性抑郁症患者中，CBASP 应优于 MBCT。
