Center for Global Mental Health, National Institute of Psychiatry Ramón de la Fuente Muñiz, Mexico City, Mexico.
Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
JAMA Psychiatry. 2023 Aug 1;80(8):768-777. doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2023.1675.
Guided internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy (i-CBT) is a low-cost way to address high unmet need for anxiety and depression treatment. Scalability could be increased if some patients were helped as much by self-guided i-CBT as guided i-CBT.
To develop an individualized treatment rule using machine learning methods for guided i-CBT vs self-guided i-CBT based on a rich set of baseline predictors.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This prespecified secondary analysis of an assessor-blinded, multisite randomized clinical trial of guided i-CBT, self-guided i-CBT, and treatment as usual included students in Colombia and Mexico who were seeking treatment for anxiety (defined as a 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder [GAD-7] score of ≥10) and/or depression (defined as a 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9] score of ≥10). Study recruitment was from March 1 to October 26, 2021. Initial data analysis was conducted from May 23 to October 26, 2022.
Participants were randomized to a culturally adapted transdiagnostic i-CBT that was guided (n = 445), self-guided (n = 439), or treatment as usual (n = 435).
Remission of anxiety (GAD-7 scores of ≤4) and depression (PHQ-9 scores of ≤4) 3 months after baseline.
The study included 1319 participants (mean [SD] age, 21.4 [3.2] years; 1038 women [78.7%]; 725 participants [55.0%] came from Mexico). A total of 1210 participants (91.7%) had significantly higher mean (SE) probabilities of joint remission of anxiety and depression with guided i-CBT (51.8% [3.0%]) than with self-guided i-CBT (37.8% [3.0%]; P = .003) or treatment as usual (40.0% [2.7%]; P = .001). The remaining 109 participants (8.3%) had low mean (SE) probabilities of joint remission of anxiety and depression across all groups (guided i-CBT: 24.5% [9.1%]; P = .007; self-guided i-CBT: 25.4% [8.8%]; P = .004; treatment as usual: 31.0% [9.4%]; P = .001). All participants with baseline anxiety had nonsignificantly higher mean (SE) probabilities of anxiety remission with guided i-CBT (62.7% [5.9%]) than the other 2 groups (self-guided i-CBT: 50.2% [6.2%]; P = .14; treatment as usual: 53.0% [6.0%]; P = .25). A total of 841 of 1177 participants (71.5%) with baseline depression had significantly higher mean (SE) probabilities of depression remission with guided i-CBT (61.5% [3.6%]) than the other 2 groups (self-guided i-CBT: 44.3% [3.7%]; P = .001; treatment as usual: 41.8% [3.2%]; P < .001). The other 336 participants (28.5%) with baseline depression had nonsignificantly higher mean (SE) probabilities of depression remission with self-guided i-CBT (54.4% [6.0%]) than guided i-CBT (39.8% [5.4%]; P = .07).
Guided i-CBT yielded the highest probabilities of remission of anxiety and depression for most participants; however, these differences were nonsignificant for anxiety. Some participants had the highest probabilities of remission of depression with self-guided i-CBT. Information about this variation could be used to optimize allocation of guided and self-guided i-CBT in resource-constrained settings.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04780542.
引导式互联网认知行为疗法(i-CBT)是一种低成本的方法,可以满足焦虑和抑郁治疗的高未满足需求。如果一些患者通过自我引导的 i-CBT 获得与引导式 i-CBT 一样多的帮助,那么可扩展性可以增加。
使用机器学习方法为基于丰富基线预测因子的引导式 i-CBT 与自我引导 i-CBT 制定个体化治疗规则。
设计、地点和参与者:这是对哥伦比亚和墨西哥寻求焦虑(定义为 7 项广泛性焦虑障碍[GAD-7]评分≥10)和/或抑郁(定义为 9 项患者健康问卷[PHQ-9]评分≥10)治疗的学生进行的评估盲、多站点随机临床试验的二次分析,包括接受文化适应的跨诊断 i-CBT 的引导式(n=445)、自我引导式(n=439)或常规治疗(n=435)。研究招募于 2021 年 3 月 1 日至 10 月 26 日进行。初始数据分析于 2022 年 5 月 23 日至 10 月 26 日进行。
参与者被随机分配到接受文化适应的跨诊断 i-CBT,该疗法包括引导式(n=445)、自我引导式(n=439)或常规治疗(n=435)。
基线后 3 个月焦虑(GAD-7 评分≤4)和抑郁(PHQ-9 评分≤4)的缓解情况。
该研究共纳入 1319 名参与者(平均[SD]年龄 21.4[3.2]岁;1038 名女性[78.7%];725 名参与者[55.0%]来自墨西哥)。共有 1210 名参与者(91.7%)接受引导式 i-CBT 的焦虑和抑郁联合缓解的平均(SE)概率显著高于自我引导式 i-CBT(51.8%[3.0%])或常规治疗(40.0%[2.7%];P=0.001)。其余 109 名参与者(8.3%)在所有组中焦虑和抑郁联合缓解的平均(SE)概率较低(引导式 i-CBT:24.5%[9.1%];P=0.007;自我引导式 i-CBT:25.4%[8.8%];P=0.004;常规治疗:31.0%[9.4%];P=0.001)。所有基线焦虑的参与者接受引导式 i-CBT 的焦虑缓解的平均(SE)概率显著高于其他两组(自我引导式 i-CBT:50.2%[6.2%];P=0.14;常规治疗:53.0%[6.0%];P=0.25)。基线时有抑郁的 1177 名参与者中有 841 名(71.5%)接受引导式 i-CBT 的抑郁缓解的平均(SE)概率显著高于其他两组(自我引导式 i-CBT:44.3%[3.7%];P=0.001;常规治疗:41.8%[3.2%];P<0.001)。基线时有抑郁的其他 336 名参与者(28.5%)接受自我引导式 i-CBT 的抑郁缓解的平均(SE)概率显著高于引导式 i-CBT(54.4%[6.0%])(P=0.07)。
引导式 i-CBT 为大多数参与者提供了最高的焦虑和抑郁缓解概率;然而,对于焦虑症,这些差异无统计学意义。一些参与者接受自我引导式 i-CBT 的抑郁缓解的概率最高。有关这种差异的信息可用于优化资源有限环境下的引导式和自我引导式 i-CBT 的分配。
ClinicalTrials.gov 标识符:NCT04780542。