Suppr超能文献

群组图式治疗进食障碍的临床效果、成本效益和过程评价:一项多中心随机对照试验的研究方案。

Clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and process evaluation of group schema therapy for eating disorders: study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

机构信息

Department of Eating Disorders (Amarum), GGNet Mental Health, St. Annastraat 312c, Nijmegen, 6525 HG, The Netherlands.

Clinical Psychological Science, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Experimental Psychopathology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, 6200 MD, The Netherlands.

出版信息

BMC Psychol. 2024 Mar 4;12(1):123. doi: 10.1186/s40359-024-01624-w.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Eating disorders (EDs), such as (atypical) Anorexia (AN) and Bulimia Nervosa (BN), are difficult to treat, causing socioeconomic impediments. Although enhanced cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT-E) is widely considered clinically effective, it may not be the most beneficial treatment for (atypical) AN and BN patients who do not show a rapid response after the first 4 weeks (8 sessions) of a CBT-E treatment. Alternatively, group schema therapy (GST) may be a valuable treatment for this ED population. Even though GST for EDs has yielded promising preliminary findings, the current body of evidence requires expansion. On top of that, data on cost-effectiveness is lacking. In light of these gaps, we aim to describe a protocol to examine whether GST is more (1) clinically effective and (2) cost-effective than CBT-E for (atypical) AN and BN patients, who do not show a rapid response after the first 4 weeks of treatment. Additionally, we will conduct (3) process evaluations for both treatments.

METHODS

Using a multicenter RCT design, 232 Dutch (atypical) AN and BN patients with a CBT-E referral will be recruited from five treatment centers. Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness will be measured before treatment, directly after treatment, at 6 and at 12 months follow-up. In order to rate process evaluation, patient experiences and the degree to which treatments are implemented according to protocol will be measured. In order to assess the quality of life and the achievement of personalized goals, interviews will be conducted at the end of treatment. Data will be analyzed, using a regression-based approach to mixed modelling, multivariate sensitivity analyses and coding trees for qualitative data. We hypothesize GST to be superior to CBT-E in terms of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness for patients who do not show a rapid response to the first 4 weeks of a CBT-E treatment.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study protocol describing a multicenter RCT to explore the three aforementioned objectives. Related risks in performing the study protocol have been outlined. The expected findings may serve as a guide for healthcare stakeholders to optimize ED care trajectories.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05812950).

摘要

背景

饮食失调症(EDs),如(非典型)厌食症(AN)和贪食症(BN),治疗难度大,会造成社会经济障碍。尽管强化认知行为疗法(CBT-E)被广泛认为具有临床疗效,但对于在接受 CBT-E 治疗的前 4 周(8 个疗程)后没有快速反应的(非典型)AN 和 BN 患者来说,它可能不是最有益的治疗方法。相反,团体图式治疗(GST)可能是这种 ED 患者的一种有价值的治疗方法。尽管 GST 治疗 EDs 已经取得了有希望的初步研究结果,但目前的证据需要进一步扩展。除此之外,关于成本效益的数据也缺乏。鉴于这些差距,我们旨在描述一项方案,以检验 GST 是否比 CBT-E 更(1)对在前 4 周治疗后没有快速反应的(非典型)AN 和 BN 患者有效,以及(2)更具成本效益。此外,我们将对两种治疗方法进行(3)过程评估。

方法

使用多中心 RCT 设计,将从五个治疗中心招募 232 名荷兰(非典型)AN 和 BN 患者进行 CBT-E 转诊。在治疗前、治疗后直接、6 个月和 12 个月随访时,将测量临床疗效和成本效益。为了评估过程评估,将测量患者体验以及治疗按方案实施的程度。为了评估生活质量和个性化目标的实现,将在治疗结束时进行访谈。将使用基于回归的混合模型分析、多变量敏感性分析和定性数据编码树来分析数据。我们假设 GST 在对 CBT-E 治疗的前 4 周没有快速反应的患者中,在临床疗效和成本效益方面优于 CBT-E。

讨论

据我们所知,这是描述一项多中心 RCT 以探索上述三个目标的首个研究方案。已概述了执行研究方案的相关风险。预期结果可能为医疗保健利益相关者提供指导,以优化 ED 护理轨迹。

试验注册

clinicaltrials.gov(NCT05812950)。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验