Department of Population Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
J Med Internet Res. 2024 May 31;26:e47515. doi: 10.2196/47515.
BACKGROUND: Increasing interest has centered on the psychotherapeutic working alliance as a means of understanding clinical change in digital mental health interventions in recent years. However, little is understood about how and to what extent a digital mental health program can have an impact on the working alliance and clinical outcomes in a blended (therapist plus digital program) cognitive behavioral therapy (bCBT) intervention for depression. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the difference in working alliance scores between bCBT and treatment as usual (TAU), examine the association between working alliance and depression severity scores in both arms, and test for an interaction between system usability and working alliance with regard to the association between working alliance and depression scores in bCBT at 3-month assessments. METHODS: We conducted a secondary data analysis of the E-COMPARED (European Comparative Effectiveness Research on Blended Depression Treatment versus Treatment-as-usual) trial, which compared bCBT with TAU across 9 European countries. Data were collected in primary care and specialized services between April 2015 and December 2017. Eligible participants aged 18 years or older and diagnosed with major depressive disorder were randomized to either bCBT (n=476) or TAU (n=467). bCBT consisted of 6-20 sessions of bCBT (involving face-to-face sessions with a therapist and an internet-based program). TAU consisted of usual care for depression. The main outcomes were scores of the working alliance (Working Alliance Inventory-Short Revised-Client [WAI-SR-C]) and depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9]) at 3 months after randomization. Other variables included system usability scores (System Usability Scale-Client [SUS-C]) at 3 months and baseline demographic information. Data from baseline and 3-month assessments were analyzed using linear regression models that adjusted for a set of baseline variables. RESULTS: Of the 945 included participants, 644 (68.2%) were female, and the mean age was 38.96 years (IQR 38). bCBT was associated with higher composite WAI-SR-C scores compared to TAU (B=5.67, 95% CI 4.48-6.86). There was an inverse association between WAI-SR-C and PHQ-9 in bCBT (B=-0.12, 95% CI -0.17 to -0.06) and TAU (B=-0.06, 95% CI -0.11 to -0.02), in which as WAI-SR-C scores increased, PHQ-9 scores decreased. Finally, there was a significant interaction between SUS-C and WAI-SR-C with regard to an inverse association between higher WAI-SR-C scores and lower PHQ-9 scores in bCBT (b=-0.030, 95% CI -0.05 to -0.01; P=.005). CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first study to show that bCBT may enhance the client working alliance when compared to evidence-based routine care for depression that services reported offering. The working alliance in bCBT was also associated with clinical improvements that appear to be enhanced by good program usability. Our findings add further weight to the view that the addition of internet-delivered CBT to face-to-face CBT may positively augment experiences of the working alliance. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02542891, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02542891; German Clinical Trials Register DRKS00006866, https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00006866; Netherlands Trials Register NTR4962, https://www.onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/25452; ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT02389660, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02389660; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02361684, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02361684; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02449447, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02449447; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02410616, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02410616; ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12388725, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12388725?q=ISRCTN12388725&filters=&sort=&offset=1&totalResults=1&page=1&pageSize=10; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02796573, https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02796573. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1186/s13063-016-1511-1.
背景:近年来,人们越来越关注心理治疗联盟作为理解数字心理健康干预临床变化的一种手段。然而,对于数字心理健康计划如何以及在何种程度上可以对混合(治疗师加数字计划)认知行为疗法(bCBT)干预治疗抑郁症中的工作联盟和临床结果产生影响,我们知之甚少。
目的:本研究旨在检验 bCBT 与常规治疗(TAU)之间的工作联盟评分差异,检验工作联盟与两个治疗组中抑郁严重程度评分之间的相关性,并在 3 个月评估时检验系统可用性与工作联盟之间的交互作用与 bCBT 中工作联盟和抑郁评分之间的关联。
方法:我们对 E-COMPARED(欧洲混合抑郁症治疗与常规治疗比较的有效性研究)试验进行了二次数据分析,该试验在 9 个欧洲国家比较了 bCBT 与 TAU。数据于 2015 年 4 月至 2017 年 12 月在初级保健和专门服务机构中收集。年龄在 18 岁或以上且被诊断为重度抑郁症的合格参与者被随机分配至 bCBT(n=476)或 TAU(n=467)组。bCBT 包括 6-20 节的 bCBT(涉及与治疗师面对面的会话和基于互联网的计划)。TAU 包括常规的抑郁症治疗。主要结果是工作联盟(工作联盟量表-简短修订版-客户[WAI-SR-C])和抑郁症状(患者健康问卷-9[PHQ-9])在随机分组后 3 个月的评分。其他变量包括 3 个月时的系统可用性评分(客户的系统可用性量表[ SUS-C])和基线人口统计学信息。使用线性回归模型分析基线和 3 个月评估的数据,该模型调整了一组基线变量。
结果:在 945 名纳入的参与者中,644 名(68.2%)为女性,平均年龄为 38.96 岁(IQR 38)。bCBT 与 TAU 相比,复合 WAI-SR-C 评分较高(B=5.67,95%CI 4.48-6.86)。bCBT 中,WAI-SR-C 与 PHQ-9 呈负相关(B=-0.12,95%CI -0.17 至-0.06),TAU 中,WAI-SR-C 与 PHQ-9 也呈负相关(B=-0.06,95%CI -0.11 至-0.02),即 WAI-SR-C 评分越高,PHQ-9 评分越低。最后,在 bCBT 中,SUS-C 和 WAI-SR-C 之间存在显著的交互作用,表明较高的 WAI-SR-C 评分与较低的 PHQ-9 评分之间存在负相关(b=-0.030,95%CI -0.05 至-0.01;P=.005)。
结论:据我们所知,这是第一项表明 bCBT 可能增强客户工作联盟的研究,与服务报告提供的基于证据的常规抑郁症护理相比。bCBT 中的工作联盟也与临床改善相关,而这种改善似乎通过良好的程序可用性得到了增强。我们的研究结果进一步支持了这样一种观点,即增加互联网提供的 CBT 到面对面的 CBT 可能会积极增强对工作联盟的体验。
试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02542891,https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02542891;德国临床试验注册处 DRKS00006866,https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00006866;荷兰临床试验注册处 NTR4962,https://www.onderzoekmetmensen.nl/en/trial/25452;ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT02389660,https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02389660;ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02361684,https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02361684;ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02449447,https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02449447;ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02410616,https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02410616;ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN12388725,https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12388725?q=ISRCTN12388725&filters=&sort=&offset=1&totalResults=1&page=1&pageSize=10;ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02796573,https://classic.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02796573。
国际注册报告标识符(IRRID):RR2-10.1186/s13063-016-1511-1。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-5-14
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015-3-5
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-4-4
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-3-12
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015-3-23
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-5-23
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-2-3
JMIR Ment Health. 2025-2-7
BMC Med. 2022-10-28
NPJ Digit Med. 2022-9-15
Eye (Lond). 2022-11