REVIEW ARTICLE |
School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield
Department of Research and Development Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Trust, Rampton Hospital, Nottingham, UK
Correspondence: Eva Kaltenthaler, ScHARR, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK. Email: e.kaltenthaler{at}sheffield.ac.uk
None. Funding detailed in Acknowledgements.
|
|
|---|
Computerised cognitive–behavioural therapy (CCBT) is used for treating depression and provides a potentially useful alternative to therapist cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT).
Aims
To systematically review the evidence for the effectiveness of CCBT for the treatment of mild to moderate depression.
Method
Electronic databases were searched to identify randomised controlled trials. Selected studies were quality assessed and data extracted by two reviewers.
Results
Four studies of three computer software packages met the inclusion criteria. Comparators were treatment as usual, using a depression education website and an attention placebo.
Conclusions
There is some evidence to support the effectiveness of CCBT for the treatment of depression. However, all studies were associated with considerable drop-out rates and little evidence was presented regarding participants preferences and the acceptability of the therapy. More research is needed to determine the place of CCBT in the potential range of treatment options offered to individuals with depression.
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
In addition, the reference lists of relevant articles were checked and health services research-related resources such as Health Technology Assessment (HTA) organisations, guideline-producing bodies, generic research and trials registers, and specialist mental health sites were also searched. The search strategies and sources are described in detail elsewhere.9 No date, language, study or publication type restrictions were applied.
We included studies of adults with mild to moderate depression, with or without anxiety, as defined by individual studies. The following disorders did not fall within the remit of this review: postnatal depression, bipolar disorder, depression with psychotic symptoms or current major depression or serious suicidal thoughts.
Cognitive–behavioural therapy was delivered alone or as part of a package of care either via a computer interface or over the telephone with a computer response. Comparators were current standard treatments including therapist-led CBT, non-directive counselling, primary care counselling, routine management (including drug treatment) and alternative methods of CBT delivery such as bibliotherapy and group CBT. Outcomes included improvement in psychological symptoms, interpersonal and social functioning, quality of life and participant satisfaction both with treatment and site of delivery. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) meeting the inclusion/exclusion criteria were included.
Quality assessment for the trials was based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme11 checklist for RCTs. All data from included studies was extracted by one reviewer and checked by a second using a standardised data extraction form.
We assessed studies on the basis of study design, populations, comparators and outcomes for synthesis. Due to heterogeneity in these components, we could not undertake formal statistical synthesis and the results are presented in tabulated format with a narrative synthesis of the results.
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (21K): [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide] |
Fig. 1 Summary of study selection and exclusion. RCTs, randomised controlled
trials.
|
MoodGYM
MoodGYM is a web-based CBT programme for depression, developed in
Australia. It consists of five interactive modules, which are made available
sequentially on a week-by-week basis, with revision of all aspects of the
programme in the sixth week. No therapist input was reported in the study
identified,13 but
participants were phoned weekly to ascertain whether the site had been
visited, to encourage repeat visits and homework completion.
Overcoming Depression on the Internet
Overcoming Depression on the Internet, a US-based programme, uses cognitive
restructuring techniques delivered over the internet in the form of
self-guided interactive tutorials. The ODIN site is unattended, and there is
no therapist involvement. However, participants in the telephone reminder
group were phoned by study staff who had non-clinical
backgrounds.15
Participants were free to sign in and use the site as desired. In one
study14 the mean
number of sessions was 2.6 (s.d.=3.5; range 1–20 sessions). Sessions
were self-paced and the length of the sessions was not reported in either
study. In the second study (with reminders by post or telephone) the mean
number of sessions was 5.9 (s.d.=6.2; range 1–33 sessions) for reminders
by post and 5.6 (s.d.=5.8; range 1–27 sessions) for reminders by
telephone.15
Study characteristics
All four studies had mostly female participants with mean age varying from
36.43 years
(s.d.=9.4)13 to
50.3 years
(s.d.=10.8).15
Methods for diagnosis of depression varied. Proudfoot et
al12 used the
Programmable Questionnaire
system16 to
diagnose depression, while Christensen et
al13 used the
Kessler Psychological Distress
Scale17 and Clarke
et
al14,15
identified participants who had received medical services in the previous 30
days with a recorded diagnosis of depression. Both ODIN studies included
participants with and without depression.
Study quality
The quality of the studies was moderate, as briefly described in online
Table DS1. However, two studies reported no reasons for loss to
follow-up14,15
and none of the four studies used masked assessment of outcomes. Data on
psychological outcomes and participant satisfaction for the four studies are
presented in online Tables DS2–DS5.
Psychological outcomes
The four studies used a variety of instruments to measure psychological
outcomes, making comparison between the trials difficult. The Beating the
Blues study12 used
the Beck Depression
Inventory18 as the
primary outcome measure. Beating the Blues appeared to be more effective than
TAU with regard to scores for depression.
In the MoodGYM study,13 the Centre for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES–D) Scale19 was used as the primary outcome measure. Mean improvement in symptoms was reported rather than pre- and post-treatment values. Both MoodGYM (CCBT) and BluePages (psychoeducation) delivered via the internet were more effective in reducing symptoms of depression than the control. The two ODIN trials also used CES–D as the primary outcome measure. In one of the ODIN studies,14 ODIN was not effective in reducing symptoms of depression. In the other ODIN trial,15 participants had a greater reduction on the CES–D than those in the TAU control group.
All four studies reported the use of an intention-to-treat analysis. However, Proudfoot et al12 reported pre-treatment values only for 127 of the 146 randomised participants in the Beating the Blues group and for 114 of the 128 individuals in the TAU group making this not strictly speaking an intention-to-treat analysis.
Participant satisfaction
The four studies gave some, although limited, information on
participants attitudes to treatment. Proudfoot et
al12 reported
that individuals in the Beating the Blues group were significantly more
satisfied with treatment than those in the TAU group but no values were
reported. Christensen et
al13 reported
that peoples acceptability of MoodGYM was implied by the low drop-out
rates although no data were reported. No information regarding participants
attitudes to treatment was reported for either ODIN trial.
Drop-out rates
Drop-out rates varied between the studies. In the study comparing Beating
the Blues with
TAU,12 of the 274
individuals initially randomised, 35% dropped out during the study. In the
MoodGYM study,13
25.3% dropped out of the MoodGYM group, while 15% dropped out of the BluePages
group and 10% from the attention placebo group. In the ODIN trials it is
difficult to differentiate drop-out rates in the treatment group from the
control groups as overall drop-out numbers are reported. In one ODIN trial, of
the 299 participants initially randomised, 26% failed to complete at least one
follow-up visit and by the 32-week follow-up the drop-out rate had reached
41%.14 In the other
ODIN study, 18% of the initial 255 participants failed to complete at least
one follow-up assessment and at 16 weeks this had reached
34%.15 These
drop-out rates are comparable with those for other psychological therapies for
depression.20
|
|
|---|
Although CCBT is a potentially useful intervention, the identified trials were of moderate quality and associated with several weaknesses. For example, comparisons between the packages are difficult owing to the use of different comparators and outcome measures, and different levels of severity at baseline. It is also difficult to ascertain the amount of therapist involvement needed by individuals using the programmes. There is a lack of independent studies, with most trials being conducted by those developing and promoting the products.
Implementation of programmes may be hindered by lack of information regarding recruitment. In most of the included studies the individuals were self-selected, in that they volunteered to take part in the study. In routine primary care, not all individuals may be willing to try CCBT. Little information was provided by Proudfoot et al12 regarding the routine selection of participants in general practitioner surgeries.
Methodological strengths and weaknesses
The studies reported in this systematic review are moderate quality RCTs,
which by virtue of their design attempt to reduce potential biases. However,
the studies used self-selected individuals and there is very little data on
those who refused to participate or those who dropped out. By including only
RCTs we may have missed important data from non-randomised comparative trials.
Randomised controlled trial results can be supplemented by comparative outcome
data from large patient-population field trials to ascertain the extent to
which results obtained in efficacy trials can be translated into clinically
effective interventions within complex healthcare systems. Other limitations
are that the session duration was not always specified as well as the method
of participant selection and severity of depression-making comparisons between
trials difficult. Any extension of these findings to other groups, including
those with severe depression, must be made with caution.
Areas for further research
Future trials should include appropriate comparators such as bibliotherapy
or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and study design should incorporate
qualitative data collection regarding individual preference and attitudes
towards treatment. Information is also needed to determine why individuals
drop out of treatment. Pragmatic trials of CCBT within a stepped care
programme are also necessary.
Increasingly, CCBT is offered as part of a range of treatments for people with depression, especially where access to CBT is limited. However, there is no evidence to suggest that all those would wish to participate in treatment via a computer interface.
People with depression at present have relatively few treatment options. Computerised CBT potentially allows treatment to be offered to a far greater number of individuals than is currently possible and offers considerable savings in terms of therapist time to a subset of those with depression.
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
Related articles in BJP:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||