This pragmatic randomized controlled trial tested the effectiveness of long-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy (LTPP) as an adjunct to treatmentas-usual according to UK national guidelines (TAU), compared to TAU alone, in patients with long-standing major depression who had failed at least two different treatments and were considered to have treatment-resistant depression. Patients (N5129) were recruited from primary care and randomly allocated to the two treatment conditions. They were assessed at 6-monthly intervals during the 18 months of treatment and at 24, 30 and 42 months during follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the 17-item version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17), with complete remission defined as a HDRS-17 score 8, and partial remission defined as a HDRS-17 score 12. Secondary outcome measures included self-reported depression as assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory -II, social functioning as evaluated by the Global Assessment of Functioning, subjective wellbeing as rated by the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation -Outcome Measure, and satisfaction with general activities as assessed by the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire. Complete remission was infrequent in both groups at the end of treatment (9.4% in the LTPP group vs. 6.5% in the control group) as well as at 42-month follow-up (14.9% vs. 4.4%). Partial remission was not significantly more likely in the LTPP than in the control group at the end of treatment (32.1% vs. 23.9%, p50.37), but significant differences emerged during follow-up (24 months: 38.8% vs. 19.2%, p50.03; 30 months: 34.7% vs. 12.2%, p50.008; 42 months: 30.0% vs. 4.4%, p50.001). Both observer-based and self-reported depression scores showed steeper declines in the LTPP group, alongside greater improvements on measures of social adjustment. These data suggest that LTPP can be useful in improving the long-term outcome of treatment-resistant depression. End-oftreatment evaluations or short follow-ups may miss the emergence of delayed therapeutic benefit.

This study aimed to investigate factors linked to perceived coercion at admission and during treatment among voluntary inpatients. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used. Two hundred seventy patients were screened for perceived coercion at admission. Those who felt coerced into admission rated their perceived coercion during treatment a month after admission. Patient characteristics and experiences were tested as predictors of coercion. In-depth interviews on experiences leading to perceived coercion were conducted with 36 participants and analysed thematically. Thirty-four percent of patients felt coerced into admission and half of those still felt coerced a month later. No patient characteristics were associated with perceived coercion. Those whose satisfaction with treatment increased more markedly between baseline and a month later were less likely to feel coerced a month after admission. In the qualitative interviews three themes leading to perceived coercion were identified: viewing the hospital as ineffective and other treatments as more appropriate, not participating in the admission and treatment and not feeling respected. Involving patients in the decision-making and treating them with respect may reduce perceived coercion.

No abstract

BackgroundLong-term forms of depression represent a significant mental health problem for which there is a lack of effective evidence-based treatment. This study aims to produce findings about the effectiveness of psychoanalytic psychotherapy in patients with treatment-resistant/treatment-refractory depression and to deepen the understanding of this complex form of depression.Methods/DesignINDEX GROUP: Patients with treatment resistant/treatment refractory depression. DEFINITION & INCLUSION CRITERIA: Current major depressive disorder, 2 years history of depression, a minimum of two failed treatment attempts, ≥14 on the HRSD or ≥21 on the BDI-II, plus complex personality and/or psycho-social difficulties. EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Moderate or severe learning disability, psychotic illness, bipolar disorder, substance dependency or receipt of test intervention in the previous two years. DESIGN: Pragmatic, randomised controlled trial with qualitative and clinical components. TEST INTERVENTION: 18 months of weekly psychoanalytic psychotherapy, manualised and fidelity-assessed using the Psychotherapy Process Q-Sort. CONTROL CONDITION: Treatment as usual, managed by the referring practitioner. RECRUITMENT: GP referrals from primary care. RCT MAIN OUTCOME: HRSD (with ≤14 as remission). SECONDARY OUTCOMES: depression severity (BDI-II), degree of co-morbid disorders Axis-I and Axis-II (SCID-I and SCID-II-PQ), quality of life and functioning (GAF, CORE, Q-les-Q), object relations (PROQ2a), Cost-effectiveness analysis (CSRI and GP medical records). FOLLOW-UP: 2 years. Plus: a). Qualitative study of participants’ and therapists’ problem formulation, experience of treatment and of participation in trial. (b) Narrative data from semi-structured pre/post psychodynamic interviews to produce prototypes of responders and non-responders. (c) Clinical case-studies of sub-types of TRD and of change.DiscussionTRD needs complex, long-term intervention and extended research follow-up for the proper evaluation of treatment outcome. This pushes at the limits of the design of randomised therapeutic trials. We discuss some of the consequent problems and suggest how they may be mitigated.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN40586372

Severe forms of TRD are associated with high costs in which unpaid care and lost work predominate. Treatments that improve functioning may reduce the large degree of burden.

Taken together, findings reported in this paper provide preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of the Anaclitic-Introjective Depression Assessment, an observer-rated measure that allows the detection of important nuanced differentiations between and within anaclitic and introjective depression.

Background. Major depression is often chronic or recurrent and is usually treated within primary care. Little is known about the associated morbidity and costs. Objectives. To determine socio-demographic characteristics of people with chronic or recurrent depression in primary care and associated morbidity, service use, and costs. Method. 558 participants were recruited from 42 GP practices in the UK. All participants had a history of chronic major depression, recurrent major depression, or dysthymia. Participants completed questionnaires including the BDI-II, Work and Social Adjustment Scale, Euroquol, and Client Service Receipt Inventory documenting use of primary care, mental health, and other services. Results. The sample was characterised by high levels of depression, functional impairment, and high service use and costs. The majority (74%) had been treated with an anti-depressant, while few had seen a counsellor (15%) or a psychologist (3%) in the preceding three months. The group with chronic major depression was most depressed and impaired with highest service use, whilst those with dysthymia were least depressed, impaired, and costly to support but still had high morbidity and associated costs. Conclusion. This is a patient group with very significant morbidity and high costs. Effective interventions to reduce both are required.

Objective: Although research over the past decades has investigated the impact of the personality dimensions of dependency and self-criticism on treatment outcome, little is known of how these personality features influence responsiveness to treatment in patients with severe, chronic forms of depression. Method: The present study uses data from the Tavistock Adult Depression Study (TADS), a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of long-term psychoanalytic psychotherapy (LTPP) compared with treatment as usual (TAU) for individuals diagnosed with treatment-resistant depression. Patients were rated with the Anaclitic Introjective Depression Assessment Q-sort, which distinguishes between two more maladaptive (Submissive and Dismissive) and two less maladaptive (Needy and Self-Critical) subdimensions of dependent or anaclitic and self-critical or introjective depression. Multilevel modeling was used to compare individuals' growth curves of depression severity as measured by the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression over the 18months treatment period and two-year follow-up. Rates of clinically significant change were also determined. Results: As expected, depressed patients with more maladaptive dependent and self-critical features did not benefit from LTPP or TAU. Patients with less maladaptive self-critical features benefitted from both LTPP and TAU, while those with less maladaptive dependent features showed considerable gains from LTPP but not from TAU, with medium to large effect sizes. Conclusions: Findings of this study are consistent with existing research suggesting the need to modify and tailor treatments in accordance to individuals' pretreatment personality features. Given the time and cost-intensive nature of longer-term treatment, this may be particularly important in patients with treatment-resistant depression.