No treatment was superior to the other regarding reducing sick leave. All treatments effectively reduced symptoms, CBT in a faster pace than RTW-I, but at 1-year follow-up, all groups had similar symptom levels. Further research is needed regarding how CBT and RTW-I can be combined more efficiently to produce a larger effect on sick leave while maintaining effective symptom reduction.

Background: Prolonged exposure to stress can lead to substantial suffering, impairment and societal costs. However, access to psychological treatment is limited. Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) can be effective in reducing symptoms of stress, but little is known of its effects in clinical samples. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of ICBT for patients suffering from chronic stress, operationalized as adjustment disorder (AD) and exhaustion disorder (ED). Methods: A total of 100 adults diagnosed with AD or ED were randomly assigned to a 12-week ICBT (n = 50) or waitlist control condition (n = 50). Primary outcome was the level of perceived stress (PSS). Secondary outcomes included several mental health symptom domains as well as functional impairment and work ability. All outcomes were assessed at baseline, after treatment and at the 6-month follow-up. The study was preregistered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02540317. Results: Compared to the control condition, patients in the ICBT group made large and significant improvements on the PSS (d = 1.09) and moderate to large improvements in secondary symptom domains. Effects were maintained at the 6-month follow-up. There was no significant between-group effect on functional impairment or work ability. Conclusions: A relatively short ICBT is indicated to be effective in reducing stress-related symptoms in a clinical sample of patients with AD and ED, and has the potential to substantially increase treatment accessibility. Results must be replicated, and further research is needed to understand the relationship between symptom reduction, functional impairment and work ability.

Depression is common in primary care, and most patients prefer psychological treatment over pharmacotherapy. Cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment, but there are gaps in current knowledge about CBT in the primary care context, especially with regard to long-term effects and the efficacy of specific delivery formats. This is an obstacle to the integration of primary care and specialist psychiatry. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of CBT for primary care patients with depression to investigate the effect of CBT for patients with depression in primary care. A total of 34 studies, with 2543 patients in CBT and 2815 patients in control conditions, were included. CBT was more effective than the control conditions [g = 0.22 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15–0.30)], and the effect was sustained at follow-up [g = 0.17 (95% CI 0.10–0.24)]. CBT also led to a higher response rate [odds ratio (OR) = 2.47 (95% CI 1.60–3.80)] and remission rate [OR = 1.56 (95% CI 1.15–2.14)] than the control conditions. Heterogeneity was moderate. The controlled effect of CBT was significant regardless of whether patients met diagnostic criteria for depression, scored above a validated cut-off for depression, or merely had depressive symptoms. CBT also had a controlled effect regardless of whether the treatment was delivered as individual therapy, group therapy or therapist-guided self-help. We conclude that CBT appears to be effective for patients with depression in primary care, and recommend that patients with mild to moderate depression be offered CBT in primary care.

The aim of this study was to evaluate specific effects for patients with adjustment or exhaustion disorder, the Stress subgroup (n = 152), regarding symptom severity and sick leave after CBT, a return‐to‐work intervention (RTW‐I), and a combination of them (COMBO), using data from a randomized trial. In the original study, primary care patients on sick leave (N = 211) were randomized to CBT (n = 64), RTW‐I (n = 67), or COMBO (n = 80). Blinded Clinician Severity Rating (CSR) of symptoms and sick leave registry data were primary outcomes. Subgroup analyses showed that for the Stress subgroup, CBT led to greater reduction of symptoms than RTW‐I posttreatment, but COMBO did not differ from CBT or RTW‐I. Regarding sick leave, there was no difference between treatments in the Stress subgroup. An exploratory analysis of the treatment effects in a subgroup of patients with depression, anxiety or insomnia indicates that RTW‐I reduced sick leave faster than CBT. We conclude that CBT may be promising as an effective treatment of stress and exhaustion disorder.

BackgroundStress-related disorders are associated with significant suffering, functional impairment, and high societal costs. Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy (ICBT) is a promising treatment for stress-related disorders but has so far not been subjected to health economic evaluation.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of ICBT for patients with stress-related disorders in the form of adjustment disorder (AD) or exhaustion disorder (ED). We hypothesized that ICBT, compared with a waitlist control (WLC) group, would generate improvements at low net costs, thereby making it cost-effective.MethodsHealth economic data were obtained in tandem with a randomized controlled trial of a 12-week ICBT in which patients (N=100) were randomized to an ICBT (n=50) or a WLC (n=50) group. Health outcomes and costs were surveyed pre- and posttreatment. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) based on remission rates and incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs) based on health-related quality of life. Bootstrap sampling was used to assess the uncertainty of our results.ResultsThe ICER indicated that the most likely scenario was that ICBT led to higher remission rates compared with the WLC and was associated with slightly larger reductions in costs from pre- to posttreatment. ICBT had a 60% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness to pay (WTP) of US $0 and a 96% probability of being cost-effective at a WTP of US $1000. The ICUR indicated that ICBT also led to improvements in quality of life at no net societal cost. Sensitivity analyses supported the robustness of our results.ConclusionsThe results suggest that ICBT is a cost-effective treatment for patients suffering from AD or ED. Compared with no treatment, ICBT for these patients yields large effects at no or minimal societal net costs.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02540317; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02540317