BackgroundIt is unclear what session frequency is most effective in cognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) for depression.AimsCompare the effects of once weekly and twice weekly sessions of CBT and IPT for depression.MethodWe conducted a multicentre randomised trial from November 2014 through December 2017. We recruited 200 adults with depression across nine specialised mental health centres in the Netherlands. This study used a 2 × 2 factorial design, randomising patients to once or twice weekly sessions of CBT or IPT over 16–24 weeks, up to a maximum of 20 sessions. Main outcome measures were depression severity, measured with the Beck Depression Inventory-II at baseline, before session 1, and 2 weeks, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 months after start of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses were conducted.ResultsCompared with patients who received weekly sessions, patients who received twice weekly sessions showed a statistically significant decrease in depressive symptoms (estimated mean difference between weekly and twice weekly sessions at month 6: 3.85 points, difference in effect size d = 0.55), lower attrition rates (n = 16 compared with n = 32) and an increased rate of response (hazard ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.00–2.18).ConclusionsIn clinical practice settings, delivery of twice weekly sessions of CBT and IPT for depression is a way to improve depression treatment outcomes.

Objective. To systematically and comprehensively document the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic interventions on physical functioning and psychological well-being in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). Methods. Multiple electronic databases were searched for studies on the effectiveness of nonpharmacologic interventions in SSc. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), and observational designs (ODs) with ‡10 participants were included. Two reviewers independently assessed methodologic quality using the Downs and Black checklist. Results. Twenty-three studies (9 RCTs, 4 CCTs, and 10 ODs) were included. Studies assessing comparable interventions were grouped, resulting in data for 16 different interventions. The total number of patients included per study ranged from 10 to 53. Seventeen different outcome domains were assessed, with hand function, limitations in activities, and quality of life being assessed most frequently. Three studies, all RCTs, were rated as high quality. These RCTs reported that 1) a multifaceted oral health intervention improves mouth hygiene, and additional orofacial exercises did not improve mouth opening, 2) a multidisciplinary team-care program improves limitations in activities, mouth opening, and hand grip strength, and 3) manual lymph drainage improves hand function, limitations in activities, and quality of life. Conclusion. The body of knowledge regarding nonpharmacologic care in SSc is very limited due to the wide variety in studied interventions and outcomes in the relatively uncommon but highly disabling disease. To structure and focus future research, an international consensus should be established to prioritize primary targets for nonpharmacologic treatment and the content of interventions and to agree on a core set of outcome measures.