<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> The Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders (UP) delivered in a group format could facilitate the implementation of evidence-based psychological treatments. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> This study compared the efficacy of group UP and diagnosis-specific cognitive behavioral therapy (dCBT) for anxiety and depression in outpatient mental health services. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> In this pragmatic, multi-center, single-blinded, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial (RCT), we assigned 291 patients with major depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, or agoraphobia to 14 weekly sessions in mixed-diagnosis UP or single-diagnosis dCBT groups. The primary test was non-inferiority, using a priori criteria, on the World Health Organisation 5 Well-Being Index (WHO-5) at the end of the treatment. Secondary outcomes were functioning and symptoms. We assessed outcomes at baseline, end-of-treatment, and at a 6-month follow-up. A modified per-protocol analysis was performed. <b><i>Results:</i></b> At end-of-treatment, WHO-5 mean scores for patients in UP (<i>n</i> = 148) were non-inferior to those of patients in dCBT (<i>n</i> = 143; mean difference –2.94; 95% CI –8.10 to 2.21). Results were inconclusive for the WHO-5 at the 6-month follow-up. Results for secondary outcomes were non-inferior at end-of-treatment and the 6-month follow-up. Client satisfaction and rates of attrition, response, remission, and deterioration were similar across conditions. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> This RCT demonstrated non-inferior acute-phase outcomes of group-delivered UP compared with dCBT for major depressive disorder, social anxiety disorder, panic disorder, and agoraphobia in outpatient mental health services. The long-term effects of UP on well-being need further investigation. If study findings are replicated, UP should be considered a viable alternative to dCBT for common anxiety disorders and depression in outpatient mental health services.

BackgroundAlthough cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) is an effective treatment for depression, less than half of patients achieve satisfactory symptom reduction during treatment. Targeting known psychopathological processes such as rumination may increase treatment efficacy. The aim of this study was to test whether adding group rumination-focused CBT (RFCBT) that explicitly targets rumination to routine medical management is superior to adding group CBT to routine medical management in treating major depression.MethodsA total of 131 outpatients with major depression were randomly allocated to 12 sessions group RFCBT v. group CBT, each in addition to routine medical management. The primary outcome was observer-rated symptoms of depression at the end of treatment measured on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. Secondary outcomes were rumination at post-treatment and depressive symptoms at 6 months follow-up (Trial registered: NCT02278224).ResultsRFCBT significantly improved observer-rated depressive symptoms (Cohen's d 0.38; 95% CI 0.03–0.73) relative to group CBT at post-treatment on the primary outcome. No post-treatment differences were found in rumination or in depressive symptoms at 6 months follow-up, although these secondary analyses may have been underpowered.ConclusionsThis is the first randomized controlled trial providing evidence of benefits of RFCBT in major depression compared with CBT. Group RFCBT may be a beneficial alternative to group CBT for major depression.

BackgroundTransdiagnostic Cognitive Behavior Therapy (TCBT) manuals delivered in individual format have been reported to be just as effective as traditional diagnosis specific CBT manuals. We have translated and modified the “The Unified Protocol for Transdiagnostic Treatment of Emotional Disorders” (UP-CBT) for group delivery in Mental Health Service (MHS), and shown effects comparable to traditional CBT in a naturalistic study. As the use of one manual instead of several diagnosis-specific manuals could simplify logistics, reduce waiting time, and increase therapist expertise compared to diagnosis specific CBT, we aim to test the relative efficacy of group UP-CBT and diagnosis specific group CBT.Methods/designThe study is a partially blinded, pragmatic, non-inferiority, parallel, multi-center randomized controlled trial (RCT) of UP-CBT vs diagnosis specific CBT for Unipolar Depression, Social Anxiety Disorder and Agoraphobia/Panic Disorder. In total, 248 patients are recruited from three regional MHS centers across Denmark and included in two intervention arms.The primary outcome is patient-ratings of well-being (WHO Well-being Index, WHO-5), secondary outcomes include level of depressive and anxious symptoms, personality variables, emotion regulation, reflective functioning, and social adjustment. Assessments are conducted before and after therapy and at 6 months follow-up. Weekly patient-rated outcomes and group evaluations are collected for every session. Outcome assessors, blind to treatment allocation, will perform the observer-based symptom ratings, and fidelity assessors will monitor manual adherence.DiscussionThe current study will be the first RCT investigating the dissemination of the UP in a MHS setting, the UP delivered in groups, and with depressive patients included. Hence the results are expected to add substantially to the evidence base for rational group psychotherapy in MHS. The planned moderator and mediator analyses could spur new hypotheses about mechanisms of change in psychotherapy and the association between patient characteristics and treatment effect.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02954731. Registered 25 October 2016Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-016-1175-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background Only about half of all patients with anxiety disorders or major depression respond to cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT), even though this is an evidence-based treatment. Personalized treatment offers an approach to increase the number of patients who respond to therapy. The aim of this study was to examine predictors and moderators of (differential) treatment outcomes in transdiagnostic versus diagnosis-specific group CBT. Methods A sample of 291 patients from three different mental health clinics in Denmark was randomized to either transdiagnostic or diagnosis-specific group CBT. The study outcome was the regression slope of the individual patient's repeated scores on the WHO-5 Well-being Index. Pre-treatment variables were identified as moderators or predictors through a two-step variable selection approach. Results While the two-step approach failed to identify any moderators, four predictors were found: level of positive affect, duration of disorder, the detachment personality trait, and the coping strategy of cognitive reappraisal. A prognostic index was constructed, but did not seem to be robust across treatment sites. Conclusions Our findings give insufficient evidence to support a recommendation of either transdiagnostic or diagnosis-specific CBT for a given patient or to predict the response to the applied group therapies.

BackgroundCognitive behavioural therapy is an effective treatment for depression. However, one third of the patients do not respond satisfactorily, and relapse rates of around 30 % within the first post-treatment year were reported in a recent meta-analysis. In total, 30–50 % of remitted patients present with residual symptoms by the end of treatment. A common residual symptom is rumination, a process of recurrent negative thinking and dwelling on negative affect. Rumination has been demonstrated as a major factor in vulnerability to depression, predicting the onset, severity, and duration of future depression. Rumination-focused cognitive behavioural therapy is a psychotherapeutic treatment targeting rumination. Because rumination plays a major role in the initiation and maintenance of depression, targeting rumination with rumination-focused cognitive behavioural therapy may be more effective in treating depression and reducing relapse than standard cognitive behavioural therapy.Method/designThis study is a two-arm pragmatic randomised controlled superiority trial comparing the effectiveness of group-based rumination-focused cognitive behaviour therapy with the effectiveness of group-based cognitive behavioural therapy for treatment of depression. One hundred twenty-eight patients with depression will be recruited from and given treatment in an outpatient service at a psychiatric hospital in Denmark. Our primary outcome will be severity of depressive symptoms (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression) at completion of treatment. Secondary outcomes will be level of rumination, worry, anxiety, quality of life, behavioural activation, experimental measures of cognitive flexibility, and emotional attentional bias. A 6-month follow-up is planned and will include the primary outcome measure and assessment of relapse.DiscussionThe clinical outcome of this trial may guide clinicians to decide on the merits of including rumination-focused cognitive behavioural therapy in the treatment of depression in outpatient services.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02278224, registered 28 Oct. 2014.