BackgroundDepression and anxiety disorders are common and treatable with cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), but access to this therapy is limited.ObjectiveReview evidence that computerized CBT for the anxiety and depressive disorders is acceptable to patients and effective in the short and longer term.MethodSystematic reviews and data bases were searched for randomized controlled trials of computerized cognitive behavior therapy versus a treatment or control condition in people who met diagnostic criteria for major depression, panic disorder, social phobia or generalized anxiety disorder. Number randomized, superiority of treatment versus control (Hedges g) on primary outcome measure, risk of bias, length of follow up, patient adherence and satisfaction were extracted.Principal Findings22 studies of comparisons with a control group were identified. The mean effect size superiority was 0.88 (NNT 2.13), and the benefit was evident across all four disorders. Improvement from computerized CBT was maintained for a median of 26 weeks follow-up. Acceptability, as indicated by adherence and satisfaction, was good. Research probity was good and bias risk low. Effect sizes were non-significantly higher in comparisons with waitlist than with active treatment control conditions. Five studies comparing computerized CBT with traditional face-to-face CBT were identified, and both modes of treatment appeared equally beneficial.ConclusionsComputerized CBT for anxiety and depressive disorders, especially via the internet, has the capacity to provide effective acceptable and practical health care for those who might otherwise remain untreated.Trial RegistrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000030077

Several Internet interventions have been developed and tested for common mental disorders, and the evidence to date shows that these treatments often result in similar outcomes as in face-to-face psychotherapy and that they are cost-effective. In this paper, we first review the pros and cons of how participants in Internet treatment trials have been recruited. We then comment on the assessment procedures often involved in Internet interventions and conclude that, while online questionnaires yield robust results, diagnoses cannot be determined without any contact with the patient. We then review the role of the therapist and conclude that, although treatments including guidance seem to lead to better outcomes than unguided treatments, this guidance can be mainly practical and supportive rather than explicitly therapeutic in orientation. Then we briefly describe the advantages and disadvantages of treatments for mood and anxiety disorders and comment on ways to handle comorbidity often associated with these disorders. Finally we discuss challenges when disseminating Internet interventions. In conclusion, there is now a large body of evidence suggesting that Internet interventions work. Several research questions remain open, including how Internet interventions can be blended with traditional forms of care.

Internet interventions, and in particular Internet-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy (ICBT), have existed for at least 20 years. Here we review the treatment approach and the evidence base, arguing that ICBT can be viewed as a vehicle for innovation. ICBT has been developed and tested for several psychiatric and somatic conditions, and direct comparative studies suggest that therapist-guided ICBT is more effective than a waiting list for anxiety disorders and depression, and tends to be as effective as face-to-face CBT. Studies on the possible harmful effects of ICBT are also reviewed: a significant minority of people do experience negative effects, although rates of deterioration appear similar to those reported for face-to-face treatments and lower than for control conditions. We further review studies on change mechanisms and conclude that few, if any, consistent moderators and mediators of change have been identified. A recent trend to focus on knowledge acquisition is considered, and a discussion on the possibilities and hurdles of implementing ICBT is presented. The latter includes findings suggesting that attitudes toward ICBT may not be as positive as when using modern information technology as an adjunct to face-to-face therapy (i.e., blended treatment). Finally, we discuss future directions, including the role played by technology and machine learning, blended treatment, adaptation of treatment for minorities and non-Western settings, other therapeutic approaches than ICBT (including Internet-delivered psychodynamic and interpersonal psychotherapy as well as acceptance and commitment therapy), emerging regulations, and the importance of reporting failed trials.

BackgroundInternet-based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) for depression is effective when guided by a clinician, less so if unguided. Question: Would guidance from a technician be as effective as guidance from a clinician?MethodRandomized controlled non-inferiority trial comparing three groups: Clinician-assisted vs. technician-assisted vs. delayed treatment. Community-based volunteers applied to the VirtualClinic (www.virtualclinic.org.au) research program, and 141 participants with major depressive disorder were randomized. Participants in the clinician- and technician-assisted groups received access to an iCBT program for depression comprising 6 online lessons, weekly homework assignments, and weekly supportive contact over a treatment period of 8 weeks. Participants in the clinician-assisted group also received access to a moderated online discussion forum. The main outcome measures were the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Item (PHQ-9). Completion rates were high, and at post-treatment, both treatment groups reduced scores on the BDI-II (p<0.001) and PHQ-9 (p<0.001) compared to the delayed treatment group but did not differ from each other. Within group effect sizes on the BDI-II were 1.27 and 1.20 for the clinician- and technician-assisted groups respectively, and on the PHQ-9, were 1.54 and 1.60 respectively. At 4-month follow-up participants in the technician group had made further improvements and had significantly lower scores on the PHQ-9 than those in the clinician group. A total of approximately 60 minutes of clinician or technician time was required per participant during the 8-week treatment program.ConclusionsBoth clinician- and technician-assisted treatment resulted in large effect sizes and clinically significant improvements comparable to those associated with face-to-face treatment, while a delayed treatment control group did not improve. These results provide support for large scale trials to determine the clinical effectiveness and acceptability of technician-assisted iCBT programs for depression. This form of treatment has potential to increase the capacity of existing mental health services.Trial RegistrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12609000559213

BackgroundDepression and anxiety are common, disabling and chronic. Self-guided internet-delivered treatments are popular, but few people complete them. New strategies are required to realise their potential.AimsTo evaluate the effect of automated emails on the effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of a new automated transdiagnostic self-guided internet-delivered treatment, the Wellbeing Course, for people with depression and anxiety.MethodA randomised controlled trial was conducted through the website: www.ecentreclinic.org. Two hundred and fifty seven people with elevated symptoms were randomly allocated to the 8 week course either with or without automated emails, or to a waitlist control group. Primary outcome measures were the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-Item (PHQ-9) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item (GAD-7).ResultsParticipants in the treatment groups had lower PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores at post-treatment than controls. Automated emails increased rates of course completion (58% vs. 35%), and improved outcomes in a subsample with elevated symptoms.ConclusionsThe new self-guided course was beneficial, and automated emails facilitated outcomes. Further attention to strategies that facilitate adherence, learning, and safety will help realise the potential of self-guided interventions.Trial Registration Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610001058066

The present study evaluated the efficacy of a clinician-guided Internet-delivered cognitive behaviour therapy (iCBT) program, the Pain Course, to reduce disability, anxiety, and depression associated with chronic pain. Sixty-three adults with chronic pain were randomised to either a Treatment Group or waitlist Control Group. Treatment consisted of 5 iCBT-based lessons, homework tasks, additional resources, weekly e-mail or telephone contact from a Clinical Psychologist, and automated e-mails. Twenty-nine of 31 Treatment Group participants completed the 5 lessons during the 8-week program, and posttreatment and 3-month follow-up data were collected from 30/31 and 29/31 participants, respectively. Treatment Group participants obtained significantly greater improvements than Control Group participants in levels of disability, anxiety, depression, and average pain levels at posttreatment. These improvements corresponded to small to large between-groups effect sizes (Cohen's d) at posttreatment for disability (d = .88), anxiety (d = .38), depression (d = .66), and average pain (d = .64), respectively. These outcomes were sustained at follow-up and participants rated the program as highly acceptable. Overall, the clinician spent a total mean time of 81.54 minutes (SD 30.91 minutes) contacting participants during the program. The results appear better than those reported in iCBT studies to date and provide support for the potential of clinician-guided iCBT in the treatment of disability, anxiety, and depression for people with chronic pain.

No abstract

BackgroundInternet-based cognitive behavioural therapy (iCBT) for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) has been shown to be effective when guided by a clinician. The present study sought to replicate this finding, and determine whether support from a technician is as effective as guidance from a clinician.MethodRandomized controlled non-inferiority trial comparing three groups: Clinician-assisted vs. technician-assisted vs. delayed treatment. Community-based volunteers applied to the VirtualClinic (www.virtualclinic.org.au) research program and 150 participants with GAD were randomized. Participants in the clinician- and technician-assisted groups received access to an iCBT program for GAD comprising six online lessons, weekly homework assignments, and weekly supportive contact over a treatment period of 10 weeks. Participants in the clinician-assisted group also received access to a moderated online discussion forum. The main outcome measures were the Penn State Worry Questionnaire (PSWQ) and the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 Item (GAD-7). Completion rates were high, and both treatment groups reduced scores on the PSWQ (p<0.001) and GAD-7 (p<0.001) compared to the delayed treatment group, but did not differ from each other. Within group effect sizes on the PSWQ were 1.16 and 1.07 for the clinician- and technician-assisted groups, respectively, and on the GAD-7 were 1.55 and 1.73, respectively. At 3 month follow-up participants in both treatment groups had sustained the gains made at post-treatment. Participants in the clinician-assisted group had made further gains on the PSWQ. Approximately 81 minutes of clinician time and 75 minutes of technician time were required per participant during the 10 week treatment program.ConclusionsBoth clinician- and technician-assisted treatment resulted in large effect sizes and clinically significant improvements comparable to those associated with face-to-face treatment, while a delayed treatment/control group did not improve. These results provide support for large scale trials to determine the clinical effectiveness and acceptability of technician-assisted iCBT programs for GAD. This form of treatment has potential to increase the capacity of existing mental health services.Trial RegistrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12609000563268