Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy Versus Usual Clinical Care for Youth Depression: An Initial Test of Transportability to Community Clinics and Clinicians

Department of Psychology, Harvard University and Judge Baker Children's Center, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology (Impact Factor: 4.85). 07/2009; 77(3):383-96. DOI: 10.1037/a0013877
Source: PubMed


Community clinic therapists were randomized to (a) brief training and supervision in cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for youth depression or (b) usual care (UC). The therapists treated 57 youths (56% girls), ages 8-15, of whom 33% were Caucasian, 26% were African American, and 26% were Latino/Latina. Most youths were from low-income families and all had Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) depressive disorders (plus multiple comorbidities). All youths were randomized to CBT or UC and treated until normal termination. Session coding showed more use of CBT by CBT therapists and more psychodynamic and family approaches by UC therapists. At posttreatment, depression symptom measures were at subclinical levels, and 75% of youths had no remaining depressive disorder, but CBT and UC groups did not differ on these outcomes. However, compared with UC, CBT was (a) briefer (24 vs. 39 weeks), (b) superior in parent-rated therapeutic alliance, (c) less likely to require additional services (including all psychotropics combined and depression medication in particular), and (d) less costly. The findings showed advantages for CBT in parent engagement, reduced use of medication and other services, overall cost, and possibly speed of improvement--a hypothesis that warrants testing in future research.

Download full-text


Available from: Bryce D McLeod, Mar 07, 2014
  • Source
    • "They also compare favorably with the findings in Oei & Boschen's (2009) study of group CBT for anxiety disorders , although not as large as those found in previous formal efficacy studies with all the standard controls (e.g., Chambless & Gillis, 1993). Gains in this study were observed on multiple measures, adding to the growing literature of evidence-based treatments (Weisz et al., 2009). Also of note is the finding that age, gender, previous group experience, a history of substance abuse in the record, and comorbid depression did not predict outcome on any measure. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The efficacy, and to a lesser extent, effectiveness, of individual cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for anxiety disorders has been demonstrated, but whether manualized treatments work in a group format in community settings is less established. We investigated the predictors of retention and outcome in 26 groups (11 Generalized Anxiety Disorder, 11 Panic, 4 Social Phobia groups), conducted for more than 10 years in a semirural community mental health center by 19 therapists. Members of the Anxiety Disorders Treatment Team delivered manualized group CBT treatments. Analysis of standard symptom measures at pre- and post-treatment and archival data revealed significant pre–post decreases in anxiety, retention rates comparable to past findings on group retention, and several significant predictors of retention and outcome. Manualized group CBT for anxiety appears to be a viable treatment in community settings. Limitations of the study as well as related practice–research implications of the findings are discussed.
    Journal of Cognitive Psychotherapy 05/2014; 28(2). DOI:10.1891/0889-8391.28.2.117
  • Source
    • "Because PTSD often co-occurs with other disorders, this is an important finding for clinicians. The reduction in depression is particularly interesting to note, as some evidence-based treatments for depression reported in other studies do not outperform treatment as usual (Kerfoot, Harrington, Harrington, Rogers, & Verduyn, 2004; Weisz et al., 2009). Although we did not specifically examine which components may have been particularly beneficial for treatment outcomes in this study, teaching skills with which to regulate emotions and correct maladaptive appraisals appears to be fundamental for many effective interventions (Berliner, 2005). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The efficacy of trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) has been shown in several randomized controlled trials. However, few trials have been conducted in community clinics, few have used therapy as usual (TAU) as a comparison group, and none have been conducted outside of the United States. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of TF-CBT in regular community settings compared with TAU. One hundred fifty-six traumatized youth (M age = 15.1 years, range = 10-18; 79.5% girls) were randomly assigned to TF-CBT or TAU. Intent-to-treat analysis using mixed effects models showed that youth receiving TF-CBT reported significantly lower levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms (est. = 5.78, d = 0.51), 95% CI [2.32, 9.23]; depression (est. = 7.00, d = 0.54), 95% CI [2.04, 11.96]; and general mental health symptoms (est. = 2.54, d = 0.45), 95% CI [0.50, 4.58], compared with youth in the TAU group. Youth assigned to TF-CBT showed significantly greater improvements in functional impairment (est. = -1.05, d = -0.55), 95% CI [-1.67, -0.42]. Although the same trend was found for anxiety reduction, this difference was not statistically significant (est. = 4.34, d = 0.30), 95% CI [-1.50, 10.19]. Significantly fewer youths in the TF-CBT condition were diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder compared to youths in the TAU condition, χ(2)(1, N = 116) = 4.61, p = .031, Phi = .20). Findings indicate that TF-CBT is effective in treating traumatized youth in community mental health clinics and that the program may also be successfully implemented in countries outside the United States.
    Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology 08/2013; 43(3). DOI:10.1080/15374416.2013.822307 · 1.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "An implicit assumption was that a treatment , once successful in efficacy and effectiveness tests, was deemed ready for widespread dissemination (i.e., the targeted distribution of an EBT; Chambers, Ringeisen , & Hickman, 2005; Fixsen et al., 2005). Some researchers had argued that psychosocial treatment development and evaluation requires more than three stages (e.g., Chorpita & Nakamura, 2004; Hogue, 2010; Schoenwald & Hoagwood, 2001), an assertion supported by the fact that some EBTs have progressed to the third stage but have not been successful in effectiveness tests (e.g., Clarke et al., 2005; Southam-Gerow et al., 2010; Weisz et al., 2009). Thus, an emerging consensus is that treatment development and evaluation models need additional stages that assess fit between EBTs and different practice contexts (Schoenwald & Hoagwood, 2001). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This special series focuses upon the ways in which research on treatment integrity, a multidimensional construct including assessment of the content and quality of a psychosocial treatment delivered to a client as well as relational elements, can inform dissemination and implementation science. The five articles for this special series illustrate how treatment integrity concepts and methods can be applied across different levels of the mental health service system to advance dissemination and implementation science. In this introductory article, we provide an overview of treatment integrity research and describe three broad conceptual models that are relevant to the articles in the series. We conclude with a brief description of each of the five articles in the series.
    Clinical Psychology Science and Practice 03/2013; 20(1):1-13. DOI:10.1111/cpsp.12019 · 2.92 Impact Factor
Show more