TY - JOUR
T1 - The outcomes of mental health care for depression over time
T2 - A meta-regression analysis of response rates in usual care
AU - Cuijpers, Pim
AU - Miguel, Clara
AU - Harrer, Mathias
AU - Ciharova, Marketa
AU - Karyotaki, Eirini
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors
PY - 2024/8/1
Y1 - 2024/8/1
N2 - Background: Over the past decades dozens of randomized trials have shown that psychological treatments are more effective than care-as-usual (CAU). It could be expected that these treatments are implemented in routine care and that the response rates in usual care improve over time. The aim of the current meta-analysis is to examine if response and remission rates in usual care have improved over time. Methods: We used an existing meta-analytic database of randomized controlled trials examining the effects of psychological treatments of depression and selected CAU control groups from these trials. We only included CAU conditions in primary care, specialized mental health care, perinatal care and general medical care. The response rate (50 % symptom reduction) was the primary outcome. Results: We included 125 CAU control groups (8542 participants). The response rate for all CAU control groups was 0.22 (95 % CI: 0.19; 0.24) with high heterogeneity (I2 = 83; 95 % CI: 80; 85), with somewhat higher rates in primary care (0.27; 95 % CI: 0.23; 0.31). We found hardly any indications that the outcomes have improved over the years. The meta-regression analysis with publication year as predictor in the full dataset resulted in a coefficient of 0.1 (SE = 0.01; p = 0.0.35). A series of sensitivity analyses supported the main findings. Remission rates and pre-post effect sizes also did not significantly improve over time. Conclusions: Response and remission rates in usual care are low, with the large majority of patients not responding or remitting, and the outcomes have probably not improved over time.
AB - Background: Over the past decades dozens of randomized trials have shown that psychological treatments are more effective than care-as-usual (CAU). It could be expected that these treatments are implemented in routine care and that the response rates in usual care improve over time. The aim of the current meta-analysis is to examine if response and remission rates in usual care have improved over time. Methods: We used an existing meta-analytic database of randomized controlled trials examining the effects of psychological treatments of depression and selected CAU control groups from these trials. We only included CAU conditions in primary care, specialized mental health care, perinatal care and general medical care. The response rate (50 % symptom reduction) was the primary outcome. Results: We included 125 CAU control groups (8542 participants). The response rate for all CAU control groups was 0.22 (95 % CI: 0.19; 0.24) with high heterogeneity (I2 = 83; 95 % CI: 80; 85), with somewhat higher rates in primary care (0.27; 95 % CI: 0.23; 0.31). We found hardly any indications that the outcomes have improved over the years. The meta-regression analysis with publication year as predictor in the full dataset resulted in a coefficient of 0.1 (SE = 0.01; p = 0.0.35). A series of sensitivity analyses supported the main findings. Remission rates and pre-post effect sizes also did not significantly improve over time. Conclusions: Response and remission rates in usual care are low, with the large majority of patients not responding or remitting, and the outcomes have probably not improved over time.
KW - Depression
KW - Major depressive disorder
KW - Meta-analysis
KW - Remission
KW - Response
KW - Usual care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85192054633&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85192054633&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jad.2024.05.019
DO - 10.1016/j.jad.2024.05.019
M3 - Article
C2 - 38710332
AN - SCOPUS:85192054633
SN - 0165-0327
VL - 358
SP - 89
EP - 96
JO - Journal of Affective Disorders
JF - Journal of Affective Disorders
ER -