Cost and Outcome of Behavioural Activation versus Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Depression (COBRA): a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial

David A Richards, David Ekers, Dean McMillan, Rod S Taylor, Sarah Byford, Fiona C Warren, Barbara Barrett, Paul A Farrand, Simon Gilbody, Willem Kuyken, Heather O'Mahen, Ed R Watkins, Kim A Wright, Steven D Hollon, Nigel Reed, Shelley Rhodes, Emily Fletcher, Katie Finning, David A Richards, David Ekers, Dean McMillan, Rod S Taylor, Sarah Byford, Fiona C Warren, Barbara Barrett, Paul A Farrand, Simon Gilbody, Willem Kuyken, Heather O'Mahen, Ed R Watkins, Kim A Wright, Steven D Hollon, Nigel Reed, Shelley Rhodes, Emily Fletcher, Katie Finning

Abstract

Background: Depression is a common, debilitating, and costly disorder. Many patients request psychological therapy, but the best-evidenced therapy-cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)-is complex and costly. A simpler therapy-behavioural activation (BA)-might be as effective and cheaper than is CBT. We aimed to establish the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of BA compared with CBT for adults with depression.

Methods: In this randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial, we recruited adults aged 18 years or older meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV criteria for major depressive disorder from primary care and psychological therapy services in Devon, Durham, and Leeds (UK). We excluded people who were receiving psychological therapy, were alcohol or drug dependent, were acutely suicidal or had attempted suicide in the previous 2 months, or were cognitively impaired, or who had bipolar disorder or psychosis or psychotic symptoms. We randomly assigned participants (1:1) remotely using computer-generated allocation (minimisation used; stratified by depression severity [Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) score of <19 vs ≥19], antidepressant use, and recruitment site) to BA from junior mental health workers or CBT from psychological therapists. Randomisation done at the Peninsula Clinical Trials Unit was concealed from investigators. Treatment was given open label, but outcome assessors were masked. The primary outcome was depression symptoms according to the PHQ-9 at 12 months. We analysed all those who were randomly allocated and had complete data (modified intention to treat [mITT]) and also all those who were randomly allocated, had complete data, and received at least eight treatment sessions (per protocol [PP]). We analysed safety in the mITT population. The non-inferiority margin was 1·9 PHQ-9 points. This trial is registered with the ISCRTN registry, number ISRCTN27473954.

Findings: Between Sept 26, 2012, and April 3, 2014, we randomly allocated 221 (50%) participants to BA and 219 (50%) to CBT. 175 (79%) participants were assessable for the primary outcome in the mITT population in the BA group compared with 189 (86%) in the CBT group, whereas 135 (61%) were assessable in the PP population in the BA group compared with 151 (69%) in the CBT group. BA was non-inferior to CBT (mITT: CBT 8·4 PHQ-9 points [SD 7·5], BA 8·4 PHQ-9 points [7·0], mean difference 0·1 PHQ-9 points [95% CI -1·3 to 1·5], p=0·89; PP: CBT 7·9 PHQ-9 points [7·3]; BA 7·8 [6·5], mean difference 0·0 PHQ-9 points [-1·5 to 1·6], p=0·99). Two (1%) non-trial-related deaths (one [1%] multidrug toxicity in the BA group and one [1%] cancer in the CBT group) and 15 depression-related, but not treatment-related, serious adverse events (three in the BA group and 12 in the CBT group) occurred in three [2%] participants in the BA group (two [1%] patients who overdosed and one [1%] who self-harmed) and eight (4%) participants in the CBT group (seven [4%] who overdosed and one [1%] who self-harmed).

Interpretation: We found that BA, a simpler psychological treatment than CBT, can be delivered by junior mental health workers with less intensive and costly training, with no lesser effect than CBT. Effective psychological therapy for depression can be delivered without the need for costly and highly trained professionals.

Funding: National Institute for Health Research.

Copyright © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Trial profile (A) 6 month, (B) 12 month, and (C) 18 month follow-up. BA=behavioural activation. CBT=cognitive behavioural therapy. *Includes four participants who were initially allocated in error and subsequently excluded.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Bootstrapped mean differences in costs and effects of BA compared with CBT BA=behavioural activation. CBT=cognitive behavioural therapy. NE=northeast. NW=northwest. SE=southeast. SW=southwest. QALY=quality-adjusted life-year.

References

    1. Ferrari AJ, Charlson FJ, Norman RE. Burden of depressive disorders by country, sex, age, and year: findings from the global burden of disease study 2010. PLoS Med. 2013;10:e1001547.
    1. Bloom DE, Cafiero ET, Jané-Llopis E. The global economic burden of noncommunicable diseases. World Economic Forum; Geneva: 2011.
    1. Amick HR, Gartlehner G, Gaynes BN. Comparative benefits and harms of second generation antidepressants and cognitive behavioral therapies in initial treatment of major depressive disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2015;351:h6019.
    1. Kohn R, Levav I, de Almeida JM. The treatment gap in mental health care. Bull World Health Organ. 2004;82:858–866. (in Spanish).
    1. Jacobson NS, Martell CR, Dimidjian S. Behavioral activation treatment for depression: returning to contextual roots. Clin Psychol Sci Pract. 2001;8:255–270.
    1. Ekers D, Webster L, Van Straten A, Cuijpers P, Richards D, Gilbody S. Behavioural activation for depression; an update of meta-analysis of effectiveness and sub group analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9:e100100.
    1. Shinohara K, Honyashiki M, Imai H. Behavioural therapies versus other psychological therapies for depression. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;10 CD008696.
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence . Depression in adults: recognition and management. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; London: 2009.
    1. First MB, Spitzer RL, Gibbon M, Williams JB. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders, Research Version, Patient Edition. (SCID-I/P) New York State Psychiatric Institute; New York: 2002.
    1. Rhodes S, Richards DA, Ekers D. Cost and outcome of behavioural activation versus cognitive behaviour therapy for depression (COBRA): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial. Trials. 2014;15:29.
    1. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001;16:606–613.
    1. Beck J. Cognitive therapy: basics and beyond. Guilford Press; New York: 1995.
    1. Addis E, Martell CR. Overcoming depression one step at a time. New Harbinger; Oakland: 2004.
    1. Ekers D, Richards D, McMillan D, Bland JM, Gilbody S. Behavioural activation delivered by the non-specialist: phase II randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2011;198:66–72.
    1. Wiles N, Thomas L, Abel A. Cognitive behavioural therapy as an adjunct to pharmacotherapy for primary care based patients with treatment resistant depression: results of the CoBalT randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2013;381:375–384.
    1. Blackburn IM, James IA, Milne DL. The Revised Cognitive Therapy Scale (Cts-R): psychometric properties. Behav Cogn Psychother. 2001;29:431–446.
    1. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Löwe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:1092–1097.
    1. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 health survey: manual and interpretation guide. The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; Boston: 1993.
    1. European Medicines Agency Committee For Medicinal Products For Human Use (CHMP) Guideline on the choice of the non-inferiority margin. (accessed July 4, 2016).
    1. Kuyken W, Byford S, Taylor RS. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy to prevent relapse in recurrent depression. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2008;76:966–978.
    1. European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products Points to consider on switching between superiority and non-inferiority. (accessed July 4, 2016).
    1. van Buuren S. Multiple imputation of discrete and continuous data by fully conditional specification. Stat Methods Med Res. 2007;16:219–242.
    1. Rubin DB. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. John Wiley & Sons; New York: 1987.
    1. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence . Guide to the methods of technology appraisal 2013. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; London: 2013.
    1. Kessler RC, Barber C, Beck A. The World Health Organization Health and Work Performance Questionnaire (HPQ) J Occup Environ Med. 2003;45:156–174.
    1. Brooks R. EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy. 1996;37:53–72.
    1. Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. A social tariff for EuroQoL: results from a UK general population survey. University of York; York: 1995.
    1. Department of Health . Reference costs 2013–14. Department of Health; London: 2014.
    1. Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care 2013. Personal Social Services Research Unit; Canterbury: 2013.
    1. Netten A, Knight J, Dennett J, Cooley R, Slight A. A ready reckoner for staff costs in the NHS. University of Kent; Canterbury: 1998.
    1. Curtis L. Unit costs of health and social care 2014. University of Kent; Canterbury: 2014.
    1. Stinnett AA, Mullahy J. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making. 1998;18(suppl 2):S68–S80.
    1. Thompson SG, Barber JA. How should cost data in pragmatic randomised trials be analysed? BMJ. 2000;320:1197–1200.
    1. Fenwick E, Byford S. A guide to cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Br J Psychiatry. 2005;187:106–108.

Source: PubMed

3
Předplatit