Search

Introduction: The aim is to perform an economic evaluation alongside a randomized controlled trial comparing guided self‐help cognitive behavioral therapy‐enhanced (CBT‐E) for binge‐eating disorder (BED) to a waiting list control condition. Methods: BED patients (N = 212) were randomly assigned to guided self‐help CBT‐E or the 3‐month waiting list. Measurements took place at baseline and the end‐of‐treatment. The cost‐effectiveness analysis was performed using the number of binge‐eating episodes during the last 28 days as an outcome indicator according to the eating disorder examination. A cost‐utility analysis was performed using the EuroQol‐5D. Results: The difference in societal costs over the 3 months of the intervention between both conditions was €679 (confidence interval [CI] 50–1330). The incremental costs associated with one incremental binge eating episode prevented in the guided self‐help condition was approximately €18 (CI 1–41). From a societal perspective there was a 96% likelihood that guided self‐help CBT‐E led to a greater number of binge‐eating episodes prevented, but at higher costs. Each additional quality‐adjusted life year (QALY) gained was associated with incremental costs of €34,000 (CI 2494–154,530). With a 95% likelihood guided self‐help CBT‐E led to greater QALY gain at higher costs compared to waiting for treatment. Based on the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence willingness‐to‐pay threshold of €35,000 per QALY, guided self‐help CBT‐E can be considered cost‐effective with a likelihood of 95% from a societal perspective. Discussion: Guided self‐help CBT‐E is likely a cost‐effective treatment for BED in the short‐term (3‐month course of treatment). Comparison to treatment‐as‐usual is recommended for future research, as it enables an economic evaluation with a longer time horizon. Public Significance: Offering treatment remotely has several benefits for patients suffering from binge‐eating disorders. Guided self‐help CBT‐E is an efficacious and likely cost‐effective treatment, reducing binge eating and improving quality‐of‐life, albeit at higher societal costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Users of new psychoactive substances including 4-fluoroamphetamine (4-FA/4-FMP) frequently share their experiences or opinions in online drug forums. We have tested the potential of computerised analysis of drug users' forum posts for monitoring and early detection of trends. Specifically, we tested whether changes in the volume of 4-FA related posts and sentiments expressed in those posts can be observed around the time 4-FA was increasingly reported by Dutch drug monitoring sources (2012-2017).Methods: Opening posts from two popular Dutch internet-based drug discussion forums, written between January 1 st, 2012 and January 1 st, 2018 were scraped: Portions of the forum posts about 4-FA were collected. To contrast 4-FA findings against other categories of forum posts, we also collected posts on two other substances (ecstasy and cocaine) and posts not related to a specific substance. Sentiments expressed in these posts were inferred using text recognition software, and analysed for trends using linear mixed modelling.Results: The number of 4-FA posts increased between 2012 and 2015: 76 posts in 2012, 138 in 2013, 322 in 2014, 323 in 2015, and decreased thereafter: 264 in 2016 and 135 in 2017; X2(5) = 271.8, p < .001. Over time, a decrease in positive sentiment towards 4-FA can be observed starting in 2015, compared to the period before 2015, coinciding with more news searches and reports on adverse events related to 4-FA use. Linear mixed modelling analysis confirmed a significantly higher sentiment score in 2015 compared to 2017 for 4-FA, B = 0.062; SE = 0.023; t(1252) = 2.70; p = 0.007, but not for posts on other substances.Conclusion: Changes in the volume and sentiments of forum posts coincided with news media exposure related to 4-FA and with trends observed by established drug monitoring sources. Hence, internet forum monitoring facilitates early discovery of trends in the popularity, prevalence and adverse events related to new psychoactive substances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Social distancing measures during the COVID‐19 pandemic forced an abrupt transformation of treatment delivery for mental health care. In mid‐March 2020, nearly all in‐person contact was replaced with video conferencing. The pandemic thus offered a natural experiment and a unique opportunity to conduct an observational study of whether alcohol use disorder treatment through video conferencing is non‐inferior to in‐person treatment. Methods: In a large urban substance use disorder treatment center in the Netherlands, treatment evaluation is routine practice. Outcome data are regularly collected to support shared decision making and monitor patient progress. For this study, pre‐test and post‐test data on alcohol use (Measurements in the Addictions for Triage and Evaluation), psychopathology (Depression Anxiety Stress Scales), and quality of life (Manchester Short Assessment of Quality of Life) were used to compare outcomes of cognitive behavioral therapy treatment for three cohorts: patients who received treatment for a primary alcohol use disorder performed prior to (n = 628), partially during (n = 557), and entirely during (n = 653) the COVID‐19 lockdown. Results: Outcome was similar across the three cohorts: No inferior outcomes were found for treatments that were conducted predominantly through video conferencing during lockdown or treatments that started in‐person, but were continued through video conferencing, compared to in‐person treatments that were conducted prior to COVID‐19. The number of drop‐outs were also similar between cohorts. However, there was a difference in average treatment intensity between cohorts, with treatment partially or fully conducted during the COVID‐19 pandemic lasting longer. Conclusions: Treatment for a primary alcohol use disorder, provided partially or predominantly through video conferencing during the COVID‐19 pandemic resulted in abstinence rates and secondary outcomes similar to traditional in‐person care, in spite of the potentially negative effects of the COVID‐related lockdown measures themselves. These results from everyday clinical practice corroborate findings of randomized controlled studies and meta‐analyses in which video conferencing appeared non‐inferior to in‐person care in clinical effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In this study, penalized imputation (PI), a common approach to handle missing smoking status data and sometimes referred to as "missing=smoking," is compared with other missing data approaches using data from internet-based smoking cessation trials. Two hypotheses were tested: (1) PI leads to more conservative effect estimates than complete observations analysis; and (2) PI and multiple imputation (MI) lead to similar effect estimates under balanced (equal missingness proportions among the trial arms) and unbalanced missingness.Methods: First, the outcomes of 22 trials included in a recent Cochrane review on internet-based smoking cessation interventions were reanalyzed using only the complete observations, and after applying PI. Second, in a simulation study outcomes under PI, complete observations analysis, and two types of MI were compared. For this purpose, individual patient data from one of the Cochrane review trials were used. Results of the missing data approaches were compared with reference data without missing observations, upon which balanced and unbalanced missingness scenarios were imposed.Results: In the reanalysis of 22 trials, relative risks (RR = 1.15 [1.00; 1.33]) after PI were nearly identical to those under complete observations analysis (RR = 1.14 [0.98; 1.32]). In the simulation study, PI was the only approach that led to deviations from the reference data beyond its 95% confidence interval.Conclusions: Analyses after PI led to pooled results equivalent to complete observations analyses. PI also led to significant deviations from the reference in the simulation studies. PI biases the reported effects of interventions, favoring the condition with the lowest proportion of missingness. Therefore, more sophisticated missing data approaches than PI should be applied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with substance use disorder (SUD) or Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) have a high risk of drop out from treatment. Few studies have investigated predictors of therapy drop out and outcome in SUD patients with comorbid ADHD. Recently, integrated cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT/Integrated) was shown to be more effective than standard CBT (CBT/SUD) in the treatment of SUD + ADHD.Objective: To investigate the association of demographic, clinical and neurocognitive variables with drop-out and treatment outcome, and to examine which of these variables are suitable for patient-treatment matching.Methods: We performed an RCT in which 119 patients were allocated to CBT/Integrated (n = 60) or CBT/SUD (n = 59). In addition, 55 patients had dropped out before randomization. Demographic variables, clinical characteristics and measures of cognitive functioning (Stroop, Tower of London (ToL) and Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART)) were included as predictors. Outcome measures were: early treatment drop-out, ADHD symptom severity, and substance use severity at end of treatment and follow up.Results: Primary substance of abuse (drugs as opposed to alcohol only) and lower accuracy scores on the ToL were significant predictors of early treatment drop-out. Having more depression and anxiety symptoms and using ADHD medication at baseline significantly predicted more ADHD symptoms at end of treatment, and higher accuracy scores on the ToL significantly predicted higher substance use at end of treatment. No significant predictor-by-treatment interactions were found.Conclusion: The results add to the existing realization that also relatively mild cognitive deficits are a risk factor for treatment drop-out in these patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of a brief motivational enhancing intervention (MEI) as an add-on to supervision-as-usual (SAU) in reducing time to treatment initiation in offenders with substance use disorders (SUDs) under probation supervision. We also tested the effectiveness in enhancing treatment retention and abstinence of primary substance rates. The study was designed as a multi-site, cluster randomized trial (CRT) in six addiction probation offices. We randomized 73 probation officers (37 to intervention, 36 to control) and followed 220 substance-abusing repeat offenders during their supervision (111 intervention, 109 control). Individualized SAU was compared with supervision with MEI. We report time to treatment initiation, treatment retention rate during the 12 months follow-up, and primary substance abstinence rate in the 30 days before follow-up. Results show that time to treatment initiation (χ2(1) = 1.817, p = .178), and the proportion of treatment retention (OR = 1.980, p = .213) and primary substance abstinence (OR = 0.945, p = .886) did not significantly differ between offenders that received SAU plus MEI and those that received SAU at 12 months follow-up. Our findings provide no evidence that supervision plus a brief manual-base MEI is more effective than SAU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Two types of mentalization-based treatment (MBT), day hospital MBT (MBT-DH) and intensive outpatient MBT (MBT-IOP), have been shown to be effective in treating patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). This study evaluated trajectories of change in a multi-site trial of MBT-DH and MBT-IOP at 36 months after the start of treatment. Methods: All 114 patients (MBT-DH n = 70, MBT-IOP n = 44) from the original multicentre trial were assessed at 24, 30 and 36 months after the start of treatment. The primary outcome was symptom severity measured with the Brief Symptom Inventory. Secondary outcome measures included borderline symptomatology, personality and interpersonal functioning, quality of life and self-harm. Data were analysed using multilevel modelling and the intention-to-treat principle. Results: Patients in both MBT-DH and MBT-IOP maintained the substantial improvements made during the intensive treatment phase and showed further gains during follow-up. Across both conditions, 83% of patients improved in terms of symptom severity, and 97% improved on borderline symptomatology. No significant differences were found between MBT-DH and MBT-IOP at 36 months after the start of treatment. However, trajectories of change were different. Whereas patients in MBT-DH showed greater improvement during the intensive treatment phase, patients in MBT-IOP showed greater continuing improvement during follow-up. Conclusions: Patients in both conditions showed similar large improvements over the course of 36 months, despite large differences in treatment intensity. MBT-DH and MBT-IOP were associated with different trajectories of change. Cost-effectiveness considerations and predictors of differential treatment outcome may further inform optimal treatment selection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Antidepressant trials are criticized due to potential methodological flaws. Root causes of failing methodology can be found in insufficient inter-rater reliability (IRR) and training practices, leading to higher placebo response and reduced study-power. However, it is unknown to what extent reliability estimates or training procedures are currently included in antidepressant reports. Therefore, we aimed to determine the proportion of publications concerning double-blind randomized controlled antidepressant trials that report on IRR coefficients and training procedures.Methods: We extracted all double-blind randomized clinical trials (RCTs) from the meta-analysis of Cipriani et al. (2018) concerning the period from 2000 until January 2016. Further, we conducted a Medline-search for double-blind RCTs from January 2016 until January 2020 for additional reports. We identified IRR coefficients and training procedures in these publications.Results: In total we identified 179 double-blind RCTs. Only 4.5% reported an IRR coefficient whereas 27.9% reported training procedures.Limitations: We did not contact individual authors for additional information regarding implementation of training procedures or inter-rater reliability assessment.Conclusions: There is a substantial lack of reporting IRR coefficients and training procedures in RCTs with antidepressant medication. Considering the large implications of insufficient reliability, we urge researchers to conduct and report training procedures and reliability estimations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Even though evidence‐based interventions can enhance clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness, in the field of eating disorders, implementation of empirically supported treatments (ESTs) in routine inpatient and outpatient settings is slow. Objective: This study examined differential (cost‐) effectiveness, after implementing evidence‐based cognitive behavioral therapy‐enhanced (CBT‐E) throughout a Dutch treatment center. Method: Two consecutive cohorts of adult patients, BMI between 17.5 and 40, were compared, with one cohort (N = 239) receiving treatment‐as‐usual (TAU) between 2012 and 2014 and the other (N = 320) receiving CBT‐E between 2015 and 2017. Results: Eating disorder pathology, measured with self‐reports, decreased significantly in both cohorts; overall, no differences in clinical outcomes between both cohorts were found. Treatment costs and treatment duration were considerably lower in 2015–2017. When limiting the cost analysis to direct costs, there is a 71% likelihood that CBT‐E is more cost‐effective and a 29% likelihood that CBT‐E leads to fewer remissions at lower costs, based on the distribution of the cost‐effectiveness plane. The likelihood that TAU leads to lower costs is 0%. Discussion: Findings show that implementing an EST throughout inpatient and outpatient settings leads to lower costs with similar treatment effect and has the advantage of shorter treatment duration and a shorter inpatient stay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Depression and harmful alcohol use are two of the top five leading causes of years of life lost to disability in high-income countries. Integrated treatment targeting both at the same time is often considered more complicated and difficult and, therefore, more expensive. Consequently, integrated internet-based interventions could be a valuable addition to traditional care.Methods: A three-arm randomized controlled trial was conducted comparing the effectiveness of (1) an integrated, minimal-guidance, adherence-focused self-help intervention designed to reduce both alcohol use and depression symptoms (AFGE-AD); (2) a similar intervention designed to reduce alcohol use only (AFGE-AO), and (3) internet access as usual (IAU) as a control condition, in at least moderately depressed alcohol misusers from February 2016-March 2020. We recruited 689 alcohol misusers (51.6 % males, mean age = 42.8 years) with at least moderate depression symptoms not otherwise in treatment from the general population. Six months after baseline, 288 subjects (41.8 %) were reachable for the final assessment.Results: All interventions yielded reduced alcohol-use after six months (AFGE-AD: -16.6; AFGE-AO: -19.8; IAU: -13.2). Those who undertook active-interventions reported significantly fewer standard drinks than controls (AFGE-AD: p = .048, d=0.10; AFGE-AO: p = .004, d=0.20). The two active-intervention groups also reported significantly less severe depression symptoms than controls (AFGE-AD: p = .006, d=0.41; AFGE-AO: p = .008, d=0.43). Testing revealed noninferiority between the two interventions.Conclusions: This study documented sustained effectiveness of the first integrated, fully internet-based self-help intervention developed for the reduction of both alcohol use and depression symptoms in at least moderately depressed adult alcohol misusers recruited from the general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]