4.5 Article

Critical Decision Points for Augmenting Interpersonal Psychotherapy for Depressed Adolescents: A Pilot Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaac.2018.06.032

关键词

depression; psychotherapy; fluoxetine; symptom assessment; algorithms

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health of the National Institutes of Health [K23MH090216]
  2. National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health [UL1TR000114]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Practice parameters recommend systematic assessment of depression symptoms over the course of treatment to inform treatment planning; however, there are currently no guidelines regarding how to use symptom monitoring to guide treatment decisions for psychotherapy. The current study compared two time points (week 4 and week 8) for assessing symptoms during interpersonal psychotherapy for depressed adolescents (IPT-A) and explored four algorithms that use the symptom assessments to select the subsequent treatment. Method: Forty adolescents (aged 12-17 years) with a depression diagnosis began IPT-A with an initial treatment plan of 12 sessions delivered over 16 weeks. Adolescents were randomized to a week 4 or week 8 decision point for considering a change in treatment. Insufficient responders at either time point were randomized a second time to increased frequency of IPT-A (twice per week) or addition of fluoxetine. Measures were administered at baseline and weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16. Results: The week 4 decision point for assessing response and implementing treatment augmentation for insufficient responders was more efficacious for reducing depression symptoms than the week 8 decision point. There were significant differences between algorithms in depression and psychosocial functioning outcomes. Conclusion: Therapists implementing IPT-A should routinely monitor depression symptoms and consider augmenting treatment for insufficient responders as early as week 4 of treatment.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据