The clinical effectiveness of a self-management intervention for patients with persistent depressive disorder and their partners/caregivers: results from a multicenter, pragmatic randomized controlled trial

Ericka C. Solis*, Ingrid V.E. Carlier, Noëlle G.A. Kamminga, Erik J. Giltay, Albert M. van Hemert

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background: Persistent depressive disorder (PDD) is prevalent and debilitating. For patients with PDD, psychiatric rehabilitation using self-management interventions is advised as the next therapeutic step after multiple unsuccessful treatment attempts. The “Patient and Partner Education Program for All Chronic Diseases” (PPEP4All) is a brief, structured self-management program that focuses on functional recovery for patients and their partners/caregivers. In chronic somatic disorder populations, PPEP4All has already been shown to be clinically effective. We examined whether PPEP4All adapted for PDD (PPEP4All-PDD, nine weekly group or individual sessions) is also clinically effective for adults/elderly with PDD and their partners/caregivers compared to care-as-usual (CAU) in specialized mental healthcare. Methods: In this mixed-method multicenter pragmatic randomized controlled trial, 70 patients with PDD and 14 partners/caregivers were allocated to either PPEP4All-PDD (patients, n = 37; partners/caregivers, n = 14) or CAU (patients, n = 33; partners/caregivers, not included) and completed questionnaires at 0, 3, 6, and 12 months regarding depressive symptoms, psychopathology, psychosocial burden, mental resilience, and happiness/well-being. Qualitative data were collected regarding treatment satisfaction. Data were analyzed using mixed model analyses and an intention-to-treat (ITT) approach. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in any outcome regarding clinical effectiveness between PPEP4All-PDD and CAU. Subgroup analysis for depressive symptoms did not show any interaction effect for any subgroup. Although 78% of participants recommended PPEP4All-PDD, there was no difference in treatment satisfaction between PPEP4All-PDD (score = 6.6; SD = 1.7) and CAU (score = 7.6; SD = 1.2), p = 0.06. Conclusion: Although depressive symptoms did not improve relative to CAU, this only confirmed that treatment for patients with treatment-resistant PDD should move from symptom reduction to functional recovery. Also, functional recovery may be reflected in other outcomes than psychosocial burden, such as self-empowerment, in patients with treatment-resistant PDD. Future research on PPEP4All-PDD could focus on a longer-term program and/or online program that may also be offered earlier in the treatment process as an empowerment intervention. Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register Identifier NL5818. Registered on 20 July 2016 https://clinicaltrialregister.nl/nl/trial/20302
Original languageEnglish
Article number187
Number of pages16
JournalTrials
Volume25
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 13 Mar 2024

Keywords

  • Clinical effectiveness
  • Persistent depressive disorder
  • Psychiatric rehabilitation
  • Randomized controlled trial
  • Self-management
  • Treatment resistant depression

Cite this