Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T09:08:10.605Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Outcome, Costs and Patient Engagement for Group and Individual CBT for Depression: A Naturalistic Clinical Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 March 2011

June S. L Brown*
Affiliation:
King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, UK
Katie Sellwood
Affiliation:
King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, UK
Jennifer K. Beecham
Affiliation:
University of Kent, Canterbury, UK
Mike Slade
Affiliation:
King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, UK
Manoharan Andiappan
Affiliation:
King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, UK
Sabine Landau
Affiliation:
King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, UK
Tracy Johnson
Affiliation:
King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, UK
Roger Smith
Affiliation:
University Hospital, Lewisham, UK
*
Reprint requests to June Brown, Psychology Department (PO77), King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, De Crespigny Park, London SE5 8AF, UK. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Background and Method: This naturalistic study was undertaken in routine settings and compared the clinical effectiveness, costs, treatment preference, attrition and patient satisfaction of Group and Individual CBT. Results: No significant differences were found in depressive and distress symptoms between group and individual CBT at post-treatment and follow-up. Individual CBT was 1.5 times more expensive to provide than Group CBT and the wider costs of other supports were similar between study arms suggesting a cost-effectiveness advantage for Group CBT. Patients preferred individual treatment at baseline but, despite this, there were no between-group differences in attrition or satisfaction. Conclusion: A larger RCT study is needed, but running CBT groups for depression could be considered more frequently by clinicians.

Type
Brief Clinical Reports
Copyright
Copyright © British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beck, A., Steer, R. and Brown, G. (1996). Manual for the Beck Depression Inventory-II. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Evans, C., Mellor-Clark, J., Margison, F., Barkham, M., Audin, K., Connell, J. and McGrath, G. (2000). CORE: Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation. Journal of Mental Health, 9, 247255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockwood, C., Page, T. and Conroy-Hiller, T. (2004). Comparing the effectiveness of cognitive behaviour therapy using individual or group therapy in the treatment of depression. JBI Reports, 2, 185206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2004). Depression: management of depression in primary and secondary care (CG23). London: NICE.Google Scholar
National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2009). Depression in Adults (update, CG90). London: NICE.Google Scholar
Nguyen, T., Attkisson, C. and Stegner, B. (1983). Assessment of patient satisfaction: development and refinement of a Service Evaluation Questionnaire. Evaluation of Program Planning, 6, 299313.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Radloff, L. (1977). The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Brown Supplementary Material

Brown Extended Report

Download Brown Supplementary Material(File)
File 378.4 KB
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.