Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Feb 2, 2022
Date Accepted: Jul 28, 2022

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Comparability of Patients in Trials of eHealth and Face-to-Face Psychotherapeutic Interventions for Depression: Meta-synthesis

Aemissegger V, Lopez-Alcalde J, Witt CM, Barth J

Comparability of Patients in Trials of eHealth and Face-to-Face Psychotherapeutic Interventions for Depression: Meta-synthesis

J Med Internet Res 2022;24(9):e36978

DOI: 10.2196/36978

PMID: 36103217

PMCID: 9520399

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Comparability of Patients in Trials of E-Health and Face-To-Face Psychotherapeutic Interventions for Depression: a Meta-Synthesis

  • Vera Aemissegger; 
  • Jesus Lopez-Alcalde; 
  • Claudia M Witt; 
  • Jürgen Barth

ABSTRACT

Background:

Depressive disorders are a public health problem. Face-to-face psychotherapeutic interventions are considered to be a first-line option for their treatment in adults. There is a growing interest in eHealth interventions to maximize accessibility for effective treatments. Thus, the number of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of eHealth psychotherapeutic interventions has increased, and these interventions are often being offered to patients. However, it is unknown whether patients with depressive disorders differ in internet and face-to-face intervention trials. This information is essential to gain knowledge about the external validity of eHealth trials.

Objective:

To compare the baseline characteristics of patients with depressive disorder in eHealth and face-to-face psychotherapeutic intervention RCTs.

Methods:

Meta-epidemiological study. We searched five databases between 1990 and November 2017 (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Google Scholar, Cuijpers’s database). We included RCTs of psychotherapeutic interventions with a cognitive component (such as cognitive therapy, cognitive–behavioral therapy, or interpersonal therapy) delivered face-to-face or via the internet to adults with a depressive disorder. Each included study had a matching study for predefined criteria to allow a valid comparison of baseline characteristics. Each study was classified as a face-to-face (CBT) or eHealth (iCBT) intervention trial. Two authors selected the studies, extracted data, and resolved disagreements by discussion. We tested whether predefined baseline characteristics differed in face-to-face and internet-based trials by using a mixed-effects model and testing for differences with a Z-test (statistical significance threshold set at 0.05). For continuous outcomes, we also estimated the difference in means between subgroups along with the 95% CI.

Results:

We included 58 RCTs (29 matching pairs) with 3,655 participants (71.5% females) with a mean age from 20 to 74 years. Caucasian participants were the most frequently reported. Other socioeconomic characteristics were poorly reported. The participants presented different depressive disorders measured with heterogeneous instruments. iCBT trials had a longer mean duration of depression at baseline (7.19 years higher; CI 95% 2.53 to 11.84; 10.0 versus 2.8 years, P=.002), but the proportion of patients with previous depression treatment was lower (24.8% versus 42.0%, P=.035). The subgroup analyses found no evidence of differences for the remaining baseline characteristics: age, gender, education, living area, depression severity, history of depression, actual antidepressant medication, actual physical comorbidity, actual mental comorbidity, study drop-out, quality of life, having children, family status and employment. We could not compare proficiency with computers due to the insufficient number of studies reporting this information.

Conclusions:

Our study found that the baseline characteristics of patients with depressive disorders included in RCTs of eHealth and face-to-face psychotherapeutic interventions are generally similar. However, patients in eHealth trials had a longer duration of depression, and a lower proportion had received previous depression treatment. This might indicate that eHealth trials attract patients who postpone earlier treatment attempts. Clinical Trial: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42019085880 (7 of August 2019).


 Citation

Please cite as:

Aemissegger V, Lopez-Alcalde J, Witt CM, Barth J

Comparability of Patients in Trials of eHealth and Face-to-Face Psychotherapeutic Interventions for Depression: Meta-synthesis

J Med Internet Res 2022;24(9):e36978

DOI: 10.2196/36978

PMID: 36103217

PMCID: 9520399

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.