Search

Frequent attenders in primary care (FAs) consume a disproportionate amount of healthcare resources and often have depression, anxiety, chronic health issues, and interpersonal problems. Despite extensive medical care, they remain dissatisfied with the care and report no improvement in quality of life. To pilot a Telephone-based Interpersonal Counseling intervention for Frequent Attenders (TIPC-FA) and assess its feasibility and efficacy in reducing symptoms and healthcare utilization. Top 10% of primary care visitors were randomly assigned to TIPC-FA, Telephone Supportive Contact (Support), or Treatment as Usual (TAU). TIPC-FA and Support groups received six telephone sessions over twelve weeks, while the TAU group was interviewed twice. Multilevel regression tested for changes over time, considering patient and counselor variance. TIPC-FA and Support groups demonstrated reduced depressive symptoms, and the TIPC-FA group showed decreased somatization and anxiety. The TIPC-FA group demonstrated a trend towards less healthcare utilization than the TAU group. This pilot study suggests that IPC via telephone outreach is a feasible approach to treating FAs, achieving a reduction in symptoms not seen in other groups. Promising reduction in healthcare utilization in the TIPC-FA group warrants further exploration in larger-scale trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of individual humanistic-experiential therapies (HEPs) for depression. Database searches (Scopus, Medline, and PsycINFO) identified RCTs comparing any HEP intervention with a treatment-as-usual (TAU) control or active alternative intervention for the treatment of depression. Included studies were assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool and narratively synthesized. Post-treatment and follow-up effect sizes were aggregated using random-effects meta-analysis and moderators of treatment effect were explored (PROSPERO: CRD42021240485). Seventeen RCTs, synthesized across four meta-analyzes, indicated HEP depression outcomes were significantly better than TAU controls at post-treatment (g = 0.41, 95% CI [0.18, 0.65], n = 735), but not significantly different at follow-up (g = 0.14, 95% CI [−0.30, 0.58], n = 631). HEP depression outcomes were comparable to active treatments at post-treatment (g = −0.09, 95% CI [−0.26, 0.08], n = 2131), but significantly favored non-HEP alternative interventions at follow-up (g = −0.21, 95% CI [−0.35, −0.07], n = 1196). Relative to usual care, HEPs are effective in the short-term and comparable to non-HEP alternative interventions at post-treatment, but not at follow-up. However, imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias concerns were identified as limitations of the evidence included. Future large-scale trials of HEPs with equipoise between comparator conditions are required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]