The effectiveness of four empirically supported psychotherapies for primary care depression and anxiety: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

BackgroundDepressive and anxiety disorders are highly prevalent and detrimental in primary care settings. However, there are gaps in the literature concerning effectiveness and generalizability of empirically supported interventions and treatment of both depression and anxiety in primary care settings. The aim of this review is to systematically assess and meta-analyze the effectiveness of brief empirically-supported psychotherapies for treating depression and/or anxiety in primary care. MethodsSeven electronic databases, five professional websites and manual search of reference lists were searched through April 2017 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of four psychotherapies treating primary care depression and anxiety: cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT), problem-solving therapy (PST), motivational interviewing (MI), and solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT). ResultsFrom an initial pool of 1140 articles, 179 articles were eligible for full-text review and 65 articles were included for final analysis. Sixty-five articles containing 198 effect sizes reported an overall treatment effect size of d = 0.462, p < 0.001. Single-predictor meta-regression indicated that marital status, treatment modality (individual versus group), and treatment composition were significant moderators. Multiple-predictor meta-regression discovered treatment setting (inside versus outside primary care) significantly moderated treatment effect, b = −0.863, p = 0.039 after controlling for other intervention characteristics. ConclusionTreatment effects were found for CBT and PST, both for depressive and anxiety disorders. Interventions delivered outside primary care settings were more effective than those within, individual treatment had greater treatment effects compared to group treatment, and both technology-assisted and in-person treatments were found to be effective.