Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-ws8qp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T13:15:26.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Over-simplification and exclusion of non-conforming studies can demonstrate absence of effect: a lynching party?

A commentary on ‘Cognitive behavioural therapy for major psychiatric disorder: does it really work? A meta-analytical review of well-controlled trials’ by Lynch et al. (2009)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2009

D. Kingdon*
Affiliation:
University of Southampton, Department of Psychiatry, Royal South Hants Hospital, Southampton, UK
*
*Address for correspondence: D. Kingdon, Professor of Mental Health Care Delivery, University of Southampton, Department of Psychiatry, Royal South Hants Hospital, Brintons Terrace, SouthamptonSO14 0YG, UK. (Email: d.kingdon@soton.ac.uk)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

A number of meta-analyses of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) in severe mental illness have been published by its advocates (Wykes et al. Reference Wykes, Steel, Everitt and Tarrier2008), independent commentators (Jones et al. Reference Jones, Cormac, Silveira da Mota Neto and Campbell2004) and now finally by its opponents (McKenna, Reference McKenna2001, Reference McKenna2006; Turkington & McKenna, Reference Turkington and McKenna2003). Lynch et al. (Reference Lynch, Laws and McKenna2009) conclude that there is a small effect of CBT in severe depression but no effect in bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.

In bipolar disorder, there have been relatively few studies and the largest reported a negative finding which has overshadowed promising earlier findings. This may be related to the treatment group selected in that study or the therapeutic intervention used. Lam et al. (Reference Lam, Watkins, Hayward, Bright, Wright, Kerr, Parr-Davis and Sham2003) have described an adaptation of CBT, whereas the intervention in the larger study seems to have been more behavioural in form, concentrating on early intervention, treatment adherence and relapse prevention (Scott et al. Reference Scott, Paykel, Morriss, Bentall, Kinderman, Johnson, Abbott and Hayhurst2006).

The findings on schizophrenia are more interesting. Meta-analyses and reviews published so far have found favourably for CBT. Lynch et al. (Reference Lynch, Laws and McKenna2009) find differently. For relapse prevention, this may be because a large new study has produced negative findings in this area and also because of the use of studies that do not fit their inclusion criteria. For example, Hogarty's Personal Therapy has very different origins and practice from CBT and was not described as such by him (Hogarty et al. Reference Hogarty, Kornblith, Greenwald, DiBarry, Cooley, Ulrich, Carter and Flesher1997). Most importantly, the total exclusion of studies using hospitalization as a proxy for relapse led to a substantial underestimate of effect.

Lynch et al. (Reference Lynch, Laws and McKenna2009) review studies which have an active control but wrongly conclude that such controls ‘lacked any specific therapeutic effects’. Befriending, for example, appears to have positive effects on delusions including paranoia but not hallucinations (Samarasekera et al. Reference Samarasekera, Kingdon, Siddle, O'Carroll, Scott, Sensky, Barnes and Turkington2007). Active controls allow for differentiation of effects from the non-specific but very important effects of developing a relationship with patients. Studies comparing with treatment as usual are summarily dismissed but these do have relevance in assessing generalizability in effectiveness studies.

Studies in this area have used different time scales and target symptoms and previous meta-analyses have made allowance for this. Lynch et al. (Reference Lynch, Laws and McKenna2009) do not, focusing only on end-of-treatment scoring. This has allowed them to claim that ‘perhaps the best study published to date … conducted by Sensky and colleagues’ (Beck et al. Reference Beck, Rector, Stolar and Grant2008) was one which failed. It did not indeed show a difference on most measures at the treatment end-point – apart from suicidality (Bateman et al. Reference Bateman, Hansen, Turkington and Kingdon2007) – but such effects were apparent at the 9-month follow-up and maintained at 5 years (Turkington et al. Reference Turkington, Sensky, Scott, Barnes, Nur, Siddle, Hammond, Samarasekara and Kingdon2008). Lynch et al. (Reference Lynch, Laws and McKenna2009) justify excluding these beneficial effects because some other studies did not show this despite others – not quoted – which did (Drury et al. Reference Drury, Birchwood and Cochrane2000; Turkington et al. Reference Turkington, Kingdon, Rathod, Hammond, Pelton and Mehta2006).

It is also disingenuous to hold up double-blind placebo trials of medication as if they were infallible: the effects of bias and other factors are still clearly a major concern as has emerged with evaluation of the latest generation of antipsychotics (Tyrer & Kendall, Reference Tyrer and Kendall2009). Blindness is rarely assessed in these trials. Yet the side-effects of drugs such as haloperidol compared with olanzapine and quetiapine are markedly different such that it would be expected that patient and rater would frequently be aware of which drug was being provided. Generalizability is also a major concern – recruiting patients with delusional beliefs, especially paranoia, to any study is difficult but to medication trials especially so.

The approach of Lynch et al. (Reference Lynch, Laws and McKenna2009) to mental disorder using concepts and terms such as schizophrenia (van Os, Reference van Os2009) is also being increasingly recognized as too blunt for psychosocial interventions. Successful targeted studies are emerging in early psychosis (Morrison et al. Reference Morrison, French, Walford, Lewis, Kilcommons, Green, Parker and Bentall2004) and where psychosis is associated with substance abuse (Haddock et al. Reference Haddock, Barrowclough, Tarrier, Moring, O'Brien, Schofield, Quinn, Palmer, Davies, Lowens, McGovern and Lewis2003), command hallucinations (Trower et al. Reference Trower, Birchwood, Meaden, Byrne, Nelson and Ross2004), post-traumatic stress disorder (Mueser et al. Reference Mueser, Rosenberg, Xie, Jankowski, Bolton, Lu, Hamblen, Rosenberg, McHugo and Wolfe2008) and anger (Haddock et al. Reference Haddock, Barrowclough, Shaw, Dunn, Novaco and Tarrier2009). Such diversity makes meta-analysis that much more complex and none of these studies was included in this meta-analysis. Over-simplification and exclusion of non-conforming studies can readily demonstrate limited or absence of effect. However, the acceptability of CBT to patients, carers as well as practitioners suggests that positive findings in the clinical studies undertaken so far are valid and generalizable in clinical practice. These are now being used and evaluated further in countries from China to Pakistan to the USA.

Declaration of Interest

D.K. has extensively researched, taught and published papers and books on cognitive therapy of psychosis.

References

Bateman, K, Hansen, L, Turkington, D, Kingdon, D (2007). Cognitive behavioral therapy reduces suicidal ideation in schizophrenia: results from a randomized controlled trial. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior 37, 284290.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beck, AT, Rector, NA, Stolar, N, Grant, P (2008). Schizophrenia. Guilford: New York.Google Scholar
Drury, V, Birchwood, M, Cochrane, R (2000). Cognitive therapy and recovery from acute psychosis: a controlled trial. 3. Five-year follow-up. British Journal of Psychiatry 177, 814.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haddock, G, Barrowclough, C, Shaw, JJ, Dunn, G, Novaco, RW, Tarrier, N (2009). Cognitive-behavioural therapy v. social activity therapy for people with psychosis and a history of violence: randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry 194, 152157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haddock, G, Barrowclough, C, Tarrier, N, Moring, J, O'Brien, R, Schofield, N, Quinn, J, Palmer, S, Davies, L, Lowens, I, McGovern, J, Lewis, S (2003). Cognitive-behavioural therapy and motivational intervention for schizophrenia and substance misuse: 18-month outcomes of a randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry 183, 418426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hogarty, GE, Kornblith, SJ, Greenwald, D, DiBarry, AL, Cooley, S, Ulrich, RF, Carter, M, Flesher, S (1997). Three-year trials of personal therapy among schizophrenic patients living with or independent of family, I: Description of study and effects on relapse rates. American Journal of Psychiatry 154, 15041513.Google Scholar
Jones, C, Cormac, I, Silveira da Mota Neto, JI, Campbell, C (2004). Cognitive behaviour therapy for schizophrenia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD000524. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000524.pub2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lam, DH, Watkins, ER, Hayward, P, Bright, J, Wright, K, Kerr, N, Parr-Davis, G, Sham, P (2003). A randomized controlled study of cognitive therapy for relapse prevention for bipolar affective disorder: outcome of the first year. Archives of General Psychiatry 60, 145152.Google Scholar
Lynch, D, Laws, KR, McKenna, PJ (2009). Cognitive behavioural therapy for major psychiatric disorder: does it really work? A meta-analytical review of well-controlled trials. Psychological Medicine. Published online: 29 May 2009. doi:10.1017/S003329170900590X.Google Scholar
McKenna, PJ (2001). Cognitive therapy in schizophrenia. British Journal of Psychiatry 178, 379380.Google Scholar
McKenna, PJ (2006). What works in schizophrenia: cognitive behaviour therapy is not effective. BMJ 333, 353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, AP, French, P, Walford, L, Lewis, SW, Kilcommons, A, Green, J, Parker, S, Bentall, RP (2004). Cognitive therapy for the prevention of psychosis in people at ultra-high risk: randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry 185, 291297.Google Scholar
Mueser, KT, Rosenberg, SD, Xie, H, Jankowski, MK, Bolton, EE, Lu, W, Hamblen, JL, Rosenberg, HJ, McHugo, GJ, Wolfe, R (2008). A randomized controlled trial of cognitive-behavioral treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder in severe mental illness. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 76, 259271.Google Scholar
Samarasekera, N, Kingdon, D, Siddle, R, O'Carroll, M, Scott, JL, Sensky, T, Barnes, TR, Turkington, D (2007). Befriending patients with medication-resistant schizophrenia: can psychotic symptoms predict treatment response? Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice 80, 97–106.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, J, Paykel, E, Morriss, R, Bentall, R, Kinderman, P, Johnson, T, Abbott, R, Hayhurst, H (2006). Cognitive-behavioural therapy for severe and recurrent bipolar disorders: randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry 188, 313320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trower, P, Birchwood, M, Meaden, A, Byrne, S, Nelson, A, Ross, K (2004). Cognitive therapy for command hallucinations: randomised controlled trial. British Journal of Psychiatry 184, 312320.Google Scholar
Turkington, D, Kingdon, D, Rathod, S, Hammond, K, Pelton, J, Mehta, R (2006). Outcomes of an effectiveness trial of cognitive-behavioural intervention by mental health nurses in schizophrenia. British Journal of Psychiatry 189, 3640.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turkington, D, McKenna, PJ (2003). Is cognitive-behavioural therapy a worthwhile treatment for psychosis? British Journal of Psychiatry 182, 477479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turkington, D, Sensky, T, Scott, J, Barnes, TR, Nur, U, Siddle, R, Hammond, K, Samarasekara, N, Kingdon, D (2008). A randomized controlled trial of cognitive-behavior therapy for persistent symptoms in schizophrenia: a five-year follow-up. Schizophrenia Research 98, 17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tyrer, P, Kendall, T (2009). The spurious advance of antipsychotic drug therapy. Lancet 373, 45.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Os, J (2009). A salience dysregulation syndrome. British Journal of Psychiatry 194, 101103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wykes, T, Steel, C, Everitt, B, Tarrier, N (2008). Cognitive behavior therapy for schizophrenia: effect sizes, clinical models, and methodological rigor. Schizophrenia Bulletin 34, 523537.Google Scholar