METHODS: The study is being conducted as a randomized controlled intervention trial. Adult participants with unipolar depression are being randomized into three groups (BPT, MMT, or CG), and the first two groups are undergoing a 10-week treatment phase. CG follows their individual standard treatment as usual. A priori power analysis revealed that about 120 people should be included to capture a moderate effect. The primary outcome of the study is depression rated with the Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) before (t0), directly after (t1), and 12 months after the intervention phase (t2). Data are being collected via questionnaires, computer-assisted video interviews, and physical examinations. The primary hypotheses will be statistically analyzed by mixed model ANOVAs to compare the three groups over time. For secondary outcomes, further multivariate methods (e.g., mixed model ANOVAs and regression analyses) will be conducted. Qualitative data will be evaluated on the basis of the qualitative thematic analysis.
DISCUSSION: This study is investigating psychological and physical effects of BPT and MMT and its factors of influence on outpatients suffering from depression compared with a CG in a highly naturalistic design. The study could therefore provide insight into the modes of action of group therapy for depression and help to establish new short-term group treatments. Methodological limitations of the study might be the clinical heterogeneity of the sample and confounding effects due to simultaneous individual psychotherapy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN12347878. Registered 28 March 2022, https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN12347878 .
METHODS: A qualitative study design was employed. Data were collected through observations and semi-structured interviews of 12 caregivers and 11 people with dementia (PWD) at seven secondary care facilities. Observations were written in the field notes, and interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. All data were subjected to thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Some personalised non-pharmacological interventions, such as physical exercise, music therapy, reminiscence therapy and pet therapy, were conducted in several nursing care centres. Collaborative care from the care providers and family members was found to be an important facilitating factor. The lack of family support led to care providers carrying additional workload beyond their job scope. Other barriers to non-pharmacological interventions were cultural and language differences between the care providers and PWD, inadequate staff numbers and training, and time constraints.
CONCLUSION: Although non-pharmacological approaches have been used to some extent in Malaysia, continuous education and training of healthcare providers and the family members of PWD is needed to overcome the challenges to their successful implementation.
CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic equipoise, for psychiatric care, is an aspiration rather than a position easily achieved. In day-to-day clinical practice, there will be unexpected demands and barriers that cannot always be accommodated or surmounted. Psychiatrists can work collaboratively with patients, carers, and colleagues in conceptualising and care-planning to avoid extremes of therapeutic hubris and despair, and to adapt evidence-based care more effectively so that it is suited to the patient and their circumstances.