When a test is more than just a test: Findings from patient interviews and survey in the trial of a technology to measure antidepressant medication response (the PReDicT Trial)
Susan Brown , Cornelia Ploeger , Boliang Guo , Juliana J. Petersen , Amy C. Beckenstrom , Michael Browning , Gerard R. Dawson , Jürgen Deckert , Rebecca Dias , Colin T. Dourish , Philip Gorwood , Jonathan Kingslake , Andreas Menke , Victor Perez Sola , Andreas Reif , Henricus Ruhe , Judit Simon , Michael Stäblein , Anneke van Schaik , Dick J. Veltman , Richard Morriss
{"title":"When a test is more than just a test: Findings from patient interviews and survey in the trial of a technology to measure antidepressant medication response (the PReDicT Trial)","authors":"Susan Brown , Cornelia Ploeger , Boliang Guo , Juliana J. Petersen , Amy C. Beckenstrom , Michael Browning , Gerard R. Dawson , Jürgen Deckert , Rebecca Dias , Colin T. Dourish , Philip Gorwood , Jonathan Kingslake , Andreas Menke , Victor Perez Sola , Andreas Reif , Henricus Ruhe , Judit Simon , Michael Stäblein , Anneke van Schaik , Dick J. Veltman , Richard Morriss","doi":"10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152467","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>A RCT of a novel intervention to detect antidepressant medication response (the PReDicT Test) took place in five European countries, accompanied by a nested study of its acceptability and implementation presented here. The RCT results indicated no effect of the intervention on depression at 8 weeks (primary outcome), although effects on anxiety at 8 weeks and functioning at 24 weeks were found.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>The nested study used mixed methods. The aim was to explore patient experiences of the Test including acceptability and implementation, to inform its use within care. A bespoke survey was completed by trial participants in five countries (<em>n</em> = 778) at week 8. Semi-structured interviews were carried out in two countries soon after week 8 (UK <em>n</em> = 22, Germany <em>n</em> = 20). Quantitative data was analysed descriptively; for qualitative data, thematic analysis was carried out using a framework approach. Results of the two datasets were interrogated together.</p></div><div><h3>Outcomes</h3><p>Survey results showed the intervention was well received, with a majority of participants indicating they would use it again, and it gave them helpful extra information; a small minority indicated the Test made them feel worse. Qualitative data showed the Test had unexpected properties, including: instigating a process of reflection, giving participants feedback on progress and new understanding about their illness, and making participants feel supported and more engaged in treatment.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>The qualitative and quantitative results are generally consistent. The Test's unexpected properties may explain why the RCT showed little effect, as properties were experienced across both trial arms. Beyond the RCT, the qualitative data sheds light on measurement reactivity, i.e., how measurements of depression can impact patients.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10554,"journal":{"name":"Comprehensive psychiatry","volume":"132 ","pages":"Article 152467"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X2400018X/pdfft?md5=eace4d667e0ac8859eebb725e7587acd&pid=1-s2.0-S0010440X2400018X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comprehensive psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X2400018X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
A RCT of a novel intervention to detect antidepressant medication response (the PReDicT Test) took place in five European countries, accompanied by a nested study of its acceptability and implementation presented here. The RCT results indicated no effect of the intervention on depression at 8 weeks (primary outcome), although effects on anxiety at 8 weeks and functioning at 24 weeks were found.
Methods
The nested study used mixed methods. The aim was to explore patient experiences of the Test including acceptability and implementation, to inform its use within care. A bespoke survey was completed by trial participants in five countries (n = 778) at week 8. Semi-structured interviews were carried out in two countries soon after week 8 (UK n = 22, Germany n = 20). Quantitative data was analysed descriptively; for qualitative data, thematic analysis was carried out using a framework approach. Results of the two datasets were interrogated together.
Outcomes
Survey results showed the intervention was well received, with a majority of participants indicating they would use it again, and it gave them helpful extra information; a small minority indicated the Test made them feel worse. Qualitative data showed the Test had unexpected properties, including: instigating a process of reflection, giving participants feedback on progress and new understanding about their illness, and making participants feel supported and more engaged in treatment.
Interpretation
The qualitative and quantitative results are generally consistent. The Test's unexpected properties may explain why the RCT showed little effect, as properties were experienced across both trial arms. Beyond the RCT, the qualitative data sheds light on measurement reactivity, i.e., how measurements of depression can impact patients.
期刊介绍:
"Comprehensive Psychiatry" is an open access, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the field of psychiatry and mental health. Its primary mission is to share the latest advancements in knowledge to enhance patient care and deepen the understanding of mental illnesses. The journal is supported by a diverse team of international editors and peer reviewers, ensuring the publication of high-quality research with a strong focus on clinical relevance and the implications for psychopathology.
"Comprehensive Psychiatry" encourages authors to present their research in an accessible manner, facilitating engagement with clinicians, policymakers, and the broader public. By embracing an open access policy, the journal aims to maximize the global impact of its content, making it readily available to a wide audience and fostering scientific collaboration and public awareness beyond the traditional academic community. This approach is designed to promote a more inclusive and informed dialogue on mental health, contributing to the overall progress in the field.