The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×

Objective:

Patient choice is recognized as a factor that influences clinical outcomes and treatment evaluation in mental health care. However, research on how having a choice affects patients with depression has been rare. This Dutch study examined whether patients randomly selected to choose between two types of depression psychotherapy benefited more from treatment than patients randomly assigned to an intervention.

Methods:

Data were derived from a trial of outpatients with depression who were randomly assigned to cognitive therapy (CT), interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT), or a 2-month waitlist control condition followed by the patient’s choice of CT or IPT. Treatment groups were combined into a no-choice condition (N=151), with the waitlist as the choice condition (N=31). Multilevel regression was used to compare depression severity (measured with the Beck Depression Inventory–II [BDI-II]) and general psychological distress (measured with the Brief Symptom Inventory [BSI]) posttreatment and at the 5-month follow-up. Differences in patients’ pretreatment expectations, beliefs about treatment credibility, and posttreatment evaluation were examined.

Results:

No significant differences in clinical outcomes were found between the choice and no-choice conditions (mean difference: BDI-II posttreatment=–0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI]=–5.25 to 4.15; follow-up=2.10, 95% CI=–4.01 to 8.20; BSI posttreatment=–1.89, 95% CI=–15.35 to 11.58; follow-up=3.13, 95% CI=–12.32 to 18.57). Patients in both groups reported comparable scores on pretreatment expectations, credibility beliefs, and posttreatment evaluation. Neither expectations nor credibility beliefs were predictive of clinical outcomes.

Conclusions:

Our findings did not support the value of patient choice. Considering the exploratory nature of the trial, future studies designed to examine the effects of choice in depression treatment are recommended.

Access content

To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.