No abstract

Background/Objective Brief transdiagnostic psychotherapies are a possible treatment for emotional disorders. We aimed to determine their efficacy on mild/moderate emotional disorders compared with treatment as usual (TAU) based on pharmacological interventions. Method: This study was a single-blinded randomized controlled trial with parallel design of three groups. Patients ( N = 102) were assigned to brief individual psychotherapy ( n = 34), brief group psychotherapy ( n = 34) or TAU ( n = 34). Participants were assessed before and after the interventions with the following measures: PHQ-15, PHQ-9, PHQ-PD, GAD-7, STAI, BDI-II, BSI-18, and SCID. We conducted per protocol and intention-to-treat analyses. Results: Brief psychotherapies were more effective than TAU for the reduction of emotional disorders symptoms and diagnoses with moderate/high effect sizes. TAU was only effective in reducing depressive symptoms. Conclusions: Brief transdiagnostic psychotherapies might be the treatment of choice for mild/moderate emotional disorders and they seem suitable to be implemented within health care systems.

In recent decades, the evidence on psychological treatments for children and adolescents has increased considerably. Several organizations have proposed different criteria to evaluate the evidence of psychological treatment in this age group. The aim of this study was to analyze evidence-based treatments drawn from RCTs, reviews, meta-analyses, guides and lists provided by four leading international organizations. The institutions reviewed were the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (Division 53) of the American Psychological Association, Cochrane Collaboration and the Australian Psychological Society in relation to mental disorders in children and adolescents. A total of 137 treatments were analyzed for 17 mental disorders and compared to determine the level of agreement among the organizations. The results indicate that, in most cases, there is little agreement among organizations and that there are several discrepancies within certain disorders. These results require reflection on the meaning attributed to evidence-based treatments with regard to psychological treatments in children and adolescents. The possible reasons for these differences could be explained by a combination of different issues: the procedures or committees may be biased, different studies were reviewed, different criteria are used by the organizations or the reviews of existing evidence were conducted in different time periods.