Perceived loneliness and objective social network size are related but distinct factors, which negatively affect mental health and are prevalent in patients who have experienced childhood maltreatment (CM), for example, patients with persistent depressive disorder (PDD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD). This cross-diagnostic study investigated whether loneliness, social network size, or both are associated with self-reported CM.

Loneliness and social network size were assessed in a population-based sample at two time points (Study 1, N = 509), and a clinical group of patients with PDD or BPD (Study 2, N = 190) using the UCLA Loneliness Scale and the Social Network Index. Further measures were the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire, and standard depression rating scales. Linear regression analyses were applied to compare associations of loneliness or social network size with CM. Multiple mediation analyses were used to test the relative importance of loneliness and social network size in the relationship between CM and depressive symptoms.

In both studies, loneliness showed a stronger association than social network size with CM. This was particularly marked for emotional neglect and emotional abuse. Loneliness but not social network size mediated the relationship between CM and depressive symptoms.

Loneliness is particularly associated with self-reported CM, and in this respect distinct from the social network size. Our results underline the importance of differentiating both psychosocial constructs and suggest focusing on perceived loneliness and its etiological underpinnings by mechanism-based psychosocial interventions.

Youth ontogenesis contributes significantly to depressive disorders, causing pronounced atypia, a high level of comorbid pathology. A long-term depressive state lead can to persistent, adverse consequences.

To study the clinical, psychopathological and psychometric features of youth chronic endogenous depression (UCED).

62 patients of the age 16-25 were examined clinically and psychopathologically; the patients were first hospitalized from 2017 to 2020 for a chronic depressive state with non-psychotic mental disorders (ICD-10: F31, F32, F33, F34, F21 keys) lasting more than two years. Psychometric assessment was done by HDRS, SOPS, and SANS.

UCED are characterized by a pronounced atypia with a predominance of symptoms for negative affectivity with apathy, anhedonia, physical and mental asthenia, depressive devitalization. In contrast with non-chronic youth depressions, cognitive disorders, motor inhibition, a large proportion of comorbid pathology are presented in the chronic ones. Depending on the prevalence of additional psychopathological disorders, 2 types were distinguished: Type I – depression with a clear-cut affective psychopathological structure (54.8%, 34 patients); Type II - depression with the symptoms of other than affective registers (45.2%, 28 patients). Psychometric assessment on the HDRS scale, in the sub-scale “negative symptoms” of the SOPS scale, in the sub-scale “anhedonia-associality” of the SANS scale showed a greater severity of psychopathological symptoms in type II depression (p<0.05).

The obtained data confirm the differences between UCED and non-chronic youth depressions and demonstrate the aggravating effect of symptoms of the non-affective spectrum on the severity of UCED and the level of negative affectivity.

No significant relationships.

Patients with chronic depression (CD) by definition respond less well to standard forms of psychotherapy and are more likely to be high utilizers of psychiatric resources. Therefore, the aim of this guidance paper is to provide a comprehensive overview of current psychotherapy for CD. The evidence of efficacy is critically reviewed and recommendations for clinical applications and research are given.

We performed a systematic literature search to identify studies on psychotherapy in CD, evaluated the retrieved documents and developed evidence tables and recommendations through a consensus process among experts and stakeholders.

We developed 5 recommendations which may help providers to select psychotherapeutic treatment options for this patient group. The EPA considers both psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy to be effective in CD and recommends both approaches. The best effect is achieved by combined treatment with psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy, which should therefore be the treatment of choice. The EPA recommends psychotherapy with an interpersonal focus (e.g. the Cognitive Behavioural Analysis System of Psychotherapy [CBASP]) for the treatment of CD and a personalized approach based on the patient's preferences.

The DSM-5 nomenclature of persistent depressive disorder (PDD), which includes CD subtypes, has been an important step towards a more differentiated treatment and understanding of these complex affective disorders. Apart from dysthymia, ICD-10 still does not provide a separate entity for a chronic course of depression. The differences between patients with acute episodic depression and those with CD need to be considered in the planning of treatment. Specific psychotherapeutic treatment options are recommended for patients with CD.

Patients with chronic forms of depression should be offered tailored psychotherapeutic treatments that address their specific needs and deficits. Combination treatment with psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy is the first-line treatment recommended for CD. More research is needed to develop more effective treatments for CD, especially in the longer term, and to identify which patients benefit from which treatment algorithm.

Refractory depression is a major contributor to the economic burden of depression. Radically open dialectical behaviour therapy (RO DBT) is an unevaluated new treatment targeting overcontrolled personality, common in refractory depression, but it is not yet known whether the additional expense of RO DBT is good value for money.

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of RO DBT plus treatment as usual (TAU) compared with TAU alone in people with refractory depression (trial registration: ISRCTN85784627).

We undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomised trial evaluating RO DBT plus TAU versus TAU alone for refractory depression in three UK secondary care centres. Our economic evaluation, 12 months after randomisation, adopted the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services. It evaluated cost-effectiveness by comparing the net cost of RO DBT with the net gain in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), estimated using the EQ-5D-3L measure of health-related quality of life.

The additional cost of RO DBT plus TAU compared with TAU alone was £7048 and was associated with a difference of 0.032 QALYs, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £220 250 per QALY. This ICER was well above the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) upper threshold of £30 000 per QALY. A cost-effectiveness acceptability curve indicated that RO DBT had a zero probability of being cost-effective compared with TAU at the NICE £30 000 threshold.

In its current resource-intensive form, RO DBT is not a cost-effective use of resources in the UK NHS.

R.H. is co-owner and director of Radically Open Ltd, the RO DBT training and dissemination company. D.K. reports grants outside the submitted work from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). T.L. receives royalties from New Harbinger Publishing for sales of RO DBT treatment manuals, speaking fees from Radically Open Ltd, and a grant outside the submitted work from the Medical Research Council. He was co-director of Radically Open Ltd between November 2014 and May 2015 and is married to Erica Smith-Lynch, the principal shareholder and one of two directors of Radically Open Ltd. H.O'M. reports personal fees outside the submitted work from the Charlie Waller Institute and Improving Access to Psychological Therapy. S.R. provides RO DBT supervision through her company S C Rushbrook Ltd. I.R. reports grants outside the submitted work from NIHR and Health & Care Research Wales. M. Stanton reports personal fees outside the submitted work from British Isles DBT Training, Stanton Psychological Services Ltd and Taylor & Francis. M. Swales reports personal fees outside the submitted work from British Isles DBT Training, Guilford Press, Oxford University Press and Taylor & Francis. B.W. was co-director of Radically Open Ltd between November 2014 and February 2015.

Individuals with depression often do not respond to medication or psychotherapy. Radically open dialectical behaviour therapy (RO DBT) is a new treatment targeting overcontrolled personality, common in refractory depression.

To compare RO DBT plus treatment as usual (TAU) for refractory depression with TAU alone (trial registration: ISRCTN 85784627).

RO DBT comprised 29 therapy sessions and 27 skills classes over 6 months. Our completed randomised trial evaluated RO DBT for refractory depression over 18 months in three British secondary care centres. Of 250 adult participants, we randomised 162 (65%) to RO DBT. The primary outcome was the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD), assessed masked and analysed by treatment allocated.

After 7 months, immediately following therapy, RO DBT had significantly reduced depressive symptoms by 5.40 points on the HRSD relative to TAU (95% CI 0.94–9.85). After 12 months (primary end-point), the difference of 2.15 points on the HRSD in favour of RO DBT was not significant (95% CI –2.28 to 6.59); nor was that of 1.69 points on the HRSD at 18 months (95% CI –2.84 to 6.22). Throughout RO DBT participants reported significantly better psychological flexibility and emotional coping than controls. However, they reported eight possible serious adverse reactions compared with none in the control group.

The RO DBT group reported significantly lower HRSD scores than the control group after 7 months, but not thereafter. The imbalance in serious adverse reactions was probably because of the controls' limited opportunities to report these.

Dyadic discord, while common in depression, has not been specifically evaluated as an outcome predictor in chronic major depressive disorder. This study investigated pretreatment dyadic discord as a predictor of non-remission and its relationship to depressive symptom change during acute treatment for chronic depression.

Out-patients with chronic depression were randomized to 12 weeks of treatment with nefazodone, the Cognitive Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy or their combination. Measures included the Marital Adjustment Scale (MAS) and the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology – Self Report (IDS-SR30). Of 681 original patients, 316 were partnered and 171 of these completed a baseline and exit MAS, and at least one post-baseline IDS-SR30. MAS scores were analysed as continuous and categorical variables (‘dyadic discord’ v. ‘no dyadic discord’ defined as an MAS score >2.36. Remission was defined as an IDS-SR30 of ⩽14 at exit (equivalent to a 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression of ⩽7).

Patients with dyadic discord at baseline had lower remission rates (34.1%) than those without dyadic discord (61.2%) (all three treatment groups) (χ2=12.6, df=1, p=0.0004). MAS scores improved significantly with each of the treatments, although the change was reduced by controlling for improvement in depression. Depression remission at exit was associated with less dyadic discord at exit than non-remission for all three groups [for total sample, 1.8 v. 2.4, t(169)=7.3, p<0.0001].

Dyadic discord in chronically depressed patients is predictive of a lower likelihood of remission of depression. Couple therapy for those with dyadic discord may increase remission rates.