Table 2.
Rates of remission, improvement, overall improvement, unchanged, deterioration and reliable deterioration for intention-to-treat and treatment completers by treatment condition.
|
|
Immediate access group, n (%) | Delayed access control group, n (%) | Chi-square (df) | P value | |
| Intention-to-treat group (n=189; LOCFa) | n=94 | n=95 | 29.85 (2) | <.001 | |
|
|
Remissionb | 20 (21) | 7 (7) |
|
|
|
|
Reliable improvementc | 6 (6) | 7 (7) |
|
|
|
|
Minimal improvementd | 9 (10) | 28 (30) |
|
|
|
|
Unchangede | 53 (56) | 34 (36) |
|
|
|
|
Minimal deteriorationf | 6 (6) | 17 (18) |
|
|
|
|
Reliable deteriorationg | 0 (0) | 2 (2) |
|
|
| Treatment completers (n=110) | n=44 | n=66 | 22.82 (2) | <.001 | |
|
|
Remissionb | 20 (50) | 7 (101) |
|
|
|
|
Reliable improvementc | 6 (14) | 7 (11) |
|
|
|
|
Minimal improvementd | 9 (21) | 28 (42) |
|
|
|
|
Unchangede | 3 (7) | 5 (8) |
|
|
|
|
Minimal deteriorationf | 6 (14) | 17 (26) |
|
|
|
|
Reliable deteriorationg | 0 (0) | 2 (3) |
|
|
aLOCF: last observation carried forward.
bRemission: proportion of clients who moved into the functional population (positively changed more than the Reliable Change Index=5.66 and gets under the cutoff point for PHQ-9<10).
cReliable improvement: proportion of clients who positively changed more than the Reliable Change Index=5.66 and gets above the cutoff point for PHQ-9<10.
dMinimal improvement: proportion of clients who positively changed less than the Reliable Change Index=5.66.
eUnchanged: proportion of clients who maintained their PHQ-9 score.
fDeterioration: proportion of clients who deteriorated less than the Reliable Change Index=5.66.
gReliable deterioration: proportion of clients who deteriorated more than the Reliable Change Index=5.66.