Abstract
Aims Although brief psychological interventions in low-and-middle-income-countries have been shown to be effective, they have typically been tested against usual or enhanced usual care (EUC). This design has precluded delineation of the role of specific and non-specific factors in influencing symptom reduction outcomes. This study evaluates the impact of a group psychological intervention (adapted version of WHO’s Problem Management Plus; PM+; titled Coping with COVID) against non-directive group Supportive Counselling (SC) on psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in India.
Methods Between October 2020 and December 2022, this two-arm single-blind, controlled trial randomised 183 young adults in Bangalore, India who screened positive for psychological distress to either Coping with COVID (n = 91) or SC (n=92), on a 1:1 basis. Coping with COVID comprised six weekly small group sessions delivered by videoconferencing that taught stress coping strategies. SC also involved six weekly group sessions that were led by a facilitator and offered non-directive support. The primary outcomes were anxiety and depression as measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scales (HADS) assessed at baseline, post-intervention, 2-months, and 6-months after treatment. The primary outcome timepoint was the 2-month assessment. Secondary outcomes included generalised worry, positive wellbeing, pandemic-related stress, and suicidal ideation.
Results One hundred and sixty-one participants (88%) were retained at the 2-month follow-up. Intent-to-treat analyses indicated that the Coping with COVID condition did not lead to significant reductions in in anxiety (mean difference 0.24 [95% CI, –1.01,1.48], p>0.05), or depression (mean difference .03 [95% CI, –1.19, 1.26], p>0.05) relative to SC. Similarly, there were no significant differences between conditions for all secondary outcomes.
Conclusions The findings suggest that the benefits of strategies that comprise transdiagnostic scalable psychological interventions may not surpass non-specific factors in driving symptom reduction. There is a need to further evaluate the non-specific factors in scalable psychological programs because focusing on these may have implications for ease of training and implementation.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
ACTRN12621001064897
Funding Statement
This research received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC; grant number 1173921). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This trial received ethical approval through the CHRIST University Research Ethics Committee (ID: CU: RCEC/64/10/21). The authors assert that all procedures contributing to this work comply with the ethical standards of the relevant institutional committee (as per the CHRIST University Research Ethics Committee regulations).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
The data supporting the findings of our study analyses can be found on the osf data repository.
https://osf.io/5kaf7/?view_only=16f53f28bcd44b77be08c5e9ce83a0d0
