differential effects, and moderating effects vis-à-vis no-treatment controls (NT) and alternative psychotherapies (AP), respectively. Overall, STPP was superior to NT at posttreatment, inferior to AP at posttreatment, and even more so a 1-yr follow-up. STPP was inferior to AP in treating depression and, in particular, to cognitive-behavior therapy for major depression. STPP was equally successful with mixed neurotics. As research quality increased, STPP grew less superior to NT. STPP decreased its overall superiority over NT and increased its overall inferiority to AT on a series of clinically relevant variables. Improvement in research quality from 1978 to 1988 was noted. Evidence, although limited, supported the view that STPP approaches do seem to differ along a few major dimensions
Leichsenring, F. (2009). In: Handbook of evidence-based psychodynamic psychotherapy: Bridging the gap between science and practice. Levy, R. A. & Ablon, J. S. (Eds.). Totowa, NJ, US: Humana Press, pp. 3-27.
Having seen a patient and having carried out diagnostic assessment on both a phenomenological and a psychodynamic level, psychodynamically oriented clinicians have to decide what kind of treatment they recommend to a patient. For this reason, it is useful for them to know which treatment approach has been shown to be effective in the treatment of the respective disorder. In this chapter, a review of the efficacy and effectiveness of psychodynamic psychotherapy is given. First, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of psychodynamic psychotherapy in specific mental disorders are reviewed. After that, effectiveness studies of long-term dynamic therapy are presented. Studies of psychodynamic psychotherapy published between 1960 and 2006 were identified by a computerized search using MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Current Contents. In addition, textbooks and journal articles were used.
Leichsenring, F. Rabung, S. & Leibing, E. (2004). Archives of General Psychiatry, 61(12), 1208-1216.
Background: The efficacy of psychodynamic therapy is controversial. Previous meta-analyses have reported discrepant results. Objective: To test the efficacy of short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (STPP) in specific psychiatric disorders by performing a meta-analysis of more recent studies. We assessed outcomes in target problems, general psychiatric symptoms, and social functioning. Design: We identified studies of STPP published between January 1, 1970, and September 30, 2004 by means of a computerized search using MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Current Contents. Rigorous inclusion criteria, included randomized controlled trials, use of treatment manuals and ensurance of treatment integrity, therapists experienced or specifically trained in STPP, treatment of patients with specific psychiatric disorders, reliable and valid diagnostic measures, and data necessary to calculate effect sizes. Studies of interpersonal therapy were excluded. Seventeen studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The information was extracted by 3 raters. Effect sizes were calculated for target problems, general psychiatric symptoms, and social functioning using the data published in the original studies. To examine the stability of outcome, we assessed effect sizes separately for end of therapy and follow-up assessment. The effect sizes of STPP were compared with those of waiting-list control patients, treatments as usual, and other forms of psychotherapy. Results: Short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy yielded significant and large pretreatment-posttreatment effect sizes for target problems (1.39), general psychiatric symptoms (0.90), and social functioning (0.80). These effect sizes were stable and tended to increase at follow-up (1.57, 0.95, and 1.19, respectively). The effect sizes of STPP significantly exceeded those of waiting-list controls and treatments as usual. No differences were