PlumX Metrics
Embed PlumX Metrics

Six-month outcomes of the CODES randomised controlled trial of cognitive behavioural therapy for dissociative seizures: A secondary analysis

Seizure, ISSN: 1059-1311, Vol: 96, Page: 128-136
2022
  • 11
    Citations
  • 0
    Usage
  • 84
    Captures
  • 5
    Mentions
  • 0
    Social Media
Metric Options:   Counts1 Year3 Year

Metrics Details

  • Citations
    11
    • Citation Indexes
      11
  • Captures
    84
  • Mentions
    5
    • References
      5
      • Wikipedia
        5

Article Description

The CODES Trial for adults with dissociative seizures had a predesignated 12-month post-randomisation follow-up point for outcome evaluation. We undertook an exploratory, unplanned, secondary analysis to evaluate the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy plus standardised medical care (CBT+SMC) compared to SMC alone at 6 months post-randomisation, i.e., closer to the end of treatment. The analysis of 6-month data followed our previous method of using multiple imputation and an intention-to-treat approach to analyse variables 12 months post-randomisation. The original trial primary outcome of monthly seizure frequency showed greater benefit from CBT+SMC than SMC-alone at 6 months (at p  < 0.05). Of 13 comparable previously-defined secondary outcomes, 12 showed a significant between group effect ( p  < 0.05) in favour of the CBT intervention at 6 months. The average effect size of the comparable previously-defined primary and secondary continuous outcomes was 0.33 at 6 months vs 0.26 at 12 months. The estimated Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) quantifying monthly seizure reduction was IRR = 0.72 (95%CI from 0.55 to 0.93) at 6 months compared to IRR = 0.78 at 12 months. DS-specific CBT (plus SMC) produced evidence of significant benefits at 6 months post- randomisation (around which time CBT was complete) compared to SMC alone; for the majority of these outcomes, better results following CBT (plus SMC) had previously been reported at 12 months. Our pattern of results suggests that short- and longer-term follow-ups are necessary to understand treatment effects in this disorder. Studies only providing short-term follow-up data should be interpreted with caution.

Bibliographic Details

Provide Feedback

Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know