TY - JOUR

T1 - The Efficacy of Metacognitive Therapy for Anxiety and Depression

T2 - A Meta-Analytic Review

AU - Normann, Nicoline

AU - van Emmerik, Arnold A.P.

AU - Morina, Nexhmedin

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background: Metacognitive therapy (MCT) is a relatively new approach to treat- ing mental disorders. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of MCT in patients with mental disorders. Method: A comprehensive literature search revealed 16 published as well as unpublished studies on the ef- ficacy of MCT, of which nine were controlled trials. These studies report on 384 participants suffering from anxiety or depression. Treatment efficacy was ex- amined using a random effects model. Results: On primary outcome measures the aggregate within-group pre- to posttreatment and pretreatment to follow- up effect sizes for MCT were large (Hedges’ g = 2.00 and 1.65, respectively). Within-group pre- to posttreatment changes in metacognitions were also large (Hedges’ g = 1.18) and maintained at follow-up (Hedges’ g = 1.31). Across the controlled trials, MCT was significantly more effective than both waitlist control groups (between-group Hedges’ g = 1.81) as well as cognitive behavior therapy (CBT; between-group Hedges’ g = 0.97). Conclusions: Results suggest that MCT is effective in treating disorders of anxiety and depression and is supe- rior compared to waitlist control groups and CBT, although the latter finding should be interpreted with caution. The implications of these findings are limited by small sample sizes and few active control conditions. Future studies should include larger sample sizes and also include comparisons of MCT with other empirically supported therapies.

AB - Background: Metacognitive therapy (MCT) is a relatively new approach to treat- ing mental disorders. The aim of the current meta-analysis was to examine the efficacy of MCT in patients with mental disorders. Method: A comprehensive literature search revealed 16 published as well as unpublished studies on the ef- ficacy of MCT, of which nine were controlled trials. These studies report on 384 participants suffering from anxiety or depression. Treatment efficacy was ex- amined using a random effects model. Results: On primary outcome measures the aggregate within-group pre- to posttreatment and pretreatment to follow- up effect sizes for MCT were large (Hedges’ g = 2.00 and 1.65, respectively). Within-group pre- to posttreatment changes in metacognitions were also large (Hedges’ g = 1.18) and maintained at follow-up (Hedges’ g = 1.31). Across the controlled trials, MCT was significantly more effective than both waitlist control groups (between-group Hedges’ g = 1.81) as well as cognitive behavior therapy (CBT; between-group Hedges’ g = 0.97). Conclusions: Results suggest that MCT is effective in treating disorders of anxiety and depression and is supe- rior compared to waitlist control groups and CBT, although the latter finding should be interpreted with caution. The implications of these findings are limited by small sample sizes and few active control conditions. Future studies should include larger sample sizes and also include comparisons of MCT with other empirically supported therapies.

U2 - 10.1002/da.22273

DO - 10.1002/da.22273

M3 - Review

VL - 31

SP - 402

EP - 411

JO - Depression and Anxiety

JF - Depression and Anxiety

SN - 1091-4269

IS - 5

ER -