Effects of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy on Symptomatic Generalized Anxiety Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Effects of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy on Symptomatic Generalized Anxiety Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Effects of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy on Symptomatic Generalized Anxiety Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial Si-si Jiang, Xue-hua Liu, Nan Han, Hai-jing Zhang, Wu-xiang Xie, and 8 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-506369/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 10 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Background: Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is a promising treatment for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is currently considered a first-line treatment for GAD. The objective of this study was to examine the efficacy of MBCT in symptomatic GAD patients compared with CBT for a variety of outcomes of anxiety symptoms, as well as depressive symptoms, overall illness severity, quality of life and mindfulness. Methods: Adult patients with GAD (n = 138) were randomized to a MBCT or CBT group. Both groups received either MBCT or CBT in addition to treatment-as-usual (TAU). The primary outcomes were the anxiety response and remission rates, as measured using the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA). Secondary outcomes included scores on the HAMA, the state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI), the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD), the Severity Subscale of the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI-S), and the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) , as well as mindfulness measured by the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ). Assessments were performed at baseline, 8 weeks after treatment, and at a 3-month follow-up. For primary analyses, response and remission rates were analyzed by the χ2 test in the two groups at each assessment time. For the secondary analyses, separate two-way mixed ANOVAs were performed to compare the mean differences in all secondary outcomes. Results: The anxiety remission rate of the two groups significantly differed (63.8% in the MBCT group vs. 44.6% in the CBT group, p = 0.040, Cohen’s d = 0.39) but not in anxiety response rate (86.2% vs. 80.4%, p = 0.402; Cohen’s d = 0.16) at 8 weeks. Overall illness severity and mindfulness were significantly different between the groups at 8 weeks. There were no significant differences between the two groups at the 3-month follow-up. Conclusions: Our data indicate that MBCT was effective in reducing anxiety symptoms in GAD patients. While MBCT appeared to have better short-term benefits, the long-term benefits of CBT may be superior. Trial registration: registered at chic.org.cn (registration number: ChiCTR1800019150, registration date: 27/10/2018). Psychiatry Mindfulness Generalized anxiety disorder Cognitive behavioral therapy Treatment Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Background Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is characterized by chronic and persistent worry(1). Effective treatments for GAD include pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy(2, 3). Only 50%–60% of GAD patients respond to pharmacotherapy, and 30%–50% of GAD patients experience remission(4, 5). The disadvantages of pharmacotherapy include side effects, premature discontinuation, and a significant risk of relapse(6, 7). A large proportion of patients prefer psychotherapy to pharmacotherapy. Among the various forms of psychotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is considered a first-line treatment for GAD(8, 9). Nevertheless, CBT is not widely offered in clinical practice. In addition to a shortage of trained CBT therapists, individual sessions are expensive in healthcare systems with limited resources(10). Thus, more treatments for GAD are needed. Mindfulness is the awareness that emerges through intentionally focusing, in a non-judgmental way, on how things are in the present moment(11). Instead of changing thoughts themselves, the intension of mindfulness is to change one’s relationship with their thoughts(12). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT), which combines the practice and principles of mindfulness with CBT components, was originally developed to prevent the recurrence of depression for patients in recovery(13). MBCT is currently recommended by NICE guidelines for the treatment of recurrent depression(13-15). Although some randomized controlled studies (16) have evaluated the effects of Mindfulness-based interventions for treating GAD in adults, most of these had small sample sizes(17, 18), examined adults in a specific age group or demographic(19, 20), included participants with heterogeneous diagnoses including anxiety disorders other than GAD(19, 21). Furthermore, although MBCT and CBT have common features, evidence directly comparing their efficacy for the treatment of GAD is lacking (22-24). We designed the current study to address the above-mentioned limitations of previous research. Research objectives Our primary objective was to evaluate the effects of MBCT, adapted for treating GAD (MBCT-A), by comparing it with group CBT designed to treat symptomatic GAD (CBT-A). We hypothesized that MBCT-A would be as effective as CBT-A in improving symptoms of anxiety. Our other objectives were to investigate the effects of MBCT-A and CBT-A in terms of psychic and somatic anxiety symptoms, state and trait anxiety symptoms, depression symptoms, overall illness severity, quality of life and mindfulness. We included the CBT-A group for active comparison because CBT has been suggested to be a high-intensity intervention for GAD and it is recommended by current guidelines(9). Furthermore, CBT is considered to be the gold standard for evaluating the efficacy of new and promising interventions (25). Methods Design This study is a parallel randomized controlled trial with two groups: MBCT-A vs. CBT-A (with a 1:1 allocation ratio). We did not include a no-treatment control group because we were comparing a relatively new treatment with a well-established treatment, and we considered our study to be more ethical if all participants received some form of intervention (26). The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Sixth Hospital of Peking University before initiation of the trial. Each participant was fully informed and agreed to the randomization process. Informed consent forms were obtained from all participants. The trial was registered at chic.org.cn (registration number: ChiCTR1800019150, registration date: 27/10/2018). Population and Recruitment Participants were recruited from the Outpatient Department of the Sixth Hospital of Peking University from November 2018 to November 2019 via a) posters distributed in outpatient clinics and b) recommendations from psychiatrists who worked in the Sixth Hospital of Peking University but were not involved in the study. A trained research assistant first screened all interested participants by telephone or in-person appointments. Diagnostic screenings were then independently made by an attending psychiatrist in accordance with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV). The principal investigator (B.X.H) conducted a final screening using the study inclusion and exclusion criteria to determine eligibility. All patients concurrently continued their regular outpatient psychiatry visits for medication management during the study period (treatment-as-usual, TAU) at the Sixth Hospital of Peking University. The regular outpatient psychiatry visits did not include psychotherapy, and the average consulting time was about 10 min per patient, with an average of one visit every two weeks. We used the following inclusion criteria :(a) Aged 18-65 years; (b) diagnosis of GAD; (c) score of ≥14 on the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA)(27); (d) medication for on a stable dose for ≥1 month; (e) ability to understand and communication in Chinese. Exclusion criteria were: (a) Diagnosis of any organic mental disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, major depression disorder, or bipolar disorder; (b) abuse of alcohol or other substances in the past 12 months; (c) any conditions that were potentially life-threatening or could severely limit participation (e.g. serious suicidal ideation, antisocial personality disorder, severe or unstable medical illness, pregnancy, breastfeeding); (d) current engagement in psychological treatment for GAD; (e) a history of attending 4 or more mindfulness sessions in the past 2 years. Participants were withdrawn from the study if they (a) had any suicidal behavior or suicide attempts; (b) withdrew their informed consent; or (c) were absent for more than three therapy sessions during the study period. Randomization Allocation, Concealment, and Blinding Randomization was performed using computer-generated random numbers that were generated by an independent statistician. Sealed envelopes were used to conceal the randomization sequence. The intervention types were written on sheets of paper that were placed inside opaque envelopes. After the informed consent forms were signed, research assistants opened the envelopes in order and noted the group assignment for the corresponding participants. The participants were notified that the treatments received in both study groups could be helpful in improving anxiety symptoms. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Sixth Hospital of Peking University before initiation of the trial. Intervention and Control Intervention: MBCT-A The adapted MBCT-A protocol followed the manual described by Segal, Williams, and Teasdale(13, 28). We made several adaptations to render the MBCT appropriate for treating GAD. These changes were developed on the basis of (1) the dissimilar characteristics between GAD and depression, (2) the different needs when attempting to improve current anxiety symptoms vs. preventing a relapse of depression, and 3) clinical experience. The first author (S.S.J) and co-first author (X.H.L) wrote the adapted manualized protocol, which largely reflected the classic protocol for MBCT. Qualified instructors with more than two years of experience delivered the MBCT-A program. The MBCT-A instructors were supervised by 2 certified MBCT supervisors during the intervention period. The MBCT-A group attended weekly 2-hour sessions over an 8-week period with 20–25 participants in each session. In the MBCT-A manual, the pre-course orientation information was integrated into Session one; psychoeducation about anxiety was integrated into Session four; one-day retreat part of the program was integrated into Session six. Practices in the MBCT-A included mindful eating, body scans, sitting meditation, 3-min breathing space exercises, mindful stretching, and mindful walking. During the intervention period, participants in the MBCT-A group were given daily audio homework exercises. All participants were instructed to practice mindfulness meditation for 30 min a day and to report their daily mindfulness practice via a messaging and social media application (WeChat). Control: CBT-A The CBT-A program followed a manualized protocol originally authored by the corresponding author (X.B.H), that had been used successfully in previous clinical trials(29). The main aim of CBT is to change or challenge the “dysfunctional” thoughts related to generalized anxiety, and to introduce the participant to various relaxation techniques. Two qualified therapists with either a psychiatry or psychotherapy background led each CBT-A group. The corresponding author X. B. H supervised the CBT-A therapists during the study period. Participants in the CBT-A group attended weekly 1.5 h sessions over 8 weeks with 10–15 participants in each group. Each CBT-A session had a particular theme. Weekly homework was assigned at the end of each session, and was handed in to the therapists and discussed in the following session. Measurements The outcome measures were collected at baseline (T1), week 8 (post-intervention, T2), and at a 3-month follow-up assessment (T3). Four trained psychiatric residents who kept blind to patient’s treatment allocation conducted patient assessments. Demographic and baseline clinical information including age, sex, education history, marital status, ethnicity, residential location, religious beliefs, age of onset, course of GAD, and use of medication was collected using a questionnaire. Primary Outcome The primary outcomes were anxiety response and remission, as measured by the HAMA (27) at 8 weeks and at a 3-month follow-up assessment. The HAMA is a 14-item scale used to evaluate symptom severity in patients with anxiety disorders. For this study, remission was defined as a HAMA total score of less than 7, and response was defined as a ≥ 50% decrease relative to the baseline. Secondary Outcomes The secondary outcome measures included the total, psychological, and somatic anxiety symptoms measured by the HAMA, state and trait anxiety symptoms measured by the state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI-S, STAI-T), depressive symptoms measured by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), overall illness severity measured by the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scale, and quality of life measured by the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12). Mindfulness was measured using the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), on which a higher total score (range 39–195) suggests a higher level of mindfulness(30). This scale has been translated into Chinese and validated(30). Sample Size Because no previous studies had compared MBCT with CBT for the treatment of GAD, we used the findings from two studies, one which compared the effects of CBT and medication(29) and the other which compared the effects of MBCT-A and medication(31), for our sample size calculation. Assuming the response rate for MBCT was 0.767 and the response rate for CBT was 0.636 with a type I error-set of 5% and a type II error-set of 20%, we calculated the sample size per group to be 57 participants. With a presumed drop-out rate of 20%, we aimed to recruit 69 participants per group. Data Analysis All analyses were based on the intention-to-treat principle and statistics were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics ver. 22. The baseline characteristics of the two groups were compared using an independent samples t-test or Mann-Whitney’s U test for continuous variables and the χ2 test for categorical variables. For our primary analyses, we used the χ2 test to analyze the response and remission rates in the two groups at each assessment time (8 weeks after the start of the treatment, 3-month follow-up). The effect size estimates were presented using Cohen's d, and were interpreted as small effects (0.2–0.5), moderate effects (0.5 to 0.8), and large effects (≥ 0.8)(32). For the secondary analyses, we performed separate two-way mixed ANOVAs to compare the mean differences in all secondary outcomes. Group (MBCT-A vs. CBT-A) was used as a between-subjects factor and time (baseline, 8 weeks after treatment onset, 3-months follow-up) was used as a within-subjects factor. The Bonferroni post hoc test was used for post hoc comparisons at each assessment. Partial eta squared (η2p) values were calculated for all significant findings. Significance level was set at p < 0.05. Results Baseline characteristics and dropout rates Out of the 682 screened participants, 168 (24.6%) were successfully recruited (Shown in Fig. 1). A total of 138 participants finally attended the intervention sessions, including 82 women and 56 men, with a mean age of 35.94 (SD = 11.05) years. Of all the recruited participants, 17.9% (14 and 16 in the MBCT-A and CBT-A groups, respectively) did not attend any intervention sessions. There was no difference in this proportion between the two groups. This was viewed as pre-treatment attrition and not included in the data analyses. The basic participant demographics and baseline clinical data for both groups are listed in Table 1. The baseline characteristics were not statistically different between the MBCT-A group (n = 69) and CBT-A group (n = 69). There were 58 (84.1%) and 56 (81.2%) participants in the MBCT-A and CBT-A groups, respectively, who attended at least 6 out of the 8 sessions. Compared with the 114 participants who completed the treatment, the 24 participants who dropped out had a shorter course of GAD (p = 0.005) but no significant differences in other characteristics at baseline. The dropout rates in the MBCT-A and CBT-A groups were 15.9% and 18.8% at 8 weeks (p = 0.653) and 18.8% and 21.7% at the 3-month follow-up (p = 0.672), respectively. Table 1. Baseline participant data MBCT （ n=69 ） CBT （ n=69 ） P Age, years, mean (SD) 35.1 (10.1) 36.8 (11.9) 0.373 a Female, n (%) 38 (55.1) 44 (63.8) 0.386 Education, years, mean (SD) 15.7 (3.6) 15.1 (3.2) 0.331 a Marital status, n (%) single 30 (43.5) 19 (27.5) 0.145 married 36 (52.2) 46 (66.7) divorced 3 (4.3) 4 (5.8) Ethnicity （ Han ） ,n (%) 63 (91.3) 68 (98.6) 0.115 Location (city ） ,n (%) 66 (95.7) 66 (95.7) 1.000 Religion (none-religious ） ,n (%) 57 (82.6) 59 (85.5) 0.817 Age of onset, years, mean (SD) 29.5 (10.1) 30.6 (11.5) 0.534 a Course of GAD, months, mean (SD) 72.9 (95.1) 73.9 (83.4) 0.501 b HAMA, mean (SD) 24.1 (7.1) 23.3 (7.1) 0.377 b HAMD, mean (SD) 11.5 (5.1) 11.2 (4.7) 0.653 a CGI-S, mean (SD) 4.4 (0.8) 4.3 (0.8) 0.682 b STAI-state, mean (SD) 53.1 (14.9) 50.6 (14.2) 0.295 b STAI-trait, mean (SD) 55.7 (12.5) 53.7 (10.7) 0.326 a SF-12, mean (SD) 21.2 (6.3) 23.1 (6.0) 0.071 a FFMQ, mean (SD) 111.3 (14.8) 112.0 (17.0) 0.782 a Use of antidepressants ,n (%) SSRI 50 (72.5) 53 (76.5) 0.696 SNRI 19 (27.5) 16 (23.2) Use of benzodiazepines, n (%) 24 (34.8) 24 (34.8) 1.000 Use of atypical antipsychotics , n(%) 11 (15.9) 7 (10.1) 0.449 *p < 0.05. a Independent samples t-test. b Mann-Whitney’s U test. Primary outcomes At 8 weeks, the HAMA remission rate in the MBCT-A group was significantly higher than that in the CBT-A group (63.8% in the MBCT-A group vs. 44.6% in the CBT-A group, p = 0.040, Cohen’s d = 0.39). However, the response rates were not significantly different (86.2% in the MBCT-A group vs. 80.4% in the CBT-A group, p = 0.402; Cohen’s d = 0.16) (shown in Table 2). At the 3-month follow-up assessment, neither the remission rate (48.2% in the MBCT-A group vs. 48.1% in the CBT-A group, p = 0.994, Cohen’s d = 0.19) nor the response rate (80.4% in the MBCT-A group vs. 74.1% in the CBT-A group, p = 0.432, Cohen’s d = 0.00) were statistically different between the two groups (shown in Table 2). Table 2. Primary outcomes MBCT CBT Effect size P value 8weeks N=58 N=56 (Cohen’s d) HAMA response(n,%) 50 (86.2) 45 (80.4) 0.157 0.402 HAMA remission(n,%) 37 (63.8) 25 (44.6) 0.392 0.040* 3months N=56 N=54 HAMA response(n,%) 45 (80.4) 40(74.1) 0.150 0.432 HAMA remission(n,%) 27 (48.2) 26 (48.1) 0.191 0.994 *means p＜0.05 Secondary outcomes The two-way mixed ANOVAs with time as the repeated measure, intervention group as the between-subjects factor, and HAMA total score, HAMA psychic score, HAMA somatic score, HAMD score, and SF-12 score as the dependent variables all revealed a significant main effect of time but no significant intervention group × time interaction (shown in Table 3). To further explore the time effect, we performed pairwise comparisons with the Bonferroni correction. Both groups showed significant improvements in HAMA total, psychic, and somatic scores, HAMD scores, and SF-12 scores between the baseline and immediate after-treatment assessments (T1 to T2) and between the baseline and 3-month follow-up assessments (T1 to T3) (shown in Online Supplementary Table 1). The two-way mixed ANOVAs with time as the repeated measure, the intervention group as the between-subjects factor, and STAI-S, STAI-T, CGI-S, and FFMQ scores as dependent variables revealed a significant main effect of time and a significant intervention group × time interaction (shown in Online Supplementary Table 2). Therefore, a simple effects analysis was performed in STAI-S, STAI-T, CGI-S, and FFMQ scores. The CGI-S scores revealed significant group simple effects at the 8-week assessment, F(1,53) = 1.403, P = 0.001 (not shown in Online Supplementary Table 2). This indicates that the MBCT-A group exhibited a significantly greater decrease in CGI-S scores compared with the CBT-A group immediately after the intervention. However, these enhanced improvements had not persisted at the three-month follow-up assessment in the MBCT-A group, as indicated by the lack of a significant difference between the two groups at this time point. Comparing the FFMQ scores revealed a significant simple effect of group at 8-weeks, F(1,53) = 5.104, P = 0.028 (not shown in Online Supplementary Table 2). Thus, while the level of mindfulness increased in both groups immediately post-treatment, the increase was significantly greater in the MBCT-A group. There were no significant group simple effects in STAI-S, STAI-T scores at the 8-week assessment and no significant group simple effects in all STAI-S, STAI-T, CGI-S, and FFMQ scores at the 3-month follow-up assessments. Table 3. Secondary outcomes: the two-way mixed ANOVA results. variable Main effects for time Main effects for group Interaction(Time×Group) F P partial η2 F P F P partial η2 HAMA total 302.98 0.000* 0.737 0.26 0.610 2.14 0.127 0.019 HAMA psychic 198.63 0.000* 0.648 0.01 0.912 1.78 0.171 0.016 HAMA somatic 237.60 0.000* 0.687 0.56 0.455 1.38 0.255 0.013 HAMD 82.79 0.000* 0.434 0.02 0.888 1.16 0.317 0.011 CGI-S 195.80 0.000* 0.645 2.94 0.089 5.80 0.004* 0.051 STAI-S 80.25 0.000* 0.426 0.11 0.741 3.56 0.030* 0.032 STAI-T 108.74 0.000* 0.502 0.18 0.671 4.28 0.015* 0.038 SF-12 99.94 0.000* 0.481 0.27 0.603 2.03 0.134 0.018 FFMQ 53.55 0.000* 0.331 1.28 0.261 5.26 0.006* 0.046 Listwise deletion resulted in a final sample size of. n = 110 *means p＜0.05 Discussion To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to compare MBCT with high intensity, evidence-based group CBT, which is considered the first-line of psychotherapy for treatment of GAD(2, 3, 9). We obtained three main findings: First, with CBT-A as an active control, MBCT-A was effective in reducing anxiety symptoms in symptomatic GAD patients. After the 8-week treatment period, 86.2% of the patients in the MBCT-A group and 80.4% of the patients in the CBT-A group achieved a response, and 63.8% and 44.6%, respectively, achieved remission. Given that all of the participants had significant anxiety symptoms (HAMA scores higher than 14) under TAU at baseline, we interpreted the improvement as an effect of the treatment. MBCT-A was also effective in improving a wider range of outcomes, including well-being, overall illness severity, depression symptoms, and state and trait anxiety symptoms. These findings are not only concordant with our hypothesis, but are also in line with previous studies demonstrating the effectiveness of MBCT in treating GAD(20, 25). Second, at the 8-week assessment, the MBCT-A group had a significantly higher remission rate and a greater reduction in overall illness severity. However, at the 3-month follow-up visit, no differences between the two groups remained statistically significant. One plausible explanation for this difference is the request that participants in the MBCT-A group report their mindfulness practice in a WeChat group on a daily basis, which could have promoted engagement. It is widely accepted that for MBI participants, there is a significant association between the extent of practice and positive intervention outcomes(33). By contrast, in the CBT-A group, weekly homework was handed in to the therapists and discussed in the following session. Thus, this difference in the homework expectations may account for the advantage of MBCT-A at the 8-week visit. However, at the 3-month follow-up visit, there was a drop (63.8–48.2%) in the HAMA remission rate in the MBCT-A group but not the CBT-A group. A previous study(25) found that, compared with psycho-education with exercise control, MBCT led to short-term but not long-term benefits for patients with chronic insomnia. This is not surprising, as vigorous practice is essential for the beneficial effects of MBCT. These data indicate that MBCT should not be delivered in a one-time or short-term way, but rather, a long-term pattern should be encouraged and integrated via deliberate lifestyle modification. Finally, unlike anxiety symptoms, the trait-related outcomes, including trait anxiety and trait mindfulness, showed further improvements at the 3-month follow-up visit compared with at 8 weeks, although this was not statistically significant (shown in Fig. 2). A previous study found similar changes in anxiety symptoms among GAD patients randomly assigned to MBCT, CBT-based psychoeducation, or usual care(20, 25). Thus, the benefits of MBCT may not be limited to symptomology, but may promote a positive change in personality. Indeed, we found a significant improvement in the quality of life, which was reflected in the change in SF-12 scores. To some extent, MBCT may reflect cultural context, core values, and attitudes regarding life. Our study has several strengths. To our knowledge, it is the first study with a relatively large sample size to compare MBCT and high intensity CBT among Chinese GAD patients. Additionally, there was high homogeneity in the participant diagnoses, adding to the generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, the interventions were delivered by trained and experienced instructors in accordance with standard protocols, thus demonstrating implementation of the treatment for future reference. Our study also has several limitations. First, we did not have a no-treatment control or a wait-list control. Current evidence suggests that GAD is a chronic condition that is unlikely to improve naturally over time(1). Considering this and that we were comparing a new treatment with a well-established one, we thought it more ethical to provide treatment to both groups(26). Second, due to practical difficulties, we did not collect data on the mindfulness exercises in the MBCT-A group or the behavior exercises in the CBT-A group. Third, as the two groups had multiple and overlapping specific and non-specific components, which components led to the positive effects was not clear. Further study is necessary to elucidate this point. Finally, we did not match the total treatment time between the two groups. As shown in a previous study(34), more treatment time may produce larger effects. We chose not to match the treatment time between the two groups in consideration of clinical practical applications. Conclusion MBCT was effective in reducing anxiety symptoms in GAD patients. While MBCT appeared to elicit more short-term benefits, CBT was associated with greater long-term benefits during the follow-up period. Taking into account the differences in treatment priorities and components between MBCT and CBT, our results suggest that these two evidence-based interventions are beneficial for treating GAD patients. List Of Abbreviations MBCT: Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy; GAD: generalized anxiety disorder; CBT: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; TAU: treatment-as-usual; HAMA: Hamilton Anxiety Scale; STAI: the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; HAMD: Hamilton Depression Scale; CGI-S: Clinical Global Impression Scale; SF-12: 12-item Short-Form Health Survey; FFMQ: Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire; MBCT-A: MBCT, adapted for treating GAD; CBT-A: CBT designed to treat GAD; DSM-IV: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition; LB: lower bound; UB: upper bound; SE: standard error. Declarations Ethical approval and consent to participate This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Sixth Hospital of Peking University before the conduction of the trial (NO.2018-29). All procedures were conducted ethically in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. All participants provided written informed consent to participate in this research. Consent for publication Publication consent was obtained from all authors. Availability of data and materials All data needed to support the conclusions in the paper are present in the paper and/or the Supplementary Materials. Competing interests All authors have no conflicts of interest to declare. Funding This work was supported by the Capital Health Research and Development of Special Fund Program (No.2018–2-4114). Authors' contributions Xue-bing Huang designed the study, provided supervision for CBT group, and conducted revisions on the manuscript. Si-si Jiang and Xue-hua Liu contributed to the study design. Wu-xiang Xie contributed to the randomization, allocation, concealment, and blinding processes. Si-si Jiang and Xue-hua Liu were MBCT instructors and Zhi-juan Xie, Nan Han, Hai-jing Zhang, Xin-Yuan Lu, and Xuan-zi Zhou were CBT therapists. Measurement and data collection were performed by Yu-qi Zhao, Ai-deng Duan, Shu-qin Zhao, and Zhi-cheng Zhang. Si-si Jiang conducted data analysis and wrote a draft of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgement This study was supported by the Capital Health Research and Development of Special Fund Program (No. 2018–2-4114). We thank Dr. S. Helen Ma and Dr. Yen-Hui Lee for providing MBCT supervision, and we thank Qin Si, Shu-zhe Zhou, and other colleagues for their assistance throughout the study period. We would also like to thank the outpatient department of the Sixth Hospital of Peking University for their support. References Stein MB, Sareen J. CLINICAL PRACTICE. Generalized Anxiety Disorder. The New England journal of medicine. 2015;373(21):2059-68. Katzman MA, Bleau P, Blier P, Chokka P, Kjernisted K, Van Ameringen M, et al. Canadian clinical practice guidelines for the management of anxiety, posttraumatic stress and obsessive-compulsive disorders. BMC Psychiatry. 2014;14 Suppl 1:S1. Bandelow B, Sher L, Bunevicius R, Hollander E, Kasper S, Zohar J, et al. Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder in primary care. Int J Psychiatry Clin Pract. 2012;16(2):77-84. Reinhold JA, Rickels K. Pharmacological treatment for generalized anxiety disorder in adults: an update. Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy. 2015;16(11):1669-81. Tomasi J, Lisoway AJ, Zai CC, Harripaul R, Muller DJ, Zai GCM, et al. Towards precision medicine in generalized anxiety disorder: Review of genetics and pharmaco(epi)genetics. J Psychiatr Res. 2019;119:33-47. Katzman MA. Current considerations in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder. CNS Drugs. 2009;23(2):103-20. Baldwin DS, Hou R, Gordon R, Huneke NT, Garner M. Pharmacotherapy in Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Novel Experimental Medicine Models and Emerging Drug Targets. CNS Drugs. 2017;31(4):307-17. Cuijpers P, Sijbrandij M, Koole S, Huibers M, Berking M, Andersson G. Psychological treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2014;34(2):130-40. School of H, Related Research UoS. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Guidance. Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Anxiety: Management of Anxiety (Panic Disorder, with or without Agoraphobia, and Generalised Anxiety Disorder) in Adults in Primary, Secondary and Community Care. London: National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care (UK) Copyright © 2004, National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care.; 2004. Sundquist J, Lilja Å, Palmér K, Memon AA, Wang X, Johansson LM, et al. Mindfulness group therapy in primary care patients with depression, anxiety and stress and adjustment disorders: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2015;206(2):128-35. Kabat-Zinn J, Hanh TN. Full Catastrophe Living (Revised Edition): Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness: Random House Publishing Group; 2013. Kim SM, Park JM, Seo HJ. Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction for adults with sleep disturbance: a protocol for an update of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. 2016;5:51. Segal ZV, Williams JMG, Teasdale JD. Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Depression, First Edition: A New Approach to Preventing Relapse: Guilford Publications; 2002. Chiesa A, Serretti A. Mindfulness based cognitive therapy for psychiatric disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res. 2011;187(3):441-53. Williams JM, Kuyken W. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy: a promising new approach to preventing depressive relapse. Br J Psychiatry. 2012;200(5):359-60. Ghahari S, Mohammadi-Hasel K, Malakouti SK, Roshanpajouh M. Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy for Generalised Anxiety Disorder: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. East Asian Arch Psychiatry. 2020;30(2):52-6. Kabat-Zinn J, Massion AO, Kristeller J, Peterson LG, Fletcher KE, Pbert L, et al. Effectiveness of a meditation-based stress reduction program in the treatment of anxiety disorders. The American journal of psychiatry. 1992;149(7):936-43. Evans S, Ferrando S, Findler M, Stowell C, Smart C, Haglin D. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for generalized anxiety disorder. J Anxiety Disord. 2008;22(4):716-21. Arch JJ, Ayers CR, Baker A, Almklov E, Dean DJ, Craske MG. Randomized clinical trial of adapted mindfulness-based stress reduction versus group cognitive behavioral therapy for heterogeneous anxiety disorders. Behav Res Ther. 2013;51(4-5):185-96. Wong SY, Yip BH, Mak WW, Mercer S, Cheung EY, Ling CY, et al. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy v. group psychoeducation for people with generalised anxiety disorder: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2016;209(1):68-75. Koszycki D, Benger M, Shlik J, Bradwejn J. Randomized trial of a meditation-based stress reduction program and cognitive behavior therapy in generalized social anxiety disorder. Behav Res Ther. 2007;45(10):2518-26. Hoge EA, Bui E, Marques L, Metcalf CA, Morris LK, Robinaugh DJ, et al. Randomized controlled trial of mindfulness meditation for generalized anxiety disorder: effects on anxiety and stress reactivity. J Clin Psychiatry. 2013;74(8):786-92. Dahlin M, Andersson G, Magnusson K, Johansson T, Sjögren J, Håkansson A, et al. Internet-delivered acceptance-based behaviour therapy for generalized anxiety disorder: A randomized controlled trial. Behav Res Ther. 2016;77:86-95. DeMartini J, Patel G, Fancher TL. Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170(7):ITC49-ITC64. Tovote KA, Fleer J, Snippe E, Peeters AC, Emmelkamp PM, Sanderman R, et al. Individual mindfulness-based cognitive therapy and cognitive behavior therapy for treating depressive symptoms in patients with diabetes: results of a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes care. 2014;37(9):2427-34. Kazdin AE. Research Design in Clinical Psychology: Allyn and Bacon; 2003. Hamilton M. The assessment of anxiety states by rating. Br J Med Psychol. 1959;32(1):50-5. Segal ZV, Williams JMG, Teasdale JD, Kabat-Zinn J. Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Depression: Guilford Publications; 2012. Xie ZJ, Han N, Law S, Li ZW, Chen SY, Xiao JP, et al. The efficacy of group cognitive-behavioural therapy plus duloxetine for generalised anxiety disorder versus duloxetine alone. Acta Neuropsychiatr. 2019;31(6):316-24. Deng Y-Q, Liu X-H, Rodriguez MA, Xia C-Y. The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire: Psychometric Properties of the Chinese Version. Mindfulness. 2011;2(2):123-8. Li X. A randomized controlled study of Mindful-based Group therapy for 60 Inpatients with Generalized Anxiety Disorder [Master]: SOOCHOW UNIVERSITY; 2015. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1988. Parsons CE, Crane C, Parsons LJ, Fjorback LO, Kuyken W. Home practice in Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy and Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of participants' mindfulness practice and its association with outcomes. Behav Res Ther. 2017;95:29-41. Howard KI, Kopta SM, Krause MS, Orlinsky DE. The dose-effect relationship in psychotherapy. Am Psychol. 1986;41(2):159-64. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files OnlineSupplementaryTable1.doc OnlineSupplementaryTable2.doc Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Major revision 05 Oct, 2021 Reviews received at journal 02 Oct, 2021 Reviewers agreed at journal 22 Sep, 2021 Reviews received at journal 03 Aug, 2021 Reviewers agreed at journal 24 Jul, 2021 Reviewers invited by journal 27 May, 2021 Editor assigned by journal 27 May, 2021 Editor invited by journal 27 May, 2021 Submission checks completed at journal 27 May, 2021 First submitted to journal 08 May, 2021 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-506369","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":29628940,"identity":"63c3453e-e385-4560-b311-0e4a6975443b","order_by":0,"name":"Si-si Jiang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Sixth Hospital, Peking University Institute of Mental Health, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Si-si","middleName":"","lastName":"Jiang","suffix":""},{"id":29628941,"identity":"cb8761fd-7e00-4b55-9995-99e8973c7ece","order_by":1,"name":"Xue-hua Liu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Sixth Hospital, Peking University Institute of Mental Health, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xue-hua","middleName":"","lastName":"Liu","suffix":""},{"id":29628942,"identity":"2d865d5f-0a0a-4ceb-af22-65fc49200b38","order_by":2,"name":"Nan Han","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Beijing Chang Ping Hospital of Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nan","middleName":"","lastName":"Han","suffix":""},{"id":29628943,"identity":"591b635f-3d7c-4fc0-8fd8-8b3e10ba5648","order_by":3,"name":"Hai-jing Zhang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Sixth Hospital, Peking University Institute of Mental Health, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Hai-jing","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhang","suffix":""},{"id":29628944,"identity":"4b404ac9-7b4d-4cab-ad5e-b2eceb2f48ee","order_by":4,"name":"Wu-xiang Xie","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Clinical Research Institute, Peking University Health Science Center","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Wu-xiang","middleName":"","lastName":"Xie","suffix":""},{"id":29628945,"identity":"4bd8eee8-5d0d-4e92-85fb-c5fe7d49ed8c","order_by":5,"name":"Zhi-juan Xie","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University People’s Hospital","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Zhi-juan","middleName":"","lastName":"Xie","suffix":""},{"id":29628946,"identity":"84d8e31a-df53-4cb6-b065-1516861c42ed","order_by":6,"name":"Xin-yuan Lu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Sixth Hospital, Peking University Institute of Mental Health, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xin-yuan","middleName":"","lastName":"Lu","suffix":""},{"id":29628947,"identity":"8f7220f7-e980-4d8f-a26a-a096d2474be1","order_by":7,"name":"Xuan-zi Zhou","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Sixth Hospital, Peking University Institute of Mental Health, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xuan-zi","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhou","suffix":""},{"id":29628948,"identity":"0eebc9c5-0fc8-455b-9667-733bdde9277c","order_by":8,"name":"Yu-qi Zhao","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Sixth Hospital, Peking University Institute of Mental Health, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yu-qi","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhao","suffix":""},{"id":29628949,"identity":"39bd4275-8604-4e3d-839d-4cd63e029f98","order_by":9,"name":"Ai-deng Duan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Sixth Hospital, Peking University Institute of Mental Health, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ai-deng","middleName":"","lastName":"Duan","suffix":""},{"id":29628950,"identity":"8c36f2e6-f78e-4b5d-bbc6-c6c58bc15f9a","order_by":10,"name":"Shu-qin Zhao","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Sixth Hospital, Peking University Institute of Mental Health, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Shu-qin","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhao","suffix":""},{"id":29628951,"identity":"927a904b-0895-410e-9e60-ef1b4ea9fe9a","order_by":11,"name":"Zhi-cheng Zhang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Sixth Hospital, Peking University Institute of Mental Health, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Zhi-cheng","middleName":"","lastName":"Zhang","suffix":""},{"id":29628952,"identity":"2b58be6f-f342-4d70-9764-7416a342699d","order_by":12,"name":"Xue-bing Huang","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peking University Sixth Hospital, Peking University Institute of Mental Health, National Clinical Research Center for Mental Disorders (Peking University Sixth Hospital)","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xue-bing","middleName":"","lastName":"Huang","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2021-05-08 15:44:02","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-506369/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-506369/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":9843206,"identity":"1ceaace2-064b-4533-9969-b69c2b624048","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-06-01 18:14:32","extension":"jpg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":104449,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Participant flow chart","description":"","filename":"fig1.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-506369/v1/e9a9be10ec0477f831ef25e3.jpg"},{"id":9842951,"identity":"e8e2b48f-95d7-43ba-8ec6-5e732b9a7173","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-06-01 18:11:32","extension":"jpg","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":43883,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"Estimated marginal means for FFMQ and STAI-trait scores across time","description":"","filename":"fig2.jpg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-506369/v1/c810ee0b13db4d06cd0c9c86.jpg"},{"id":15673471,"identity":"bba7a12b-59d2-4af4-b53a-5c46326adc79","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-11-18 14:18:05","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":705475,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-506369/v1/2fd29007-9d89-4f15-bfb7-e2df2f815130.pdf"},{"id":9843207,"identity":"08e3ddd9-609b-403d-814b-e83a8003d820","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-06-01 18:14:32","extension":"doc","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":52224,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineSupplementaryTable1.doc","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-506369/v1/804f40197ac6e734c44d5389.doc"},{"id":9843208,"identity":"824d5345-f800-4bc8-b02e-a70cca32ccec","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2021-06-01 18:14:33","extension":"doc","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":66048,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"OnlineSupplementaryTable2.doc","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-506369/v1/d886ff3620aa85c5dc722df4.doc"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEffects of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy on Symptomatic Generalized Anxiety Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Background","content":"\u003cp\u003eGeneralized anxiety disorder (GAD) is characterized by chronic and persistent worry(1). Effective treatments for GAD include pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy(2, 3). Only 50%\u0026ndash;60% of GAD patients respond to pharmacotherapy, and 30%\u0026ndash;50% of GAD patients experience remission(4, 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe disadvantages of pharmacotherapy include side effects, premature discontinuation, and a significant risk of relapse(6, 7). A large proportion of patients prefer psychotherapy to pharmacotherapy. Among the various forms of psychotherapy, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is considered a first-line treatment for GAD(8, 9). Nevertheless, CBT is not widely offered in clinical practice. In addition to a shortage of trained CBT therapists, individual sessions are expensive in healthcare systems with limited resources(10). Thus, more treatments for GAD are needed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMindfulness is the awareness that emerges through intentionally focusing, in a non-judgmental way, on how things are in the present moment(11). Instead of changing thoughts themselves, the intension of mindfulness is to change one\u0026rsquo;s relationship with their thoughts(12). Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT), which combines the practice and principles of mindfulness with CBT components, was originally developed to prevent the recurrence of depression for patients in recovery(13). MBCT is currently recommended by NICE guidelines for the treatment of recurrent depression(13-15).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAlthough some randomized controlled studies (16) have evaluated the effects of Mindfulness-based interventions for treating GAD in adults, most of these had small sample sizes(17, 18), examined adults in a specific age group or demographic(19, 20), included participants with heterogeneous diagnoses including anxiety disorders other than GAD(19, 21). Furthermore, although MBCT and CBT have common features, evidence directly comparing their efficacy for the treatment of GAD is lacking (22-24). We designed the current study to address the above-mentioned limitations of previous research.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch objectives\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOur primary objective was to evaluate the effects of MBCT, adapted for treating GAD (MBCT-A), by comparing it with group CBT designed to treat symptomatic GAD (CBT-A). We hypothesized that MBCT-A would be as effective as CBT-A in improving symptoms of anxiety. Our other objectives were to investigate the effects of MBCT-A and CBT-A in terms of psychic and somatic anxiety symptoms, state and trait anxiety symptoms, depression symptoms, overall illness severity, quality of life and mindfulness. We included the CBT-A group for active comparison because CBT has been suggested to be a high-intensity intervention for GAD and it is recommended by current guidelines(9). Furthermore, CBT is considered to be the gold standard for evaluating the efficacy of new and promising interventions (25).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDesign\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study is a parallel randomized controlled trial with two groups: MBCT-A vs. CBT-A (with a 1:1 allocation ratio). We did not include a no-treatment control group because we were comparing a relatively new treatment with a well-established treatment, and we considered our study to be more ethical if all participants received some form of intervention (26).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Sixth Hospital of Peking University before initiation of the trial. Each participant was fully informed and agreed to the randomization process. Informed consent forms were obtained from all participants.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe trial was registered at chic.org.cn (registration number: ChiCTR1800019150, registration date: 27/10/2018).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePopulation and Recruitment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants were recruited from the Outpatient Department of the Sixth Hospital of Peking University from November 2018 to November 2019 via a) posters distributed in outpatient clinics and b) recommendations from psychiatrists who worked in the Sixth Hospital of Peking University but were not involved in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA trained research assistant first screened all interested participants by telephone or in-person appointments. Diagnostic screenings were then independently made by an attending psychiatrist in accordance with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV). The principal investigator (B.X.H) conducted a final screening using the study inclusion and exclusion criteria to determine eligibility.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll patients concurrently continued their regular outpatient psychiatry visits for medication management during the study period (treatment-as-usual, TAU) at the Sixth Hospital of Peking University. The regular outpatient psychiatry visits did not include psychotherapy, and the average consulting time was about 10 min per patient, with an average of one visit every two weeks.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe used the following \u003cstrong\u003einclusion criteria\u003c/strong\u003e:(a) Aged 18-65 years; (b) diagnosis of GAD; (c) score of \u0026ge;14 on the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA)(27); (d) medication for on a stable dose for \u0026ge;1 month; (e) ability to understand and communication in Chinese. \u003cstrong\u003eExclusion criteria were: \u003c/strong\u003e(a) Diagnosis of any organic mental disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, major depression disorder, or bipolar disorder; (b) abuse of alcohol or other substances in the past 12 months; (c) any conditions that were potentially life-threatening or could severely limit participation (e.g. serious suicidal ideation, antisocial personality disorder, severe or unstable medical illness, pregnancy, breastfeeding); (d) current engagement in psychological treatment for GAD; (e) a history of attending 4 or more mindfulness sessions in the past 2 years. Participants were withdrawn from the study if they (a) had any suicidal behavior or suicide attempts; (b) withdrew their informed consent; or (c) were absent for more than three therapy sessions during the study period.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRandomization Allocation, Concealment, and Blinding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRandomization was performed using computer-generated random numbers that were generated by an independent statistician. Sealed envelopes were used to conceal the randomization sequence. The intervention types were written on sheets of paper that were placed inside opaque envelopes. After the informed consent forms were signed, research assistants opened the envelopes in order and noted the group assignment for the corresponding participants. The participants were notified that the treatments received in both study groups could be helpful in improving anxiety symptoms.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Sixth Hospital of Peking University before initiation of the trial.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIntervention and Control \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIntervention: MBCT-A\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe adapted MBCT-A protocol followed the manual described by Segal, Williams, and Teasdale(13, 28). We made several adaptations to render the MBCT appropriate for treating GAD. These changes were developed on the basis of (1) the dissimilar characteristics between GAD and depression, (2) the different needs when attempting to improve current anxiety symptoms vs. preventing a relapse of depression, and 3) clinical experience. The first author (S.S.J) and co-first author (X.H.L) wrote the adapted manualized protocol, which largely reflected the classic protocol for MBCT.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eQualified instructors with more than two years of experience delivered the MBCT-A program. The MBCT-A instructors were supervised by 2 certified MBCT supervisors during the intervention period. The MBCT-A group attended weekly 2-hour sessions over an 8-week period with 20\u0026ndash;25 participants in each session. In the MBCT-A manual, the pre-course orientation information was integrated into Session one; psychoeducation about anxiety was integrated into Session four; one-day retreat part of the program was integrated into Session six. Practices in the MBCT-A included mindful eating, body scans, sitting meditation, 3-min breathing space exercises, mindful stretching, and mindful walking.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring the intervention period, participants in the MBCT-A group were given daily audio homework exercises. All participants were instructed to practice mindfulness meditation for 30 min a day and to report their daily mindfulness practice via a messaging and social media application (WeChat).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eControl: CBT-A\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe CBT-A program followed a manualized protocol originally authored by the corresponding author (X.B.H), that had been used successfully in previous clinical trials(29). The main aim of CBT is to change or challenge the \u0026ldquo;dysfunctional\u0026rdquo; thoughts related to generalized anxiety, and to introduce the participant to various relaxation techniques.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwo qualified therapists with either a psychiatry or psychotherapy background led each CBT-A group. The corresponding author X. B. H supervised the CBT-A therapists during the study period. Participants in the CBT-A group attended weekly 1.5 h sessions over 8 weeks with 10\u0026ndash;15 participants in each group. Each CBT-A session had a particular theme. Weekly homework was assigned at the end of each session, and was handed in to the therapists and discussed in the following session.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMeasurements \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe outcome measures were collected at baseline (T1), week 8 (post-intervention, T2), and at a 3-month follow-up assessment (T3). Four trained psychiatric residents who kept blind to patient\u0026rsquo;s treatment allocation conducted patient assessments. Demographic and baseline clinical information including age, sex, education history, marital status, ethnicity, residential location, religious beliefs, age of onset, course of GAD, and use of medication was collected using a questionnaire.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePrimary Outcome \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe primary outcomes were anxiety response and remission, as measured by the HAMA (27) at 8 weeks and at a 3-month follow-up assessment. The HAMA is a 14-item scale used to evaluate symptom severity in patients with anxiety disorders. For this study, remission was defined as a HAMA total score of less than 7, and response was defined as a \u0026ge; 50% decrease relative to the baseline.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSecondary Outcomes \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe secondary outcome measures included the total, psychological, and somatic anxiety symptoms measured by the HAMA, state and trait anxiety symptoms measured by the state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI-S, STAI-T), depressive symptoms measured by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), overall illness severity measured by the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scale, and quality of life measured by the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12). Mindfulness was measured using the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ), on which a higher total score (range 39\u0026ndash;195) suggests a higher level of mindfulness(30). This scale has been translated into Chinese and validated(30).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSample Size \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBecause no previous studies had compared MBCT with CBT for the treatment of GAD, we used the findings from two studies, one which compared the effects of CBT and medication(29) and the other which compared the effects of MBCT-A and medication(31), for our sample size calculation. Assuming the response rate for MBCT was 0.767 and the response rate for CBT was 0.636 with a type I error-set of 5% and a type II error-set of 20%, we calculated the sample size per group to be 57 participants. With a presumed drop-out rate of 20%, we aimed to recruit 69 participants per group.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Analysis \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll analyses were based on the intention-to-treat principle and statistics were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics ver. 22.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe baseline characteristics of the two groups were compared using an independent samples t-test or Mann-Whitney\u0026rsquo;s U test for continuous variables and the \u0026chi;2 test for categorical variables.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFor our primary analyses, we used the \u0026chi;2 test to analyze the response and remission rates in the two groups at each assessment time (8 weeks after the start of the treatment, 3-month follow-up). The effect size estimates were presented using Cohen's d, and were interpreted as small effects (0.2\u0026ndash;0.5), moderate effects (0.5 to 0.8), and large effects (\u0026ge; 0.8)(32). For the secondary analyses, we performed separate two-way mixed ANOVAs to compare the mean differences in all secondary outcomes. Group (MBCT-A vs. CBT-A) was used as a between-subjects factor and time (baseline, 8 weeks after treatment onset, 3-months follow-up) was used as a within-subjects factor. The Bonferroni post hoc test was used for post hoc comparisons at each assessment. Partial eta squared (\u0026eta;2p) values were calculated for all significant findings. Significance level was set at p \u0026lt; 0.05.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBaseline characteristics and dropout rates\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOut of the 682 screened participants, 168 (24.6%) were successfully recruited (Shown in Fig. 1). A total of 138 participants finally attended the intervention sessions, including 82 women and 56 men, with a mean age of 35.94 (SD = 11.05) years. Of all the recruited participants, 17.9% (14 and 16 in the MBCT-A and CBT-A groups, respectively) did not attend any intervention sessions. There was no difference in this proportion between the two groups. This was viewed as pre-treatment attrition and not included in the data analyses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe basic participant demographics and baseline clinical data for both groups are listed in Table 1. The baseline characteristics were not statistically different between the MBCT-A group (n = 69) and CBT-A group (n = 69).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere were 58 (84.1%) and 56 (81.2%) participants in the MBCT-A and CBT-A groups, respectively, who attended at least 6 out of the 8 sessions. Compared with the 114 participants who completed the treatment, the 24 participants who dropped out had a shorter course of GAD (p = 0.005) but no significant differences in other characteristics at baseline. The dropout rates in the MBCT-A and CBT-A groups were 15.9% and 18.8% at 8 weeks (p = 0.653) and 18.8% and 21.7% at the 3-month follow-up (p = 0.672), respectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1. Baseline participant data\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMBCT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e（\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003en=69\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e）\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCBT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e（\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003en=69\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e）\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eP\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAge, years, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e35.1 (10.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e36.8 (11.9)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.373\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFemale, n (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e38 (55.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e44 (63.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.386\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEducation, years, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e15.7 (3.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e15.1 (3.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.331\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMarital status, n (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003esingle\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e30 (43.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e19 (27.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.145\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003emarried\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e36 (52.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e46 (66.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003edivorced\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3 (4.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4 (5.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthnicity\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e（\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHan\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e）\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e,n (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e63 (91.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e68 (98.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.115\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLocation (city\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e）\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e,n (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e66 (95.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e66 (95.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.000\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eReligion (none-religious\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e）\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e,n (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e57 (82.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e59 (85.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.817\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAge of onset, years, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e29.5 (10.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e30.6 (11.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.534\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCourse of GAD, months, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e72.9 (95.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e73.9 (83.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.501\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAMA, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e24.1 (7.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e23.3 (7.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.377\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAMD, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.5 (5.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11.2 (4.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.653\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCGI-S, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.4 (0.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.3 (0.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.682\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSTAI-state, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e53.1 (14.9)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e50.6 (14.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.295\u003csup\u003eb\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSTAI-trait, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e55.7 (12.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e53.7 (10.7)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.326\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSF-12, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e21.2 (6.3)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e23.1 (6.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.071\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFFMQ, mean (SD)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e111.3 (14.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e112.0 (17.0)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.782\u003csup\u003ea\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUse of antidepressants ,n (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSSRI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e50 (72.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e53 (76.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.696\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSNRI\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e19 (27.5)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e16 (23.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUse of benzodiazepines, n (%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e24 (34.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e24 (34.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.000\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eUse of atypical antipsychotics , n(%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e11 (15.9)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e7 (10.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.449\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*p \u0026lt; 0.05. a Independent samples t-test. b Mann-Whitney\u0026rsquo;s U test.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePrimary outcomes\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAt 8 weeks, the HAMA remission rate in the MBCT-A group was significantly higher than that in the CBT-A group (63.8% in the MBCT-A group vs. 44.6% in the CBT-A group, p = 0.040, Cohen\u0026rsquo;s d = 0.39). However, the response rates were not significantly different (86.2% in the MBCT-A group vs. 80.4% in the CBT-A group, p = 0.402; Cohen\u0026rsquo;s d = 0.16) (shown in Table 2).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAt the 3-month follow-up assessment, neither the remission rate (48.2% in the MBCT-A group vs. 48.1% in the CBT-A group, p = 0.994, Cohen\u0026rsquo;s d = 0.19) nor the response rate (80.4% in the MBCT-A group vs. 74.1% in the CBT-A group, p = 0.432, Cohen\u0026rsquo;s d = 0.00) were statistically different between the two groups (shown in Table 2).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2. Primary outcomes\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable style=\"width: 640px;\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr style=\"mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-prop-change: 'jiang sisi' 20210508T0010;\"\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 176px;\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMBCT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCBT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEffect size\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eP value\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr style=\"mso-yfti-irow: 1; mso-prop-change: 'jiang sisi' 20210508T0010;\"\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 176px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e8weeks\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN=58\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eN=56\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e(Cohen\u0026rsquo;s d)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr style=\"mso-yfti-irow: 2; mso-prop-change: 'jiang sisi' 20210508T0010;\"\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 176px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAMA response(n,%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e50 (86.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e45 (80.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.157\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.402\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr style=\"mso-yfti-irow: 3; mso-prop-change: 'jiang sisi' 20210508T0010;\"\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 176px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAMA remission(n,%) \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e37 (63.8)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e25 (44.6)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.392\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.040*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr style=\"mso-yfti-irow: 4; mso-prop-change: 'jiang sisi' 20210508T0010;\"\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 176px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3months\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eN=56\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eN=54\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr style=\"mso-yfti-irow: 5; mso-row-margin-right: .44%; mso-prop-change: 'jiang sisi' 20210508T0010;\"\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 176px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAMA response(n,%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e45 (80.4)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e40(74.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.150\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.432\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr style=\"mso-yfti-irow: 6; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes; mso-row-margin-right: .44%; mso-prop-change: 'jiang sisi' 20210508T0010;\"\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 176px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAMA remission(n,%)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e27 (48.2)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 104px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e26 (48.1)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.191\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.994\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*means p＜0.05\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSecondary outcomes\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe two-way mixed ANOVAs with time as the repeated measure, intervention group as the between-subjects factor, and HAMA total score, HAMA psychic score, HAMA somatic score, HAMD score, and SF-12 score as the dependent variables all revealed a significant main effect of time but no significant intervention group \u0026times; time interaction (shown in Table 3). To further explore the time effect, we performed pairwise comparisons with the Bonferroni correction. Both groups showed significant improvements in HAMA total, psychic, and somatic scores, HAMD scores, and SF-12 scores between the baseline and immediate after-treatment assessments (T1 to T2) and between the baseline and 3-month follow-up assessments (T1 to T3) (shown in Online Supplementary Table 1).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe two-way mixed ANOVAs with time as the repeated measure, the intervention group as the between-subjects factor, and STAI-S, STAI-T, CGI-S, and FFMQ scores as dependent variables revealed a significant main effect of time and a significant intervention group \u0026times; time interaction (shown in Online Supplementary Table 2). Therefore, a simple effects analysis was performed in STAI-S, STAI-T, CGI-S, and FFMQ scores.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe CGI-S scores revealed significant group simple effects at the 8-week assessment, F(1,53) = 1.403, P = 0.001 (not shown in Online Supplementary Table 2). This indicates that the MBCT-A group exhibited a significantly greater decrease in CGI-S scores compared with the CBT-A group immediately after the intervention. However, these enhanced improvements had not persisted at the three-month follow-up assessment in the MBCT-A group, as indicated by the lack of a significant difference between the two groups at this time point.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eComparing the FFMQ scores revealed a significant simple effect of group at 8-weeks, F(1,53) = 5.104, P = 0.028 (not shown in Online Supplementary Table 2). Thus, while the level of mindfulness increased in both groups immediately post-treatment, the increase was significantly greater in the MBCT-A group.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere were no significant group simple effects in STAI-S, STAI-T scores at the 8-week assessment and no significant group simple effects in all STAI-S, STAI-T, CGI-S, and FFMQ scores at the 3-month follow-up assessments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3. Secondary outcomes: the two-way mixed ANOVA results.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\"\u003e\n\u003ctbody\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003evariable\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"3\" width=\"205\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMain effects for time\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"2\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMain effects for group\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd colspan=\"3\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eInteraction(Time\u0026times;Group)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"56\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eP\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003epartial \u0026eta;2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eP\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eF\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eP\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003epartial \u0026eta;2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAMA total\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"56\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e302.98\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.737\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.26\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.610\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.14\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.127\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.019\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAMA psychic\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"56\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e198.63\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.648\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.01\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.912\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.78\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.171\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.016\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAMA somatic\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"56\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e237.60\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.687\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.56\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.455\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.38\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.255\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.013\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHAMD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"56\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e82.79\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.434\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.02\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.888\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.16\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.317\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.011\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCGI-S\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"56\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e195.80\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.645\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.94\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.089\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5.80\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.004*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.051\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSTAI-S\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"56\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e80.25\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.426\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.11\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.741\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e3.56\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.030*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.032\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSTAI-T\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"56\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e108.74\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.502\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.18\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.671\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e4.28\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.015*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.038\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSF-12\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"56\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e99.94\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.481\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.27\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.603\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.03\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.134\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.018\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003ctr\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"121\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFFMQ\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd width=\"56\"\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e53.55\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.000*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.331\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e1.28\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.261\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e5.26\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.006*\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003ctd\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e0.046\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/td\u003e\n\u003c/tr\u003e\n\u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eListwise deletion resulted in a final sample size of. n = 110\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e*means p＜0.05\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to compare MBCT with high intensity, evidence-based group CBT, which is considered the first-line of psychotherapy for treatment of GAD(2, 3, 9). We obtained three main findings:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFirst, with CBT-A as an active control, MBCT-A was effective in reducing anxiety symptoms in symptomatic GAD patients. After the 8-week treatment period, 86.2% of the patients in the MBCT-A group and 80.4% of the patients in the CBT-A group achieved a response, and 63.8% and 44.6%, respectively, achieved remission. Given that all of the participants had significant anxiety symptoms (HAMA scores higher than 14) under TAU at baseline, we interpreted the improvement as an effect of the treatment. MBCT-A was also effective in improving a wider range of outcomes, including well-being, overall illness severity, depression symptoms, and state and trait anxiety symptoms. These findings are not only concordant with our hypothesis, but are also in line with previous studies demonstrating the effectiveness of MBCT in treating GAD(20, 25).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSecond, at the 8-week assessment, the MBCT-A group had a significantly higher remission rate and a greater reduction in overall illness severity. However, at the 3-month follow-up visit, no differences between the two groups remained statistically significant. One plausible explanation for this difference is the request that participants in the MBCT-A group report their mindfulness practice in a WeChat group on a daily basis, which could have promoted engagement. It is widely accepted that for MBI participants, there is a significant association between the extent of practice and positive intervention outcomes(33). By contrast, in the CBT-A group, weekly homework was handed in to the therapists and discussed in the following session. Thus, this difference in the homework expectations may account for the advantage of MBCT-A at the 8-week visit.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, at the 3-month follow-up visit, there was a drop (63.8\u0026ndash;48.2%) in the HAMA remission rate in the MBCT-A group but not the CBT-A group. A previous study(25) found that, compared with psycho-education with exercise control, MBCT led to short-term but not long-term benefits for patients with chronic insomnia. This is not surprising, as vigorous practice is essential for the beneficial effects of MBCT. These data indicate that MBCT should not be delivered in a one-time or short-term way, but rather, a long-term pattern should be encouraged and integrated via deliberate lifestyle modification.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFinally, unlike anxiety symptoms, the trait-related outcomes, including trait anxiety and trait mindfulness, showed further improvements at the 3-month follow-up visit compared with at 8 weeks, although this was not statistically significant (shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;2). A previous study found similar changes in anxiety symptoms among GAD patients randomly assigned to MBCT, CBT-based psychoeducation, or usual care(20, 25). Thus, the benefits of MBCT may not be limited to symptomology, but may promote a positive change in personality. Indeed, we found a significant improvement in the quality of life, which was reflected in the change in SF-12 scores. To some extent, MBCT may reflect cultural context, core values, and attitudes regarding life.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOur study has several strengths. To our knowledge, it is the first study with a relatively large sample size to compare MBCT and high intensity CBT among Chinese GAD patients. Additionally, there was high homogeneity in the participant diagnoses, adding to the generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, the interventions were delivered by trained and experienced instructors in accordance with standard protocols, thus demonstrating implementation of the treatment for future reference.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOur study also has several limitations. First, we did not have a no-treatment control or a wait-list control. Current evidence suggests that GAD is a chronic condition that is unlikely to improve naturally over time(1). Considering this and that we were comparing a new treatment with a well-established one, we thought it more ethical to provide treatment to both groups(26). Second, due to practical difficulties, we did not collect data on the mindfulness exercises in the MBCT-A group or the behavior exercises in the CBT-A group. Third, as the two groups had multiple and overlapping specific and non-specific components, which components led to the positive effects was not clear. Further study is necessary to elucidate this point. Finally, we did not match the total treatment time between the two groups. As shown in a previous study(34), more treatment time may produce larger effects. We chose not to match the treatment time between the two groups in consideration of clinical practical applications.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":" \u003cp\u003eMBCT was effective in reducing anxiety symptoms in GAD patients. While MBCT appeared to elicit more short-term benefits, CBT was associated with greater long-term benefits during the follow-up period. Taking into account the differences in treatment priorities and components between MBCT and CBT, our results suggest that these two evidence-based interventions are beneficial for treating GAD patients.\u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"List Of Abbreviations","content":"\u003cp\u003eMBCT: Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy; GAD: generalized anxiety disorder; CBT: Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; TAU: treatment-as-usual; HAMA: Hamilton Anxiety Scale; STAI: the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; HAMD: Hamilton Depression Scale; CGI-S: Clinical Global Impression Scale; SF-12: 12-item Short-Form Health Survey; FFMQ: Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire; MBCT-A: MBCT, adapted for treating GAD; CBT-A: CBT designed to treat GAD; DSM-IV: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition; LB: lower bound; UB: upper bound; SE: standard error.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical approval and consent to participate\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Sixth Hospital of Peking University before the conduction of the trial (NO.2018-29). All procedures were conducted ethically in accordance with the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki. All participants provided written informed consent to participate in this research.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent for publication\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePublication consent was obtained from all authors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll data needed to support the conclusions in the paper are present in the paper and/or the Supplementary Materials.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis work was supported by the Capital Health Research and Development of Special Fund Program (No.2018\u0026ndash;2-4114).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthors' contributions \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eXue-bing Huang designed the study, provided supervision for CBT group, and conducted revisions on the manuscript. Si-si Jiang and Xue-hua Liu contributed to the study design. Wu-xiang Xie contributed to the randomization, allocation, concealment, and blinding processes. Si-si Jiang and Xue-hua Liu were MBCT instructors and Zhi-juan Xie, Nan Han, Hai-jing Zhang, Xin-Yuan Lu, and Xuan-zi Zhou were CBT therapists. Measurement and data collection were performed by Yu-qi Zhao, Ai-deng Duan, Shu-qin Zhao, and Zhi-cheng Zhang. Si-si Jiang conducted data analysis and wrote a draft of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was supported by the Capital Health Research and Development of Special Fund Program (No. 2018\u0026ndash;2-4114). We thank Dr. S. Helen Ma and Dr. Yen-Hui Lee for providing MBCT supervision, and we thank Qin Si, Shu-zhe Zhou, and other colleagues for their assistance throughout the study period. We would also like to thank the outpatient department of the Sixth Hospital of Peking University for their support.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eStein MB, Sareen J. CLINICAL PRACTICE. Generalized Anxiety Disorder. The New England journal of medicine. 2015;373(21):2059-68.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKatzman MA, Bleau P, Blier P, Chokka P, Kjernisted K, Van Ameringen M, et al. Canadian clinical practice guidelines for the management of anxiety, posttraumatic stress and obsessive-compulsive disorders. BMC Psychiatry. 2014;14 Suppl 1:S1.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBandelow B, Sher L, Bunevicius R, Hollander E, Kasper S, Zohar J, et al. Guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder in primary care. Int J Psychiatry Clin Pract. 2012;16(2):77-84.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eReinhold JA, Rickels K. Pharmacological treatment for generalized anxiety disorder in adults: an update. Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy. 2015;16(11):1669-81.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTomasi J, Lisoway AJ, Zai CC, Harripaul R, Muller DJ, Zai GCM, et al. Towards precision medicine in generalized anxiety disorder: Review of genetics and pharmaco(epi)genetics. J Psychiatr Res. 2019;119:33-47.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKatzman MA. Current considerations in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder. CNS Drugs. 2009;23(2):103-20.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBaldwin DS, Hou R, Gordon R, Huneke NT, Garner M. Pharmacotherapy in Generalized Anxiety Disorder: Novel Experimental Medicine Models and Emerging Drug Targets. CNS Drugs. 2017;31(4):307-17.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCuijpers P, Sijbrandij M, Koole S, Huibers M, Berking M, Andersson G. Psychological treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev. 2014;34(2):130-40.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSchool of H, Related Research UoS. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Guidance. Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Anxiety: Management of Anxiety (Panic Disorder, with or without Agoraphobia, and Generalised Anxiety Disorder) in Adults in Primary, Secondary and Community Care. London: National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care (UK) Copyright \u0026copy; 2004, National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care.; 2004.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e\n\u003col start=\"10\"\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSundquist J, Lilja \u0026Aring;, Palm\u0026eacute;r K, Memon AA, Wang X, Johansson LM, et al. Mindfulness group therapy in primary care patients with depression, anxiety and stress and adjustment disorders: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2015;206(2):128-35.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKabat-Zinn J, Hanh TN. Full Catastrophe Living (Revised Edition): Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness: Random House Publishing Group; 2013.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim SM, Park JM, Seo HJ. Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction for adults with sleep disturbance: a protocol for an update of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. 2016;5:51.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSegal ZV, Williams JMG, Teasdale JD. Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Depression, First Edition: A New Approach to Preventing Relapse: Guilford Publications; 2002.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChiesa A, Serretti A. Mindfulness based cognitive therapy for psychiatric disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychiatry Res. 2011;187(3):441-53.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilliams JM, Kuyken W. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy: a promising new approach to preventing depressive relapse. Br J Psychiatry. 2012;200(5):359-60.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGhahari S, Mohammadi-Hasel K, Malakouti SK, Roshanpajouh M. Mindfulness-based Cognitive Therapy for Generalised Anxiety Disorder: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. East Asian Arch Psychiatry. 2020;30(2):52-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKabat-Zinn J, Massion AO, Kristeller J, Peterson LG, Fletcher KE, Pbert L, et al. Effectiveness of a meditation-based stress reduction program in the treatment of anxiety disorders. The American journal of psychiatry. 1992;149(7):936-43.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEvans S, Ferrando S, Findler M, Stowell C, Smart C, Haglin D. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for generalized anxiety disorder. J Anxiety Disord. 2008;22(4):716-21.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArch JJ, Ayers CR, Baker A, Almklov E, Dean DJ, Craske MG. Randomized clinical trial of adapted mindfulness-based stress reduction versus group cognitive behavioral therapy for heterogeneous anxiety disorders. Behav Res Ther. 2013;51(4-5):185-96.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWong SY, Yip BH, Mak WW, Mercer S, Cheung EY, Ling CY, et al. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy v. group psychoeducation for people with generalised anxiety disorder: randomised controlled trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2016;209(1):68-75.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKoszycki D, Benger M, Shlik J, Bradwejn J. Randomized trial of a meditation-based stress reduction program and cognitive behavior therapy in generalized social anxiety disorder. Behav Res Ther. 2007;45(10):2518-26.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHoge EA, Bui E, Marques L, Metcalf CA, Morris LK, Robinaugh DJ, et al. Randomized controlled trial of mindfulness meditation for generalized anxiety disorder: effects on anxiety and stress reactivity. J Clin Psychiatry. 2013;74(8):786-92.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDahlin M, Andersson G, Magnusson K, Johansson T, Sj\u0026ouml;gren J, H\u0026aring;kansson A, et al. Internet-delivered acceptance-based behaviour therapy for generalized anxiety disorder: A randomized controlled trial. Behav Res Ther. 2016;77:86-95.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeMartini J, Patel G, Fancher TL. Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Ann Intern Med. 2019;170(7):ITC49-ITC64.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTovote KA, Fleer J, Snippe E, Peeters AC, Emmelkamp PM, Sanderman R, et al. Individual mindfulness-based cognitive therapy and cognitive behavior therapy for treating depressive symptoms in patients with diabetes: results of a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes care. 2014;37(9):2427-34.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKazdin AE. Research Design in Clinical Psychology: Allyn and Bacon; 2003.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHamilton M. The assessment of anxiety states by rating. Br J Med Psychol. 1959;32(1):50-5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSegal ZV, Williams JMG, Teasdale JD, Kabat-Zinn J. Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy for Depression: Guilford Publications; 2012.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eXie ZJ, Han N, Law S, Li ZW, Chen SY, Xiao JP, et al. The efficacy of group cognitive-behavioural therapy plus duloxetine for generalised anxiety disorder versus duloxetine alone. Acta Neuropsychiatr. 2019;31(6):316-24.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeng Y-Q, Liu X-H, Rodriguez MA, Xia C-Y. The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire: Psychometric Properties of the Chinese Version. Mindfulness. 2011;2(2):123-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi X. A randomized controlled study of Mindful-based Group therapy for 60 Inpatients with Generalized Anxiety Disorder [Master]: SOOCHOW UNIVERSITY; 2015.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1988.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eParsons CE, Crane C, Parsons LJ, Fjorback LO, Kuyken W. Home practice in Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy and Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of participants' mindfulness practice and its association with outcomes. Behav Res Ther. 2017;95:29-41.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHoward KI, Kopta SM, Krause MS, Orlinsky DE. The dose-effect relationship in psychotherapy. Am Psychol. 1986;41(2):159-64.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychiatry","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"bpsy","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychiatry](http://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/bpsy/default.aspx","title":"BMC Psychiatry","twitterHandle":"@BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Mindfulness, Generalized anxiety disorder, Cognitive behavioral therapy, Treatment","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-506369/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-506369/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBackground: \u003c/strong\u003eMindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) is a promising treatment for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is currently considered a first-line treatment for GAD. The objective of this study was to examine the efficacy of MBCT in symptomatic GAD patients compared with CBT for a variety of outcomes of anxiety symptoms, as well as depressive symptoms, overall illness severity, quality of life and mindfulness. \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMethods: \u003c/strong\u003eAdult patients with GAD (n = 138) were randomized to a MBCT or CBT group. Both groups received either MBCT or CBT in addition to treatment-as-usual (TAU). The primary outcomes were the anxiety response and remission rates, as measured using the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA). Secondary outcomes included scores on the HAMA, the state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI), the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD), the Severity Subscale of the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI-S), and the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) , as well as mindfulness measured by the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ). Assessments were performed at baseline, 8 weeks after treatment, and at a 3-month follow-up. For primary analyses, response and remission rates were analyzed by the χ2 test in the two groups at each assessment time. For the secondary analyses, separate two-way mixed ANOVAs were performed to compare the mean differences in all secondary outcomes. \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResults:\u003c/strong\u003e The anxiety remission rate of the two groups significantly differed (63.8% in the MBCT group vs. 44.6% in the CBT group, p = 0.040, Cohen’s d = 0.39) but not in anxiety response rate (86.2% vs. 80.4%, p = 0.402; Cohen’s d = 0.16) at 8 weeks. Overall illness severity and mindfulness were significantly different between the groups at 8 weeks. There were no significant differences between the two groups at the 3-month follow-up. \u003cstrong\u003eConclusions:\u003c/strong\u003e Our data indicate that MBCT was effective in reducing anxiety symptoms in GAD patients. While MBCT appeared to have better short-term benefits, the long-term benefits of CBT may be superior.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTrial registration: \u003c/strong\u003eregistered at chic.org.cn (registration number: ChiCTR1800019150, registration date: 27/10/2018).\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Effects of Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy on Symptomatic Generalized Anxiety Disorder: A Randomized Controlled Trial","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2021-06-01 18:11:31","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-506369/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Major revision","date":"2021-10-05T12:43:59+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2021-10-03T01:17:50+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"89263ac5-7002-46cc-9d76-9df8fa081c71","date":"2021-09-22T11:41:41+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2021-08-04T00:11:32+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"b1606c95-66a6-4e87-8b73-91a2baba3a3c","date":"2021-07-24T13:30:23+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2021-05-27T13:01:38+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2021-05-27T12:53:48+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvited","content":"","date":"2021-05-27T09:00:56+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2021-05-27T08:57:54+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"BMC Psychiatry","date":"2021-05-08T15:29:03+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"bmc-psychiatry","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"bpsy","sideBox":"Learn more about [BMC Psychiatry](http://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/)","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/bpsy/default.aspx","title":"BMC Psychiatry","twitterHandle":"@BMC_series","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"BMC Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"2cae9b7c-c33f-4238-8f85-18b2314f4b59","owner":[],"postedDate":"June 1st, 2021","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[{"id":4675023,"name":"Psychiatry"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2022-07-05T12:29:23+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2021-06-01 18:11:31","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-506369","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-506369","identity":"rs-506369","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"_2-kVJe1T_tPrBINL-cwx","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}