medRxiv (Medicine)
2026-06-15
DOI: HASH:f2c0244b05fd210ff3c7663d954abd03
Background. Depression affects an estimated 332 million people worldwide and is a leading cause of disability, with up to 80% of major depressive episodes preceded by an identifiable adverse life event [17,18]. First-line treatments target symptoms rather than the precipitating event and are resource-intensive: standard CBT averages roughly 12 sessions, and antidepressant discontinuation carries relapse rates near 35% at six months [8]. These limitations create a clear rationale for brief, structured interventions that address the cognitive and somatic sequelae of adverse life events directly. Painhunting therapy is one such intervention, in which each session targets a discrete adverse event through a structured incident-processing procedure. Methods. We conducted a two-arm, parallel-group, single-site randomised controlled trial comparing Painhunting therapy (Arm A, immediate; n=42) with a waitlist control (Arm B, delayed; n=42) in adults with PHQ-9 >= 9 and active psychological distress related to an adverse life event. After the primary endpoint at T2 (approximately two weeks post-randomisation), Arm B crossed over to active treatment, with T3 as the post-crossover endpoint at approximately four weeks. The primary outcome was PHQ-9 at T2 (between-arm contrast); secondary outcomes were ICG, GAD-7, WHO-DAS 2.0 (12-item), and the Global Impression of Change (GIC). Pre-specified analyses included intention-to-treat, per-protocol, and single-exclusion sensitivity populations. Results. Eighty-four participants were randomised (198 applications, 134 completed screening questionnaire, 119 passed psychometric screening). At T2, mean PHQ-9 was 2.32 (SD 2.59) in Arm A and 16.56 (SD 6.76) in Arm B, yielding an ITT between-arm Cohen d = 2.78 (95% CI 2.19-3.76, p < 0.001). Within-arm paired reductions during each arm's active-treatment window reproduced this magnitude (Arm A T0 to T2 change 14.71, Morris d = 2.80; Arm B T2 to T3 change 14.19, Morris d = 2.77, eligible n=26). Treatment gains were durable at the T4 follow-up (week 8). Aligning each arm to its own end-of-treatment timepoint, the off-treatment drift to week 8 was almost identical between arms: Arm A rose 0.78 points from T2 to T4 (2.19 to 2.97, n=37) and Arm B rose 1.59 points from T3 to T4 (4.74 to 6.33, n=27), the latter falling to 0.77 points once a single documented relapse case (R59) is excluded (4.81 to 5.58, n=26). This small off-treatment rebound then stabilised rather than continuing: Arm A was essentially unchanged from T3 to T4 (change +0.05), with concordant maintenance on ICG, GAD-7, and WHO-DAS. At T4, 68% of Arm A and 41% of Arm B remained in remission (PHQ-9 < 5). Secondary measures (ICG, GAD-7, WHO-DAS) moved in the same direction and to comparable magnitude at every timepoint. The waitlist window in Arm B showed essentially no change on any measure (PHQ-9 change 0.22, p = 0.81). Sensitivity analyses excluding six sub-threshold T2 cases, the single treated-in-error case (R82), the R59 relapse case, and one late T2 submitter left all conclusions unchanged. Conclusions. Painhunting therapy produced large and statistically robust reductions in depression, complicated grief, anxiety, and functional disability over a brief course of three to four sessions, with effect sizes substantially exceeding benchmarks reported for established first-line psychotherapies including CBT and EMDR. Critically, these gains persisted at the week-8 follow-up: depression scores in the immediate-treatment arm were essentially unchanged from four weeks to eight weeks post-randomisation, indicating that the benefit reflects durable change rather than a transient post-session dip. Treatment-window concordance between arms, durability of gains at one month off-treatment, and the flat waitlist trajectory together strengthen the evidence for genuine efficacy rather than spontaneous remission. Baseline covariates including therapeutic alliance, treatment expectancy, self-efficacy, age, and sex showed near-zero associations with outcome, reducing the plausibility of allegiance bias or expectancy effects as primary drivers. The differential retention between arms (88% vs 64% at T3) is attributable to the waitlist design and is discussed as a limitation. These findings support proceeding to a confirmatory active-comparator trial against manualized CBT. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT07490691, prospectively registered.