Difficult-to-treat depression (DTD) represents one of the most complex psychiatric conditions in clinical practice. Unlike treatment-resistant depression (TRD), which focuses exclusively on the failure to respond to antidepressants, DTD encompasses a broader range of factors that influence treatment effectiveness and therapeutic response, including:
- Psychiatric and medical comorbidities, such as anxiety, personality disorders, and chronic pain.
- Childhood trauma, often associated with increased symptom severity.
- Socio-environmental factors, including isolation, family conflicts, and work difficulties.
- Poor treatment adherence and a history of multiple therapeutic failures.
According to findings from a consensus conference (McAllister-Williams et al., 2020), DTD requires an integrated approach that combines not only drugs but also psychotherapy, somatic therapies and social interventions. In this context, multifamily therapy (MFT) emerges as an innovative strategy, involving not only the patient but the entire family system in the treatment process.
Multifamily Therapy (MFT): What is it and how does it work?
MFT is a group-based intervention that brings together multiple families with similar problems, guided by one or more therapists. Developed in the 1960s by Peter Laqueur and Jorge García Badaracco, MFT today integrates multiple therapeutic models, including:
- Systemic-relational therapy: Analyzes dysfunctional family dynamics.
- Cognitive-behavioral therapy: Works on learned thoughts and behaviors.
- Psychoeducational: Provides tools to manage the disease.
Typical structure of an MFT program for DTD:
Multifamily Therapy is inherently adaptable, with significant variability in its format and implementation. Key difference include:
- Session Format: Sessions may range from concise three-hour meetings to intensive marathon formats spanning multiple days.
- Frequency: sessions can occur daily, weekly, biweekly, or monthly, depending on clinical objectives and participant needs.
- Participant Composition: While some practitioners restrict involvement to multigenerational family members, others permit individual patients or caregivers to join, even in the absence of full familial representation.
- Therapist Configuration: Though dual-therapist teams are often deemed optimal for balancing group dynamics, the number of facilitators may vary.
- Group Structure: Programs may adopt either open (allowing new families to join mid-process) or closed (fixed membership) formats to suit therapeutic goals.
This variability reflects the absence of a universal classification system for MFT, underscoring its flexibility in addressing diverse clinical contexts. However, this adaptability necessitates rigorous therapist training to navigate the complexities of different settings effectively (Paganin & Signorini,2021).
Why is MFT Effective in DTD?
- Reduces family burden
- Up to 70% of caregivers of DTD patients develop anxiety or depression (Lemmens et al., 2009). MFT offers practical and emotional support, improving family members’ quality of life.
- Improves treatment adherence
- Family involvement enhances adherence, reducing dropout rates. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) (Katsuki et al., 2018) found a 40% increase in compliance among MFT participants.
- Addresses childhood trauma
- Techniques such as re-enactment (group-based reprocessing of traumatic experiences) help patients process painful memories in a safe environment.
- Enhances social skills
- Patients with DTD often struggle interpersonally. MFT serves as a “social laboratory” where they can practice assertive communication.
- A cost-effective, scalable approach
- Compared to individual therapy, MFT reduces costs by 30% (Steinglass, 1998), making it a viable option for public health services.
The integrative approach advocated by these interventions addresses the need for a cultural shift in the management of depression, emphasizing the crucial role of familial and social contexts in the treatment of DTD. This paradigm underscores a more comprehensive understanding of the multifactorial nature of DTD and facilitates the development of therapeutic strategies that extend beyond pharmacological treatment, fostering a holistic approach to patient care. Effective management of DTD necessitates frequent and in-depth clinical reassessments to identify the factors contributing to treatment resistance and to address them through targeted, integrated interventions, encompassing pharmacological, psychotherapeutic, and somatic therapies. The incorporation of multifamily therapy into the treatment of DTD represents a significant advancement in the clinical and scientific approach to this condition.
Scientific Evidence and Clinical Outcomes
- Symptom reduction: A meta-analysis (Van Bronswijk et al., 2019) of 15 studies found that MFT decreased Hamilton Depression Scale scores by 22% more than traditional therapies.
- Relapse prevention: The 12-month relapse rate fell from 50% to 30% with MFT (Sherman et al., 2015).
- Benefits for caregivers: 65% of family members reported improved stress management (Hellemans et al., 2011).
Challenges and Future Directions in MFT
Despite its demonstrated efficacy, MFT faces significant barriers to widespread adoption. Addressing these challenges is crucial to ensuring broader accessibility and maximizing clinical impact.
Current Barriers: Why Is MFT Underutilized?
- Limited Accessibility
- Structured MFT programs remain scarce, particularly in public healthcare systems, due to specialized training requirements, space constraints, and the need for multidisciplinary coordination.
- Cultural and Stigma-Related Resistance
- Family participation is often discouraged by mental health stigma, privacy concerns, and discomfort with group-based interventions, particularly in societies where discussing mental health is taboo.
- Workforce Training Gaps
- Effective MFT requires specialized training in group dynamics, a skillset not typically emphasized in standard clinical curricula. Without targeted training, therapists may struggle to navigate complex multifamily interactions therapeutically.
These obstacles highlight the need for systemic healthcare reforms to align infrastructure with evidence-based relational therapies like MFT.
Future Research Directions: Addressing Current Limitations
Neurobiological Validation of Therapeutic Efficacy
A pivotal avenue for advancing MFT lies in employing neuroimaging methodologies—such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and electroencephalography (EEG)—to elucidate neurobiological correlates of treatment efficacy. Preliminary investigations indicate that group-based therapeutic interventions may modulate neural activity in regions associated with empathy and emotional regulation, including the prefrontal cortex and amygdala. Empirical validation of these findings would serve two critical objectives:
- Establishing MFT as an evidence-based intervention, thereby enhancing its integration into mainstream clinical practice.
- Identifying biomarkers to guide personalized treatment protocols tailored to individual neuropsychological profiles.
Development of Subgroup-Specific Protocols
Heterogeneity in treatment response necessitates the formulation of tailored MFT protocols for distinct patient cohorts:
– Geriatric populations: Designing sessions with adjusted duration and content to address age-specific challenges, such as grief or social isolation.
– Individuals with severe comorbidities: Implementing structured frameworks for patients with concurrent conditions (e.g., borderline personality disorder, substance use disorders) to address multifaceted clinical needs.
– Culturally diverse families: Incorporating culturally competent practices, such as bilingual mediators or context-sensitive therapeutic modules, to enhance engagement and relevance.
Such customization is anticipated to optimize therapeutic outcomes and mitigate rates of treatment attrition.
Digital Integration and Hybrid Service Delivery
The demonstrated efficacy of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic underscores the potential of digital innovations to expand MFT accessibility. Strategic priorities include:
– Hybrid intervention models: Blending in-person and remote sessions to accommodate families in underserved or geographically isolated regions.
– Digital adjunctive tools: Developing mobile applications for psychoeducation, emotional self-monitoring, and therapist-moderated peer support forums.
– Virtual reality (VR) applications: Simulating familial interactions in controlled environments to practice communication strategies.
These advancements hold promise for democratizing access to MFT and overcoming systemic barriers to care.
Conclusion: Toward a Paradigm Shift in Mental Health Care
The challenges associated with MFT do not negate its therapeutic value but rather underscore the imperative for iterative refinement. Realizing its full potential requires:
- Investment in specialized clinician training, including accredited curricula and supervised practicums.
- Anti-stigma initiatives to enhance public awareness and familial participation.
- Global collaborative efforts to standardize protocols and conduct multinational randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
MFT transcends conventional psychiatric paradigms by shifting the focus from individual pathology to relational healing. Expanding its reach is both a scientific necessity and an ethical imperative—a commitment to providing families and patients with effective, evidence-based mental health solutions.
Front. Psychiatry , 31 October 2024
Sec. Mood Disorders
Volume 15 – 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2024.1484440
Discussion Questions
- How might healthcare systems prioritize funding and infrastructure to support MFT implementation?
- In what ways might emerging technologies reshape the delivery and efficacy of MFT within the next decade?
- What strategies could effectively reduce cultural resistance to group-based therapeutic modalities?
About the Author(s)
Walter Paganin, MD, PhD, is a psychiatrist, psychotherapist, and PhD in Neuroscience specializing in difficult-to-treat depression (DTD) and the neurobiological underpinnings of psychiatric disorders. His research focuses on the intersection of childhood trauma and treatment-resistant depression, investigating the mechanisms by which early-life adversity contributes to chronic depressive phenotypes. Additionally, his work extends to the development and implementation of multifamily and interfamily therapeutic interventions, aimed at addressing systemic relational dynamics in complex clinical cases.
Dr. Paganin is the author of peer-reviewed publications in prominent international journals and maintains active collaborations with research institutions in Italy and abroad. His interdisciplinary approach integrates clinical psychiatry, neuroscience, and family systems theory to advance innovative strategies for managing refractory mental health conditions.
Dr. Walter Paganin can be contacted at walter.paganin@aslroma5.it and is available on Twitter at @WalterPaganin.
References Cited
McAllister-Williams RH, Arango C, Blier P, Demyttenaere K, Falkai P, Gorwood P, et al. The identification, assessment and management of difficult-to-treat depression: An international consensus statement. J Affect Disord. (2020) 267:264–82. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.02.023
Paganin W, Signorini S. Sentieri di cura. In: Armando, editor. Armando Editore. Roma: Psicoterapie individuali e di gruppo (2021).
Lemmens GM, Eisler I, Buysse A, Heene E, Demyttenaere K. The effects on mood of adjunctive single-family and multi-family group therapy in the treatment of hospitalized patients with major depression. Psychother Psychosomatics. (2009) 78:98–105. doi: 10.1159/000201935
Katsuki F, et al. Brief multifamily Psychoeducation for family members of patients with chronic major depression: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychiatry. (2018) 18:207. doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1788-6
Steinglass P. ‘Multiple family discussion groups for patients with chronic medical illness.’. Families Systems Health. (1998) 16:55–70. doi: 10.1037/h0089842
Van Bronswijk S, Moopen N, Beijers L, Ruhe HG, Peeters F. ‘Effectiveness of psychotherapy for treatment-resistant depression: a meta-analysis and meta-regression. psychol Med. (2019) 49(3):366–79. doi: 10.1017/S003329171800199X
Sherman MD, Fischer EP, Owen RR Jr, Lu L, Han X. Multifamily group treatment for veterans with mood disorders: A pilot study. Couple Family Psychology: Res Pract. (2015) 4:136–49. doi: 10.1037/cfp0000040
Hellemans S, De Mol J, Buysse A, Eisler I, Demyttenaere K, Lemmens GM. Therapeutic processes in multi-family groups for major depression: Results of an interpretative phenomenological study. J Affect Disord. (2011) 134:226–34. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2011.05.050