Efficacy of psychological interventions for mental health and pregnancy rates among individuals with infertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 14.8 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Loveness Dube, Katherine Bright, K Alix Hayden, Jennifer L Gordon
{"title":"Efficacy of psychological interventions for mental health and pregnancy rates among individuals with infertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Loveness Dube,&nbsp;Katherine Bright,&nbsp;K Alix Hayden,&nbsp;Jennifer L Gordon","doi":"10.1093/humupd/dmac034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Depression and anxiety are highly prevalent among individuals struggling with infertility. Thus, numerous psychological interventions have been adapted to infertility, with the aim of relieving distress as well as increasing pregnancy rates.</p><p><strong>Objective and rationale: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of psychological interventions on infertility-related distress and pregnancy rates among individuals and/or couples with infertility and to analyse their overall effect. It also sought to examine potential treatment moderators, including intervention length, format and therapeutic approach.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>An electronic search of 11 databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, was performed for studies published until January 2022. The inclusion criteria were RCTs conducted on humans and published in English. Psychological outcomes of interest included anxiety, depression, infertility-related distress, wellbeing and marital satisfaction. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess study quality, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to assess the overall quality of the research evidence.</p><p><strong>Outcomes: </strong>There were 58 RCTs in total, including 54 which included psychological outcomes and 21 which assessed pregnancy rates. Studies originated from all regions of the world, but nearly half of the studies were from the Middle East. Although a beneficial effect on combined psychological outcomes was found (Hedge's g = 0.82, P < 0.0001), it was moderated by region (P < 0.00001) such that studies from the Middle East exhibited large effects (g = 1.40, P < 0.0001), while the effects were small among studies conducted elsewhere (g = 0.23, P < 0.0001). Statistically adjusting for study region in a meta-regression, neither intervention length, therapeutic approach, therapy format, nor participant gender (P > 0.05) moderated the effect of treatment. A beneficial treatment effect on pregnancy (RR (95% CI) = 1.25 (1.07-1.47), P = 0.005) was not moderated by region, treatment length, approach or format (P > 0.05). Largely due to the lack of high quality RCTs, the quality of the available evidence was rated as low to moderate.</p><p><strong>Wider implications: </strong>This is the first meta-analysis of RCTs testing the effect of psychological interventions on infertility-related distress and pregnancy rates. These findings suggest that in most regions of the world, psychological interventions are associated with small reductions in distress and modest effects on conception, suggesting the need for more effective interventions. These findings must be considered in light of the fact that the majority of the included RCTs were deemed to be at high risk of bias. Rigorously conducted trials are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":55045,"journal":{"name":"Human Reproduction Update","volume":"29 1","pages":"71-94"},"PeriodicalIF":14.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Reproduction Update","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmac034","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Background: Depression and anxiety are highly prevalent among individuals struggling with infertility. Thus, numerous psychological interventions have been adapted to infertility, with the aim of relieving distress as well as increasing pregnancy rates.

Objective and rationale: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effect of psychological interventions on infertility-related distress and pregnancy rates among individuals and/or couples with infertility and to analyse their overall effect. It also sought to examine potential treatment moderators, including intervention length, format and therapeutic approach.

Search methods: An electronic search of 11 databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, was performed for studies published until January 2022. The inclusion criteria were RCTs conducted on humans and published in English. Psychological outcomes of interest included anxiety, depression, infertility-related distress, wellbeing and marital satisfaction. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess study quality, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to assess the overall quality of the research evidence.

Outcomes: There were 58 RCTs in total, including 54 which included psychological outcomes and 21 which assessed pregnancy rates. Studies originated from all regions of the world, but nearly half of the studies were from the Middle East. Although a beneficial effect on combined psychological outcomes was found (Hedge's g = 0.82, P < 0.0001), it was moderated by region (P < 0.00001) such that studies from the Middle East exhibited large effects (g = 1.40, P < 0.0001), while the effects were small among studies conducted elsewhere (g = 0.23, P < 0.0001). Statistically adjusting for study region in a meta-regression, neither intervention length, therapeutic approach, therapy format, nor participant gender (P > 0.05) moderated the effect of treatment. A beneficial treatment effect on pregnancy (RR (95% CI) = 1.25 (1.07-1.47), P = 0.005) was not moderated by region, treatment length, approach or format (P > 0.05). Largely due to the lack of high quality RCTs, the quality of the available evidence was rated as low to moderate.

Wider implications: This is the first meta-analysis of RCTs testing the effect of psychological interventions on infertility-related distress and pregnancy rates. These findings suggest that in most regions of the world, psychological interventions are associated with small reductions in distress and modest effects on conception, suggesting the need for more effective interventions. These findings must be considered in light of the fact that the majority of the included RCTs were deemed to be at high risk of bias. Rigorously conducted trials are needed.

心理干预对不孕症患者心理健康和怀孕率的影响:一项系统综述和荟萃分析
背景:在与不孕症作斗争的个体中,抑郁和焦虑非常普遍。因此,许多心理干预已适应不孕症,目的是减轻痛苦,并提高怀孕率。目的和理由:本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在确定所有随机对照试验(rct),评估心理干预对不孕症患者和/或夫妇不孕相关痛苦和怀孕率的影响,并分析其总体效果。它还试图检查潜在的治疗调节因素,包括干预时间、形式和治疗方法。检索方法:对11个数据库进行电子检索,包括MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO和Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials,检索截止到2022年1月发表的研究。纳入标准为对人类进行的随机对照试验,并以英文发表。感兴趣的心理结果包括焦虑、抑郁、不孕相关的痛苦、幸福感和婚姻满意度。采用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具评估研究质量,采用分级推荐评估、发展和评价方法评估研究证据的整体质量。结果:共纳入58项随机对照试验,其中54项包括心理结果,21项评估妊娠率。研究来自世界各地,但近一半的研究来自中东。虽然发现了对综合心理结果的有益影响(Hedge’s g = 0.82, P < 0.0001),但区域(P < 0.05)调节了治疗的效果。对妊娠的有益治疗效果(RR (95% CI) = 1.25 (1.07-1.47), P = 0.005)不受地区、治疗时间、治疗方式或治疗形式的影响(P > 0.05)。主要由于缺乏高质量的随机对照试验,现有证据的质量被评为低至中等。更广泛的影响:这是第一个测试心理干预对不孕相关痛苦和怀孕率影响的随机对照试验的荟萃分析。这些发现表明,在世界上大多数地区,心理干预与痛苦的轻微减少和对受孕的适度影响有关,这表明需要更有效的干预措施。这些发现必须考虑到大多数纳入的随机对照试验被认为具有高偏倚风险的事实。需要进行严格的试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Reproduction Update
Human Reproduction Update 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
28.80
自引率
1.50%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Human Reproduction Update is the leading journal in its field, boasting a Journal Impact FactorTM of 13.3 and ranked first in Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology (Source: Journal Citation ReportsTM from Clarivate, 2023). It specializes in publishing comprehensive and systematic review articles covering various aspects of human reproductive physiology and medicine. The journal prioritizes basic, transitional, and clinical topics related to reproduction, encompassing areas such as andrology, embryology, infertility, gynaecology, pregnancy, reproductive endocrinology, reproductive epidemiology, reproductive genetics, reproductive immunology, and reproductive oncology. Human Reproduction Update is published on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), maintaining the highest scientific and editorial standards.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信