Comparative Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Behavioral Therapy in Obesity: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

IF 1.6 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Jin-Young Cha, Seo-Young Kim, Young-Woo Lim, Ka-Hye Choi, In-Soo Shin
{"title":"Comparative Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Behavioral Therapy in Obesity: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Jin-Young Cha, Seo-Young Kim, Young-Woo Lim, Ka-Hye Choi, In-Soo Shin","doi":"10.1007/s10880-023-10000-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We aimed to evaluate the effects of obesity treatment with behavioral therapy (BT) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions compared with multiple comparators and find effective techniques or combinations of techniques in BT and CBT interventions for weight loss. We systematically searched electronic databases and selected randomized controlled trials using CBT or BT intervention for obesity treatment in overweight adults or adults with obesity without psychological symptoms. Both pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were performed to comprehensively evaluate the comparative effects between interventions. We classified the techniques used in BT and CBT interventions and compared the treatment effects between techniques. Compared with no treatment as a common comparator, CBT was most effective for weight loss, followed by BT, usual care (UC), and minimal care (MC). CBT was a more effective intervention than BT, but the effect of CBT compared to BT was not remarkable in network estimates. The most used BT techniques were feedback and monitoring, and the most used CBT technique was cognitive restructuring. Our results indicated that CBT and BT are effective interventions for weight loss, and that successful weight loss requires more aggressive interventions such as BT or CBT than MC and UC.</p>","PeriodicalId":15494,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10880-023-10000-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We aimed to evaluate the effects of obesity treatment with behavioral therapy (BT) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions compared with multiple comparators and find effective techniques or combinations of techniques in BT and CBT interventions for weight loss. We systematically searched electronic databases and selected randomized controlled trials using CBT or BT intervention for obesity treatment in overweight adults or adults with obesity without psychological symptoms. Both pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were performed to comprehensively evaluate the comparative effects between interventions. We classified the techniques used in BT and CBT interventions and compared the treatment effects between techniques. Compared with no treatment as a common comparator, CBT was most effective for weight loss, followed by BT, usual care (UC), and minimal care (MC). CBT was a more effective intervention than BT, but the effect of CBT compared to BT was not remarkable in network estimates. The most used BT techniques were feedback and monitoring, and the most used CBT technique was cognitive restructuring. Our results indicated that CBT and BT are effective interventions for weight loss, and that successful weight loss requires more aggressive interventions such as BT or CBT than MC and UC.

认知行为疗法和行为疗法在肥胖症中的疗效比较:系统回顾与网络元分析》。
我们的目的是评估行为疗法(BT)和认知行为疗法(CBT)干预治疗肥胖症的效果,并与多个比较者进行比较,寻找有效的行为疗法和 CBT 减肥干预技术或技术组合。我们系统地检索了电子数据库,并选择了对超重成人或无心理症状的肥胖成人进行 CBT 或 BT 干预治疗肥胖的随机对照试验。我们进行了配对荟萃分析和网络荟萃分析,以全面评估干预措施之间的效果比较。我们对BT和CBT干预中使用的技术进行了分类,并比较了不同技术的治疗效果。与作为共同比较对象的无治疗相比,CBT 对减轻体重最有效,其次是 BT、常规护理(UC)和最低限度护理(MC)。CBT 是一种比 BT 更有效的干预方法,但与 BT 相比,CBT 的效果在网络估算中并不显著。使用最多的 BT 技术是反馈和监测,而使用最多的 CBT 技术是认知重组。我们的研究结果表明,CBT 和 BT 是有效的减肥干预措施,成功减肥需要更积极的干预措施,如 BT 或 CBT,而不是 MC 和 UC。
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
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
4.50%
发文量
93
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers related to all areas of the science and practice of psychologists in medical settings. Manuscripts are chosen that have a broad appeal across psychology as well as other health care disciplines, reflecting varying backgrounds, interests, and specializations. The journal publishes original research, treatment outcome trials, meta-analyses, literature reviews, conceptual papers, brief scientific reports, and scholarly case studies. Papers accepted address clinical matters in medical settings; integrated care; health disparities; education and training of the future psychology workforce; interdisciplinary collaboration, training, and professionalism; licensing, credentialing, and privileging in hospital practice; research and practice ethics; professional development of psychologists in academic health centers; professional practice matters in medical settings; and cultural, economic, political, regulatory, and systems factors in health care. In summary, the journal provides a forum for papers predicted to have significant theoretical or practical importance for the application of psychology in medical settings.
×
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