Efficacy of app-based mobile health interventions for stress management: A systematic review and meta-analysis of self-reported, physiological, and neuroendocrine stress-related outcomes

IF 13.7 1区心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Clinical Psychology Review Pub Date : 2024-11-05 DOI:10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102515

Vasile Sîrbu , Oana Alexandra David

{"title":"Efficacy of app-based mobile health interventions for stress management: A systematic review and meta-analysis of self-reported, physiological, and neuroendocrine stress-related outcomes","authors":"Vasile Sîrbu , Oana Alexandra David","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Stress is a significant mental health concern for the general population, highlighting the need for effective and scalable solutions, such as mobile health (mHealth) app interventions. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effects of mHealth apps designed primarily to reduce stress and distress in non-clinical and subclinical populations. A comprehensive literature search was conducted up to August 2024, including studies that measured both self-reported and physiological stress outcomes. 80 studies were analyzed. A small but significant effect size (<em>g</em> = 0.33) was found for self-reported stress outcomes, with studies that used specific active controls, operated in naturalistic contexts, and had a low risk of bias showing significantly lower effect sizes. A similarly small effect size was observed for physiological outcomes (<em>g</em> = 0.24). Notably, studies that employed muscle and breathing relaxation, meditation strategies, personalized guidance, experimental usage settings, and measured acute stress responses demonstrated significantly higher effect sizes. Further analysis of specific physiological systems revealed small effect sizes for autonomic (<em>g</em> = 0.32) and cardiac outcomes (<em>g</em> = 0.36). The significant effects observed across both psychological and physiological outcomes support the efficacy and potential of mHealth apps for the self-management of stress responses in the broader population.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"114 ","pages":"Article 102515"},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824001363","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Stress is a significant mental health concern for the general population, highlighting the need for effective and scalable solutions, such as mobile health (mHealth) app interventions. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effects of mHealth apps designed primarily to reduce stress and distress in non-clinical and subclinical populations. A comprehensive literature search was conducted up to August 2024, including studies that measured both self-reported and physiological stress outcomes. 80 studies were analyzed. A small but significant effect size (g = 0.33) was found for self-reported stress outcomes, with studies that used specific active controls, operated in naturalistic contexts, and had a low risk of bias showing significantly lower effect sizes. A similarly small effect size was observed for physiological outcomes (g = 0.24). Notably, studies that employed muscle and breathing relaxation, meditation strategies, personalized guidance, experimental usage settings, and measured acute stress responses demonstrated significantly higher effect sizes. Further analysis of specific physiological systems revealed small effect sizes for autonomic (g = 0.32) and cardiac outcomes (g = 0.36). The significant effects observed across both psychological and physiological outcomes support the efficacy and potential of mHealth apps for the self-management of stress responses in the broader population.

查看原文本刊更多论文

基于应用程序的移动健康干预对压力管理的功效：对自我报告、生理和神经内分泌压力相关结果的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

压力是普通人群关注的一个重要心理健康问题，因此需要有效且可扩展的解决方案，如移动医疗（mHealth）应用干预。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在研究移动医疗应用程序的效果，这些应用程序主要用于减轻非临床和亚临床人群的压力和痛苦。我们对截至 2024 年 8 月的文献进行了全面检索，包括测量自我报告和生理压力结果的研究。共分析了 80 项研究。研究发现，自我报告的压力结果的效应大小（g = 0.33）较小，但具有显著性，使用特定主动对照、在自然环境中进行操作、偏倚风险较低的研究显示的效应大小明显较低。生理结果的效应大小同样较小（g = 0.24）。值得注意的是，采用肌肉和呼吸放松、冥想策略、个性化指导、实验性使用设置以及测量急性应激反应的研究显示出明显较高的效应量。对特定生理系统的进一步分析表明，自律神经系统（g = 0.32）和心脏系统（g = 0.36）的效果较小。在心理和生理结果中观察到的显着效应支持了移动医疗应用程序在更广泛人群中对压力反应进行自我管理的功效和潜力。

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

Clinical Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

23.10

自引率

1.60%

发文量

期刊介绍： Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology. While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.