Lara Lenz, Hans-Helmut König, Melanie Leitner, André Hajek
{"title":"Treatment preferences and their determinants among adults with depression or anxiety in out-patient mental healthcare: systematic review.","authors":"Lara Lenz, Hans-Helmut König, Melanie Leitner, André Hajek","doi":"10.1192/bjo.2025.10849","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accommodation of treatment preferences is known to improve treatment outcomes and increase patient satisfaction, and is further advised in several national guidelines.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>The aim of this study was to systematically review studies that elicited treatment preferences and related determinants among adults with depressive or anxiety disorder for out-patient mental healthcare.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024546311). Studies were retrieved from Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We included studies of all types that assessed treatment preferences of adults with depressive or anxiety disorder for out-patient care. Extracted data on preferences and determinants were summarised and categorised. Preferences were categorised into treatment approaches, psychotherapy delivery and setting, and psychotherapy parameters. Study quality was assessed with the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen studies were included in the review. Preferences examined related to treatment approaches (<i>n</i> = 13), psychotherapy delivery and setting (<i>n</i> = 10), and psychotherapy parameters (<i>n</i> = 7). High heterogeneity in statistical methods and preference types restricted the derivation of robust conclusions, but tendencies toward a preference for psychotherapy (compared with medication), and particularly individual and face-to-face therapy, were observed. Regarding determinants, results were highly diverse and many findings were derived from single studies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our review synthesised evidence on treatment preferences and related determinants in out-patient mental healthcare. Results showed considerable heterogeneity regarding preference types, determinants and statistical methods. We highly recommend to develop and use standardised instruments to assess treatment preferences. Care providers should consider preference variance among patients, and provide individualised care.</p>","PeriodicalId":9038,"journal":{"name":"BJPsych Open","volume":"11 6","pages":"e229"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJPsych Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2025.10849","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Accommodation of treatment preferences is known to improve treatment outcomes and increase patient satisfaction, and is further advised in several national guidelines.
Aims: The aim of this study was to systematically review studies that elicited treatment preferences and related determinants among adults with depressive or anxiety disorder for out-patient mental healthcare.
Method: The systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42024546311). Studies were retrieved from Web of Science, PubMed, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We included studies of all types that assessed treatment preferences of adults with depressive or anxiety disorder for out-patient care. Extracted data on preferences and determinants were summarised and categorised. Preferences were categorised into treatment approaches, psychotherapy delivery and setting, and psychotherapy parameters. Study quality was assessed with the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool.
Results: Nineteen studies were included in the review. Preferences examined related to treatment approaches (n = 13), psychotherapy delivery and setting (n = 10), and psychotherapy parameters (n = 7). High heterogeneity in statistical methods and preference types restricted the derivation of robust conclusions, but tendencies toward a preference for psychotherapy (compared with medication), and particularly individual and face-to-face therapy, were observed. Regarding determinants, results were highly diverse and many findings were derived from single studies.
Conclusions: Our review synthesised evidence on treatment preferences and related determinants in out-patient mental healthcare. Results showed considerable heterogeneity regarding preference types, determinants and statistical methods. We highly recommend to develop and use standardised instruments to assess treatment preferences. Care providers should consider preference variance among patients, and provide individualised care.
期刊介绍：
Announcing the launch of BJPsych Open, an exciting new open access online journal for the publication of all methodologically sound research in all fields of psychiatry and disciplines related to mental health. BJPsych Open will maintain the highest scientific, peer review, and ethical standards of the BJPsych, ensure rapid publication for authors whilst sharing research with no cost to the reader in the spirit of maximising dissemination and public engagement. Cascade submission from BJPsych to BJPsych Open is a new option for authors whose first priority is rapid online publication with the prestigious BJPsych brand. Authors will also retain copyright to their works under a creative commons license.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
