The efficacy of individual humanistic-experiential therapies for the treatment of depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

IF 2.6 1区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL

Psychotherapy Research Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-05 DOI:10.1080/10503307.2023.2227757

Kate E M Duffy, Melanie Simmonds-Buckley, Rinda Haake, Jaime Delgadillo, Michael Barkham

{"title":"The efficacy of individual humanistic-experiential therapies for the treatment of depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Kate E M Duffy, Melanie Simmonds-Buckley, Rinda Haake, Jaime Delgadillo, Michael Barkham","doi":"10.1080/10503307.2023.2227757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of individual humanistic-experiential therapies (HEPs) for depression.Method: Database searches (Scopus, Medline, and PsycINFO) identified RCTs comparing any HEP intervention with a treatment-as-usual (TAU) control or active alternative intervention for the treatment of depression. Included studies were assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool and narratively synthesized. Post-treatment and follow-up effect sizes were aggregated using random-effects meta-analysis and moderators of treatment effect were explored (PROSPERO: CRD42021240485).Results: Seventeen RCTs, synthesized across four meta-analyzes, indicated HEP depression outcomes were significantly better than TAU controls at post-treatment (g = 0.41, 95% CI [0.18, 0.65], n = 735), but not significantly different at follow-up (g = 0.14, 95% CI [-0.30, 0.58], n = 631). HEP depression outcomes were comparable to active treatments at post-treatment (g = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.26, 0.08], n = 2131), but significantly favored non-HEP alternative interventions at follow-up (g = -0.21, 95% CI [-0.35, -0.07], n = 1196).Conclusion: Relative to usual care, HEPs are effective in the short-term and comparable to non-HEP alternative interventions at post-treatment, but not at follow-up. However, imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias concerns were identified as limitations of the evidence included. Future large-scale trials of HEPs with equipoise between comparator conditions are required.","PeriodicalId":48159,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10503307.2023.2227757","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of individual humanistic-experiential therapies (HEPs) for depression.

Method: Database searches (Scopus, Medline, and PsycINFO) identified RCTs comparing any HEP intervention with a treatment-as-usual (TAU) control or active alternative intervention for the treatment of depression. Included studies were assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool and narratively synthesized. Post-treatment and follow-up effect sizes were aggregated using random-effects meta-analysis and moderators of treatment effect were explored (PROSPERO: CRD42021240485).

Results: Seventeen RCTs, synthesized across four meta-analyzes, indicated HEP depression outcomes were significantly better than TAU controls at post-treatment (g = 0.41, 95% CI [0.18, 0.65], n = 735), but not significantly different at follow-up (g = 0.14, 95% CI [-0.30, 0.58], n = 631). HEP depression outcomes were comparable to active treatments at post-treatment (g = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.26, 0.08], n = 2131), but significantly favored non-HEP alternative interventions at follow-up (g = -0.21, 95% CI [-0.35, -0.07], n = 1196).

Conclusion: Relative to usual care, HEPs are effective in the short-term and comparable to non-HEP alternative interventions at post-treatment, but not at follow-up. However, imprecision, inconsistency, and risk of bias concerns were identified as limitations of the evidence included. Future large-scale trials of HEPs with equipoise between comparator conditions are required.

查看原文本刊更多论文

个人人文体验疗法治疗抑郁症的疗效：随机对照试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析。

目标：对随机对照试验（RCT）进行系统回顾和荟萃分析：对评估个人人文体验疗法（HEPs）对抑郁症疗效的随机对照试验（RCTs）进行系统回顾和荟萃分析：数据库搜索（Scopus、Medline 和 PsycINFO）确定了将任何 HEP 干预与治疗照常（TAU）对照或治疗抑郁症的积极替代干预进行比较的 RCT。我们使用 "偏倚风险 2 "工具对纳入的研究进行了评估，并进行了叙述性综合。使用随机效应荟萃分析对治疗后和随访效果大小进行了汇总，并探讨了治疗效果的调节因素（PROSPERO：CRD42021240485）：四项荟萃分析汇总的 17 项研究表明，在治疗后，HEP 抑郁症疗效显著优于 TAU 对照组（g = 0.41，95% CI [0.18，0.65]，n = 735），但在随访时差异不大（g = 0.14，95% CI [-0.30，0.58]，n = 631）。在治疗后，HEP抑郁治疗结果与积极治疗结果相当（g = -0.09，95% CI [-0.26，0.08]，n = 2131），但在随访时，HEP明显优于非HEP替代干预（g = -0.21，95% CI [-0.35，-0.07]，n = 1196）：结论：相对于常规护理，健康教育方案在短期内是有效的，在治疗后与非健康教育方案的替代干预措施具有可比性，但在随访时则没有可比性。然而，所纳入的证据存在不精确、不一致和偏倚风险等局限性。未来还需要进行大规模的 HEPs 试验，并在比较条件之间保持平衡。

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

Psychotherapy Research PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-

CiteScore

7.80

自引率

10.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： Psychotherapy Research seeks to enhance the development, scientific quality, and social relevance of psychotherapy research and to foster the use of research findings in practice, education, and policy formulation. The Journal publishes reports of original research on all aspects of psychotherapy, including its outcomes, its processes, education of practitioners, and delivery of services. It also publishes methodological, theoretical, and review articles of direct relevance to psychotherapy research. The Journal is addressed to an international, interdisciplinary audience and welcomes submissions dealing with diverse theoretical orientations, treatment modalities.

文献相关原料

公司名称	产品信息	采购帮参考价格