儿童和青少年创伤后应激障碍心理治疗的比较疗效和可接受性:系统回顾和网络荟萃分析。

IF 6.6 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Yajie Xiang, Andrea Cipriani, Teng Teng, Cinzia Del Giovane, Yuqing Zhang, John R Weisz, Xuemei Li, Pim Cuijpers, Xueer Liu, Jürgen Barth, Yuanliang Jiang, David Cohen, Li Fan, Donna Gillies, Kang Du, Arun V Ravindran, Xinyu Zhou, Peng Xie
{"title":"儿童和青少年创伤后应激障碍心理治疗的比较疗效和可接受性:系统回顾和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Yajie Xiang,&nbsp;Andrea Cipriani,&nbsp;Teng Teng,&nbsp;Cinzia Del Giovane,&nbsp;Yuqing Zhang,&nbsp;John R Weisz,&nbsp;Xuemei Li,&nbsp;Pim Cuijpers,&nbsp;Xueer Liu,&nbsp;Jürgen Barth,&nbsp;Yuanliang Jiang,&nbsp;David Cohen,&nbsp;Li Fan,&nbsp;Donna Gillies,&nbsp;Kang Du,&nbsp;Arun V Ravindran,&nbsp;Xinyu Zhou,&nbsp;Peng Xie","doi":"10.1136/ebmental-2021-300346","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Available evidence on the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children and adolescents remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to compare and rank the different types and formats of psychotherapies for PTSD in children and adolescents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched eight databases and other international registers up to 31 December 2020. The pairwise meta-analyses and frequentist network meta-analyses estimated pooled standardised mean differences (SMDs) and ORs with random-effects model. Efficacy at post-treatment and follow-up, acceptability, depressive and anxiety symptoms were measured.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We included 56 randomised controlled trials with 5327 patients comparing 14 different types of psychotherapies and 3 control conditions. For efficacy, cognitive processing therapy (CPT), behavioural therapy (BT), individual trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (TF-CBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing, and group TF-CBT were significantly superior to all control conditions at post-treatment and follow-up (SMDs between -2.42 and -0.25). Moreover, CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT were more effective than supportive therapy (SMDs between -1.92 and -0.49). Results for depressive and anxiety symptoms were similar to the findings for the primary outcome. Most of the results were rated as 'moderate' to 'very low' in terms of confidence of evidence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT appear to be the best choices of psychotherapy for PTSD in young patients. Other types and different ways of delivering psychological treatment can be alternative options. Clinicians should consider the importance of each outcome and the patients' preferences in real clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":12233,"journal":{"name":"Evidence Based Mental Health","volume":"24 4","pages":"153-160"},"PeriodicalIF":6.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0c/75/ebmental-2021-300346.PMC8543231.pdf","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yajie Xiang,&nbsp;Andrea Cipriani,&nbsp;Teng Teng,&nbsp;Cinzia Del Giovane,&nbsp;Yuqing Zhang,&nbsp;John R Weisz,&nbsp;Xuemei Li,&nbsp;Pim Cuijpers,&nbsp;Xueer Liu,&nbsp;Jürgen Barth,&nbsp;Yuanliang Jiang,&nbsp;David Cohen,&nbsp;Li Fan,&nbsp;Donna Gillies,&nbsp;Kang Du,&nbsp;Arun V Ravindran,&nbsp;Xinyu Zhou,&nbsp;Peng Xie\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/ebmental-2021-300346\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Available evidence on the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children and adolescents remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We aimed to compare and rank the different types and formats of psychotherapies for PTSD in children and adolescents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched eight databases and other international registers up to 31 December 2020. The pairwise meta-analyses and frequentist network meta-analyses estimated pooled standardised mean differences (SMDs) and ORs with random-effects model. Efficacy at post-treatment and follow-up, acceptability, depressive and anxiety symptoms were measured.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We included 56 randomised controlled trials with 5327 patients comparing 14 different types of psychotherapies and 3 control conditions. For efficacy, cognitive processing therapy (CPT), behavioural therapy (BT), individual trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (TF-CBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing, and group TF-CBT were significantly superior to all control conditions at post-treatment and follow-up (SMDs between -2.42 and -0.25). Moreover, CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT were more effective than supportive therapy (SMDs between -1.92 and -0.49). Results for depressive and anxiety symptoms were similar to the findings for the primary outcome. Most of the results were rated as 'moderate' to 'very low' in terms of confidence of evidence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT appear to be the best choices of psychotherapy for PTSD in young patients. Other types and different ways of delivering psychological treatment can be alternative options. Clinicians should consider the importance of each outcome and the patients' preferences in real clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12233,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence Based Mental Health\",\"volume\":\"24 4\",\"pages\":\"153-160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/0c/75/ebmental-2021-300346.PMC8543231.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence Based Mental Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300346\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence Based Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ebmental-2021-300346","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

背景:关于儿童和青少年创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)心理治疗的相对疗效和可接受性的现有证据仍然不确定。目的:对儿童和青少年创伤后应激障碍心理治疗的不同类型和形式进行比较和排名。方法:截至2020年12月31日,我们检索了8个数据库和其他国际注册数据库。两两荟萃分析和频率网络荟萃分析采用随机效应模型估计合并标准化平均差异(SMDs)和or。观察治疗后及随访疗效、可接受性、抑郁及焦虑症状。研究结果:我们纳入了56项随机对照试验,涉及5327名患者,比较了14种不同类型的心理疗法和3种对照条件。在治疗后和随访中,认知加工治疗(CPT)、行为治疗(BT)、个体创伤型认知行为治疗(TF-CBT)、眼动脱敏和再加工以及TF-CBT组的疗效显著优于所有对照组(smd在-2.42至-0.25之间)。此外,CPT, BT和个体TF-CBT比支持治疗更有效(smd在-1.92至-0.49之间)。抑郁和焦虑症状的结果与主要结局的结果相似。就证据的可信度而言,大多数结果被评为“中等”至“非常低”。结论:CPT、BT和单独的TF-CBT是治疗年轻PTSD患者的最佳选择。其他类型和不同的提供心理治疗的方式可以作为替代选择。临床医生应该在实际临床实践中考虑每个结果的重要性和患者的偏好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Background: Available evidence on the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children and adolescents remains uncertain.

Objective: We aimed to compare and rank the different types and formats of psychotherapies for PTSD in children and adolescents.

Methods: We searched eight databases and other international registers up to 31 December 2020. The pairwise meta-analyses and frequentist network meta-analyses estimated pooled standardised mean differences (SMDs) and ORs with random-effects model. Efficacy at post-treatment and follow-up, acceptability, depressive and anxiety symptoms were measured.

Findings: We included 56 randomised controlled trials with 5327 patients comparing 14 different types of psychotherapies and 3 control conditions. For efficacy, cognitive processing therapy (CPT), behavioural therapy (BT), individual trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (TF-CBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing, and group TF-CBT were significantly superior to all control conditions at post-treatment and follow-up (SMDs between -2.42 and -0.25). Moreover, CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT were more effective than supportive therapy (SMDs between -1.92 and -0.49). Results for depressive and anxiety symptoms were similar to the findings for the primary outcome. Most of the results were rated as 'moderate' to 'very low' in terms of confidence of evidence.

Conclusions: CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT appear to be the best choices of psychotherapy for PTSD in young patients. Other types and different ways of delivering psychological treatment can be alternative options. Clinicians should consider the importance of each outcome and the patients' preferences in real clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
18.10
自引率
7.70%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Evidence-Based Mental Health alerts clinicians to important advances in treatment, diagnosis, aetiology, prognosis, continuing education, economic evaluation and qualitative research in mental health. Published by the British Psychological Society, the Royal College of Psychiatrists and the BMJ Publishing Group the journal surveys a wide range of international medical journals applying strict criteria for the quality and validity of research. Clinicians assess the relevance of the best studies and the key details of these essential studies are presented in a succinct, informative abstract with an expert commentary on its clinical application.Evidence-Based Mental Health is a multidisciplinary, quarterly publication.
×
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