基于证据的心理疗法在治疗不同的 DSM-5 PTSD 症状群方面存在差异吗?对照临床试验的系统回顾和元分析》。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Marina S Melani, Jéssica M Paiva, Mauro V Mendlowicz, Liliane Vilete, Mariana P Luz, Paula Rui Ventura, Roberta Benitez Freitas Passos, William Berger
{"title":"基于证据的心理疗法在治疗不同的 DSM-5 PTSD 症状群方面存在差异吗?对照临床试验的系统回顾和元分析》。","authors":"Marina S Melani, Jéssica M Paiva, Mauro V Mendlowicz, Liliane Vilete, Mariana P Luz, Paula Rui Ventura, Roberta Benitez Freitas Passos, William Berger","doi":"10.1097/NMD.0000000000001769","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a heterogeneous disease defined by four Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5) symptom clusters: reexperiencing, avoidance, negative alterations in cognitions and mood, and hyperarousal. There are effective evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) for PTSD. However, given the variety of PTSD clinical presentations, we conducted the first meta-analysis investigating whether DSM-5 PTSD symptom clusters show different responses to EBPs. We systematically reviewed the literature for controlled clinical trials in five databases, performed a meta-analysis, and evaluated the methodological quality of the studies. We screened 633 studies and included seven. Three showed high risk, two showed some concerns, and one showed a low risk of bias. The symptom clusters do not seem to respond differently to EBPs (SMD cluster B: -0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.87 to 0.08; cluster C: -0.49; 95% CI, -0.90 to -0.08; cluster D: -0.44; 95% CI, -0.94 to 0.05; cluster E: -0.54; 95% CI, -1.07 to -0.0), even when analyzed by the therapeutic focuses. The findings dovetail nicely with the network theory of PTSD symptom, as although it is a heterogeneous disorder, the EBPs seem to promote a kind of cascade of symptom improvement.</p>","PeriodicalId":16480,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are There Differences Among Evidence-Based Psychotherapies for Treating Different DSM-5 PTSD Symptom Clusters? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Marina S Melani, Jéssica M Paiva, Mauro V Mendlowicz, Liliane Vilete, Mariana P Luz, Paula Rui Ventura, Roberta Benitez Freitas Passos, William Berger\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/NMD.0000000000001769\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a heterogeneous disease defined by four Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5) symptom clusters: reexperiencing, avoidance, negative alterations in cognitions and mood, and hyperarousal. There are effective evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) for PTSD. However, given the variety of PTSD clinical presentations, we conducted the first meta-analysis investigating whether DSM-5 PTSD symptom clusters show different responses to EBPs. We systematically reviewed the literature for controlled clinical trials in five databases, performed a meta-analysis, and evaluated the methodological quality of the studies. We screened 633 studies and included seven. Three showed high risk, two showed some concerns, and one showed a low risk of bias. The symptom clusters do not seem to respond differently to EBPs (SMD cluster B: -0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.87 to 0.08; cluster C: -0.49; 95% CI, -0.90 to -0.08; cluster D: -0.44; 95% CI, -0.94 to 0.05; cluster E: -0.54; 95% CI, -1.07 to -0.0), even when analyzed by the therapeutic focuses. The findings dovetail nicely with the network theory of PTSD symptom, as although it is a heterogeneous disorder, the EBPs seem to promote a kind of cascade of symptom improvement.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16480,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0000000000001769\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0000000000001769","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要:创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)是一种异质性疾病,由《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第五版(DSM-5)的四个症状群定义:再体验、回避、认知和情绪的负面改变以及过度虑惊。创伤后应激障碍有有效的循证心理疗法(EBPs)。然而,鉴于创伤后应激障碍的临床表现多种多样,我们首次进行了荟萃分析,研究 DSM-5 PTSD 症状群是否对 EBPs 表现出不同的反应。我们系统地查阅了五个数据库中的对照临床试验文献,进行了荟萃分析,并对研究的方法学质量进行了评估。我们筛选了 633 项研究,并纳入了 7 项研究。其中三项存在高风险,两项存在一些问题,一项存在低偏倚风险。即使按治疗重点进行分析,症状群组似乎对 EBPs 的反应也不尽相同(SMD 群组 B:-0.40;95% 置信区间 [CI],-0.87 至 0.08;群组 C:-0.49;95% CI,-0.90 至 -0.08;群组 D:-0.44;95% CI,-0.94 至 0.05;群组 E:-0.54;95% CI,-1.07 至 -0.0)。这些发现与创伤后应激障碍症状的网络理论非常吻合,因为尽管创伤后应激障碍是一种异质性疾病,但 EBPs 似乎促进了一种症状改善的连带效应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are There Differences Among Evidence-Based Psychotherapies for Treating Different DSM-5 PTSD Symptom Clusters? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials.

Abstract: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a heterogeneous disease defined by four Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5) symptom clusters: reexperiencing, avoidance, negative alterations in cognitions and mood, and hyperarousal. There are effective evidence-based psychotherapies (EBPs) for PTSD. However, given the variety of PTSD clinical presentations, we conducted the first meta-analysis investigating whether DSM-5 PTSD symptom clusters show different responses to EBPs. We systematically reviewed the literature for controlled clinical trials in five databases, performed a meta-analysis, and evaluated the methodological quality of the studies. We screened 633 studies and included seven. Three showed high risk, two showed some concerns, and one showed a low risk of bias. The symptom clusters do not seem to respond differently to EBPs (SMD cluster B: -0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.87 to 0.08; cluster C: -0.49; 95% CI, -0.90 to -0.08; cluster D: -0.44; 95% CI, -0.94 to 0.05; cluster E: -0.54; 95% CI, -1.07 to -0.0), even when analyzed by the therapeutic focuses. The findings dovetail nicely with the network theory of PTSD symptom, as although it is a heterogeneous disorder, the EBPs seem to promote a kind of cascade of symptom improvement.

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
2.90
自引率
5.30%
发文量
233
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease publishes peer-reviewed articles containing new data or ways of reorganizing established knowledge relevant to understanding and modifying human behavior, especially that defined as impaired or diseased, and the context, applications and effects of that knowledge. Our policy is summarized by the slogan, "Behavioral science for clinical practice." We consider articles that include at least one behavioral variable, clear definition of study populations, and replicable research designs. Authors should use the active voice and first person whenever possible.
×
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