广泛性焦虑障碍的CBT治疗方式:随机对照试验的系统回顾和网络荟萃分析。

IF 5.8 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Shiyu Liu, Hongqi Xiao, Yingxu Duan, Lixin Shi, Ping Wang, Lingxiao Cao, Hailong Li, Xiaoqi Huang, Changjian Qiu
{"title":"广泛性焦虑障碍的CBT治疗方式:随机对照试验的系统回顾和网络荟萃分析。","authors":"Shiyu Liu, Hongqi Xiao, Yingxu Duan, Lixin Shi, Ping Wang, Lingxiao Cao, Hailong Li, Xiaoqi Huang, Changjian Qiu","doi":"10.1038/s41398-025-03414-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the comparative efficacy and acceptability of different delivery formats of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in treating generalized anxiety disorder (GAD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Web of Science from database inception to September, 2023, to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of CBT for patients with GAD. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Finally, 52 trials that randomized 4361 patients (mean age 43 years; 69.7% women) with generalized anxiety disorder met the inclusion criteria. The most studied treatment comparisons were individual and remote CBT versus waiting list. The quality of the evidence was typically of low or unclear risk of bias (39 out of 52 trials, 75%). The network meta-analysis including 30 studies showed that individual CBT was superior to remote CBT (SMD 0.96; 95% Cl 0.13-1.79), treatment as usual (SMD 1.12; 95% Cl 0.24-2.00) and waiting list (SMD 1.62; 95% Cl 1.03-2.22) in relieving anxiety symptoms of GAD. Group CBT (SMD 1.65; 95% Cl 0.47-2.84) was more efficacious than waiting list. Remote CBT was not superior to treatment as usual or waiting list. In terms of acceptability CBT delivery formats did not differ significantly from each other.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings provide evidence for the consideration of group treatment formats as alternative to individual CBT in relieving anxiety symptoms in patients with GAD, but remote CBT may be less effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":23278,"journal":{"name":"Translational Psychiatry","volume":"15 1","pages":"197"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12162829/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"CBT treatment delivery formats for generalized anxiety disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.\",\"authors\":\"Shiyu Liu, Hongqi Xiao, Yingxu Duan, Lixin Shi, Ping Wang, Lingxiao Cao, Hailong Li, Xiaoqi Huang, Changjian Qiu\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41398-025-03414-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the comparative efficacy and acceptability of different delivery formats of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in treating generalized anxiety disorder (GAD).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Web of Science from database inception to September, 2023, to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of CBT for patients with GAD. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Finally, 52 trials that randomized 4361 patients (mean age 43 years; 69.7% women) with generalized anxiety disorder met the inclusion criteria. The most studied treatment comparisons were individual and remote CBT versus waiting list. The quality of the evidence was typically of low or unclear risk of bias (39 out of 52 trials, 75%). The network meta-analysis including 30 studies showed that individual CBT was superior to remote CBT (SMD 0.96; 95% Cl 0.13-1.79), treatment as usual (SMD 1.12; 95% Cl 0.24-2.00) and waiting list (SMD 1.62; 95% Cl 1.03-2.22) in relieving anxiety symptoms of GAD. Group CBT (SMD 1.65; 95% Cl 0.47-2.84) was more efficacious than waiting list. Remote CBT was not superior to treatment as usual or waiting list. In terms of acceptability CBT delivery formats did not differ significantly from each other.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our findings provide evidence for the consideration of group treatment formats as alternative to individual CBT in relieving anxiety symptoms in patients with GAD, but remote CBT may be less effective.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23278,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Translational Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"197\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12162829/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Translational Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-025-03414-3\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"Translational Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-025-03414-3","RegionNum":1,"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

摘要

目的:评价认知行为疗法(CBT)治疗广泛性焦虑障碍(GAD)不同交付形式的比较疗效和可接受性。方法:我们检索MEDLINE、Embase、PsycINFO和Web of Science从数据库建立到2023年9月的数据库,以确定CBT治疗广泛性焦虑症患者的随机临床试验(RCTs)。使用随机效应模型进行两两和网络荟萃分析。结果:最终,52项试验随机纳入4361例患者(平均年龄43岁;(69.7%女性)患有广泛性焦虑障碍的患者符合纳入标准。研究最多的治疗比较是个体和远程CBT与等候名单。证据质量通常具有低偏倚风险或不明确的偏倚风险(52项试验中有39项,75%)。包括30项研究的网络荟萃分析显示,个体CBT优于远程CBT (SMD 0.96;95% Cl = 0.13-1.79),常规治疗(SMD = 1.12;95% Cl 0.24-2.00)和等待名单(SMD 1.62;95% Cl 1.03-2.22)缓解广泛性焦虑症的焦虑症状。组CBT (SMD 1.65;95%(0.47-2.84)比等候治疗更有效。远程CBT并不优于常规治疗或等候治疗。在可接受性方面,CBT交付格式彼此之间没有显著差异。结论:我们的研究结果为考虑将群体治疗形式作为个体CBT的替代方案来缓解广泛性焦虑症患者的焦虑症状提供了证据,但远程CBT可能效果较差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
CBT treatment delivery formats for generalized anxiety disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Objectives: To assess the comparative efficacy and acceptability of different delivery formats of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) in treating generalized anxiety disorder (GAD).

Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Web of Science from database inception to September, 2023, to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of CBT for patients with GAD. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted using a random-effects model.

Results: Finally, 52 trials that randomized 4361 patients (mean age 43 years; 69.7% women) with generalized anxiety disorder met the inclusion criteria. The most studied treatment comparisons were individual and remote CBT versus waiting list. The quality of the evidence was typically of low or unclear risk of bias (39 out of 52 trials, 75%). The network meta-analysis including 30 studies showed that individual CBT was superior to remote CBT (SMD 0.96; 95% Cl 0.13-1.79), treatment as usual (SMD 1.12; 95% Cl 0.24-2.00) and waiting list (SMD 1.62; 95% Cl 1.03-2.22) in relieving anxiety symptoms of GAD. Group CBT (SMD 1.65; 95% Cl 0.47-2.84) was more efficacious than waiting list. Remote CBT was not superior to treatment as usual or waiting list. In terms of acceptability CBT delivery formats did not differ significantly from each other.

Conclusions: Our findings provide evidence for the consideration of group treatment formats as alternative to individual CBT in relieving anxiety symptoms in patients with GAD, but remote CBT may be less effective.

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
11.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
484
审稿时长
23 weeks
期刊介绍: Psychiatry has suffered tremendously by the limited translational pipeline. Nobel laureate Julius Axelrod''s discovery in 1961 of monoamine reuptake by pre-synaptic neurons still forms the basis of contemporary antidepressant treatment. There is a grievous gap between the explosion of knowledge in neuroscience and conceptually novel treatments for our patients. Translational Psychiatry bridges this gap by fostering and highlighting the pathway from discovery to clinical applications, healthcare and global health. We view translation broadly as the full spectrum of work that marks the pathway from discovery to global health, inclusive. The steps of translation that are within the scope of Translational Psychiatry include (i) fundamental discovery, (ii) bench to bedside, (iii) bedside to clinical applications (clinical trials), (iv) translation to policy and health care guidelines, (v) assessment of health policy and usage, and (vi) global health. All areas of medical research, including — but not restricted to — molecular biology, genetics, pharmacology, imaging and epidemiology are welcome as they contribute to enhance the field of translational psychiatry.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信