创伤后应激障碍的药物治疗:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 4 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology Pub Date : 2025-06-14 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20451253251342628
Yanyan Jia, Zifeng Ye, Fude Yang, Jiabao Chai, Haiting Xu, Jingming Yang, Weiye Liang, Lili Wu
{"title":"创伤后应激障碍的药物治疗:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Yanyan Jia, Zifeng Ye, Fude Yang, Jiabao Chai, Haiting Xu, Jingming Yang, Weiye Liang, Lili Wu","doi":"10.1177/20451253251342628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a prevalent mental illness with a high disability rate. The neurobiological abnormalities in PTSD suggest that drug therapy may have certain therapeutic effects. According to the recommendations of clinical guidelines for PTSD, the current clinical preference is for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). Nevertheless, the efficacy of other types of drugs remains uncertain, which impacts the selection of personalized treatment for patients.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and acceptability of drugs with different pharmacological mechanisms in alleviating PTSD symptoms by comparing the response rates and dropout rates of different drug treatment groups in randomized clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched and analyzed 52 reports that described the efficacy and acceptability of medication for PTSD. Among these, 49 trials used the dropout rate as an acceptability indicator, and 52 trials used the response rate as an efficacy indicator.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the 49 trials with the dropout rate as the indicator, the dropout rate was 29% (95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.33; <i>n</i> = 3870). In the 52 trials with the response rate as the indicator, the response rate was 39% (95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.45; <i>n</i> = 3808). After drug treatment, the core symptoms of PTSD were significantly improved. This meta-analysis indicated that there was no significant difference between antidepressants and antipsychotics in improving clinical symptoms and acceptability. However, antidepressants may have a slight advantage in efficacy, although with a higher dropout rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Drug treatment is an effective rehabilitation method for PTSD patients, and individualized drug management should be considered.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This systematic evaluation scheme has been registered with PROSPERO (protocol ID: CRD42023462662).</p>","PeriodicalId":23127,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology","volume":"15 ","pages":"20451253251342628"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12171264/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pharmacotherapy for post-traumatic stress disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yanyan Jia, Zifeng Ye, Fude Yang, Jiabao Chai, Haiting Xu, Jingming Yang, Weiye Liang, Lili Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20451253251342628\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a prevalent mental illness with a high disability rate. The neurobiological abnormalities in PTSD suggest that drug therapy may have certain therapeutic effects. According to the recommendations of clinical guidelines for PTSD, the current clinical preference is for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). Nevertheless, the efficacy of other types of drugs remains uncertain, which impacts the selection of personalized treatment for patients.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and acceptability of drugs with different pharmacological mechanisms in alleviating PTSD symptoms by comparing the response rates and dropout rates of different drug treatment groups in randomized clinical trials.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched and analyzed 52 reports that described the efficacy and acceptability of medication for PTSD. Among these, 49 trials used the dropout rate as an acceptability indicator, and 52 trials used the response rate as an efficacy indicator.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the 49 trials with the dropout rate as the indicator, the dropout rate was 29% (95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.33; <i>n</i> = 3870). In the 52 trials with the response rate as the indicator, the response rate was 39% (95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.45; <i>n</i> = 3808). After drug treatment, the core symptoms of PTSD were significantly improved. This meta-analysis indicated that there was no significant difference between antidepressants and antipsychotics in improving clinical symptoms and acceptability. However, antidepressants may have a slight advantage in efficacy, although with a higher dropout rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Drug treatment is an effective rehabilitation method for PTSD patients, and individualized drug management should be considered.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This systematic evaluation scheme has been registered with PROSPERO (protocol ID: CRD42023462662).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23127,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"20451253251342628\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12171264/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20451253251342628\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20451253251342628","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)是一种常见的精神疾病,致残率高。PTSD的神经生物学异常提示药物治疗可能有一定的治疗效果。根据PTSD临床指南的推荐,目前临床倾向于选择选择性5 -羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(SSRIs)或5 -羟色胺和去甲肾上腺素再摄取抑制剂(SNRIs)。然而,其他类型药物的疗效仍然不确定,这影响了患者个性化治疗的选择。目的:本荟萃分析的目的是通过比较不同药物治疗组在随机临床试验中的反应率和退出率,评估不同药理机制药物在缓解PTSD症状方面的疗效和可接受性。设计:系统回顾和荟萃分析。方法:我们检索并分析了52份描述PTSD药物治疗疗效和可接受性的报告。其中,49项试验以中途退出率作为可接受性指标,52项试验以有效率作为疗效指标。结果:以中途退学率为指标的49项试验中,中途退学率为29%(95%置信区间0.26-0.33;n = 3870)。在以应答率为指标的52项试验中,应答率为39%(95%置信区间,0.33-0.45;n = 3808)。经药物治疗后,PTSD核心症状明显改善。这项荟萃分析表明,抗抑郁药和抗精神病药在改善临床症状和可接受性方面没有显著差异。然而,抗抑郁药在疗效上可能有轻微的优势,尽管有较高的辍学率。结论:药物治疗是创伤后应激障碍患者有效的康复方法,应考虑个体化药物管理。试验注册:该系统评价方案已在PROSPERO注册(协议ID: CRD42023462662)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pharmacotherapy for post-traumatic stress disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a prevalent mental illness with a high disability rate. The neurobiological abnormalities in PTSD suggest that drug therapy may have certain therapeutic effects. According to the recommendations of clinical guidelines for PTSD, the current clinical preference is for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs). Nevertheless, the efficacy of other types of drugs remains uncertain, which impacts the selection of personalized treatment for patients.

Objectives: The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy and acceptability of drugs with different pharmacological mechanisms in alleviating PTSD symptoms by comparing the response rates and dropout rates of different drug treatment groups in randomized clinical trials.

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: We searched and analyzed 52 reports that described the efficacy and acceptability of medication for PTSD. Among these, 49 trials used the dropout rate as an acceptability indicator, and 52 trials used the response rate as an efficacy indicator.

Results: In the 49 trials with the dropout rate as the indicator, the dropout rate was 29% (95% confidence interval, 0.26-0.33; n = 3870). In the 52 trials with the response rate as the indicator, the response rate was 39% (95% confidence interval, 0.33-0.45; n = 3808). After drug treatment, the core symptoms of PTSD were significantly improved. This meta-analysis indicated that there was no significant difference between antidepressants and antipsychotics in improving clinical symptoms and acceptability. However, antidepressants may have a slight advantage in efficacy, although with a higher dropout rate.

Conclusion: Drug treatment is an effective rehabilitation method for PTSD patients, and individualized drug management should be considered.

Trial registration: This systematic evaluation scheme has been registered with PROSPERO (protocol ID: CRD42023462662).

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
7.90
自引率
2.40%
发文量
35
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies across all areas of psychopharmacology. The journal has a strong clinical and pharmacological focus and is aimed at clinicians and researchers in psychopharmacology, providing a forum in print and online for publishing the highest quality articles in this area.
×
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