Hannah L McGlashan, Kate Thompson, Michael Lam, Tegan Cruwys, Zoe C Walter, Elizabeth Beadle, Catherine Haslam
{"title":"获得性脑损伤后的群体心理干预:对群体过程和结果的系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Hannah L McGlashan, Kate Thompson, Michael Lam, Tegan Cruwys, Zoe C Walter, Elizabeth Beadle, Catherine Haslam","doi":"10.1007/s11065-025-09670-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Acquired brain injury can result in disability with direct and indirect consequences for psychosocial functioning. Psychosocial interventions embedded within traditional neurorehabilitation may provide a valuable buffer. While there is evidence of benefits associated with group-based psychosocial interventions, there is no single recommended intervention, despite several different approaches having been trialled. This systematic review aimed to provide a critical appraisal of existing group psychosocial interventions in neurorehabilitation, meta-analyse their efficacy, and explore the contribution of group process to outcomes. Eligible studies were published in English-language peer-reviewed journals and recruited adults with acquired brain injury in receipt of group psychosocial interventions. Outcomes of interest were depression, anxiety, quality of life, emotional distress, community integration, and social support. A systematic search of CINAHL, PsycINFO, Medline, Web of Science and Embase from database inception until 08.07.2024 was conducted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Effect sizes were calculated using Hedges' g and estimated using a three-level random effects model. Sixty-five studies were included in the systematic review, and 48 were included in the meta-analysis (n = 2653). There was an overall small effect on psychosocial outcomes (Hedges' g = 0.24, 95% CIs [0.16, 0.33]), though none of the included studies satisfactorily analysed group process despite 70% of these studies proclaiming their importance. Overall, there were mixed findings across intervention type and significant heterogeneity. Recommendations for future psychosocial group interventions in neurorehabilitation are provided.</p>","PeriodicalId":49754,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Group Psychosocial Interventions Following Acquired Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Group Process and Outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Hannah L McGlashan, Kate Thompson, Michael Lam, Tegan Cruwys, Zoe C Walter, Elizabeth Beadle, Catherine Haslam\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11065-025-09670-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Acquired brain injury can result in disability with direct and indirect consequences for psychosocial functioning. Psychosocial interventions embedded within traditional neurorehabilitation may provide a valuable buffer. While there is evidence of benefits associated with group-based psychosocial interventions, there is no single recommended intervention, despite several different approaches having been trialled. This systematic review aimed to provide a critical appraisal of existing group psychosocial interventions in neurorehabilitation, meta-analyse their efficacy, and explore the contribution of group process to outcomes. Eligible studies were published in English-language peer-reviewed journals and recruited adults with acquired brain injury in receipt of group psychosocial interventions. Outcomes of interest were depression, anxiety, quality of life, emotional distress, community integration, and social support. A systematic search of CINAHL, PsycINFO, Medline, Web of Science and Embase from database inception until 08.07.2024 was conducted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Effect sizes were calculated using Hedges' g and estimated using a three-level random effects model. Sixty-five studies were included in the systematic review, and 48 were included in the meta-analysis (n = 2653). There was an overall small effect on psychosocial outcomes (Hedges' g = 0.24, 95% CIs [0.16, 0.33]), though none of the included studies satisfactorily analysed group process despite 70% of these studies proclaiming their importance. Overall, there were mixed findings across intervention type and significant heterogeneity. Recommendations for future psychosocial group interventions in neurorehabilitation are provided.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49754,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuropsychology Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuropsychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-025-09670-w\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-025-09670-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Group Psychosocial Interventions Following Acquired Brain Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Group Process and Outcomes.
Acquired brain injury can result in disability with direct and indirect consequences for psychosocial functioning. Psychosocial interventions embedded within traditional neurorehabilitation may provide a valuable buffer. While there is evidence of benefits associated with group-based psychosocial interventions, there is no single recommended intervention, despite several different approaches having been trialled. This systematic review aimed to provide a critical appraisal of existing group psychosocial interventions in neurorehabilitation, meta-analyse their efficacy, and explore the contribution of group process to outcomes. Eligible studies were published in English-language peer-reviewed journals and recruited adults with acquired brain injury in receipt of group psychosocial interventions. Outcomes of interest were depression, anxiety, quality of life, emotional distress, community integration, and social support. A systematic search of CINAHL, PsycINFO, Medline, Web of Science and Embase from database inception until 08.07.2024 was conducted. Risk of bias was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Effect sizes were calculated using Hedges' g and estimated using a three-level random effects model. Sixty-five studies were included in the systematic review, and 48 were included in the meta-analysis (n = 2653). There was an overall small effect on psychosocial outcomes (Hedges' g = 0.24, 95% CIs [0.16, 0.33]), though none of the included studies satisfactorily analysed group process despite 70% of these studies proclaiming their importance. Overall, there were mixed findings across intervention type and significant heterogeneity. Recommendations for future psychosocial group interventions in neurorehabilitation are provided.
期刊介绍:
Neuropsychology Review is a quarterly, refereed publication devoted to integrative review papers on substantive content areas in neuropsychology, with particular focus on populations with endogenous or acquired conditions affecting brain and function and on translational research providing a mechanistic understanding of clinical problems. Publication of new data is not the purview of the journal. Articles are written by international specialists in the field, discussing such complex issues as distinctive functional features of central nervous system disease and injury; challenges in early diagnosis; the impact of genes and environment on function; risk factors for functional impairment; treatment efficacy of neuropsychological rehabilitation; the role of neuroimaging, neuroelectrophysiology, and other neurometric modalities in explicating function; clinical trial design; neuropsychological function and its substrates characteristic of normal development and aging; and neuropsychological dysfunction and its substrates in neurological, psychiatric, and medical conditions. The journal''s broad perspective is supported by an outstanding, multidisciplinary editorial review board guided by the aim to provide students and professionals, clinicians and researchers with scholarly articles that critically and objectively summarize and synthesize the strengths and weaknesses in the literature and propose novel hypotheses, methods of analysis, and links to other fields.