运动训练和常规心理疗法治疗成人抑郁症的疗效比较:网络荟萃分析。

N. Hooper, Tessa Johnson, M. Sachs, Alexis Silverio, Lin Zhu, Aisha Bhimla, Logan Teal, Stephanie Roth, C. LaGrotte, Joyce Stravrakis, F. Arcangelo
{"title":"运动训练和常规心理疗法治疗成人抑郁症的疗效比较:网络荟萃分析。","authors":"N. Hooper, Tessa Johnson, M. Sachs, Alexis Silverio, Lin Zhu, Aisha Bhimla, Logan Teal, Stephanie Roth, C. LaGrotte, Joyce Stravrakis, F. Arcangelo","doi":"10.15367/ch.v3i2.500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective\nAn estimated 3.8% of the global population experiences depression, according to the [2019] WHO report. Evidence supports the efficacy of exercise training (EX) for depression; however, its comparative efficacy to conventional, evidence-supported psychotherapies remains understudied. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of exercise training (EX), behavioral activation therapy (BA), cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and non-directive supportive therapy (NDST).\n\n\nMethods\nOur search was performed in seven relevant databases (inception to March 10, 2020) and targeted randomized trials comparing psychological interventions head-to-head and/or to a treatment as usual (TAU) or waitlist (WL) control for the treatment of adults (18 years or older) with depression. Included trials assessed depression using a validated psychometric tool.\n\n\nResults\nFrom 28,716 studies, 133 trials with 14,493 patients (mean age of 45.8 years; 71.9% female) were included. All treatment arms significantly outperformed TAU (standard mean difference [SMD] range, -0.49 to -0.95) and WL (SMD range, -0.80 to -1.26) controls. According to surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities, BA was mostly likely to have the highest efficacy (1.6), followed by CBT (1.9), EX (2.8), and NDST (3.8). Effect size estimates between BA and CBT (SMD = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.50 to 0.31]), BA and EX (-0.22, [-0.68 to 0.24]), and CBT and EX (-0.12, [-0.42 to 0.17]) were very small, suggesting comparable treatment effects of BA, CBT, and EX. With individual comparisons of EX, BA, and CBT to NDST, we found small to moderate effect sizes (0.09 to 0.46), suggesting EX, BA, and CBT may equally outperform NDST.\n\n\nConclusions\nFindings provide preliminary yet cautionary support for the clinical use of exercise training for adult depression. High study heterogeneity and lack of sound investigations of exercise must be considered. Continued research is needed to position exercise training as an evidence-based therapy.","PeriodicalId":72639,"journal":{"name":"Commonhealth (Philadelphia, Pa.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Efficacy of Exercise Training and Conventional Psychotherapies for Adult Depression: A Network Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"N. Hooper, Tessa Johnson, M. Sachs, Alexis Silverio, Lin Zhu, Aisha Bhimla, Logan Teal, Stephanie Roth, C. LaGrotte, Joyce Stravrakis, F. Arcangelo\",\"doi\":\"10.15367/ch.v3i2.500\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective\\nAn estimated 3.8% of the global population experiences depression, according to the [2019] WHO report. Evidence supports the efficacy of exercise training (EX) for depression; however, its comparative efficacy to conventional, evidence-supported psychotherapies remains understudied. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of exercise training (EX), behavioral activation therapy (BA), cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and non-directive supportive therapy (NDST).\\n\\n\\nMethods\\nOur search was performed in seven relevant databases (inception to March 10, 2020) and targeted randomized trials comparing psychological interventions head-to-head and/or to a treatment as usual (TAU) or waitlist (WL) control for the treatment of adults (18 years or older) with depression. Included trials assessed depression using a validated psychometric tool.\\n\\n\\nResults\\nFrom 28,716 studies, 133 trials with 14,493 patients (mean age of 45.8 years; 71.9% female) were included. All treatment arms significantly outperformed TAU (standard mean difference [SMD] range, -0.49 to -0.95) and WL (SMD range, -0.80 to -1.26) controls. According to surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities, BA was mostly likely to have the highest efficacy (1.6), followed by CBT (1.9), EX (2.8), and NDST (3.8). Effect size estimates between BA and CBT (SMD = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.50 to 0.31]), BA and EX (-0.22, [-0.68 to 0.24]), and CBT and EX (-0.12, [-0.42 to 0.17]) were very small, suggesting comparable treatment effects of BA, CBT, and EX. With individual comparisons of EX, BA, and CBT to NDST, we found small to moderate effect sizes (0.09 to 0.46), suggesting EX, BA, and CBT may equally outperform NDST.\\n\\n\\nConclusions\\nFindings provide preliminary yet cautionary support for the clinical use of exercise training for adult depression. High study heterogeneity and lack of sound investigations of exercise must be considered. Continued research is needed to position exercise training as an evidence-based therapy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72639,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Commonhealth (Philadelphia, Pa.)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Commonhealth (Philadelphia, Pa.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15367/ch.v3i2.500\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Commonhealth (Philadelphia, Pa.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15367/ch.v3i2.500","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的根据世卫组织[2019]报告,全球约有3.8%的人口患有抑郁症。证据支持运动训练(EX)对抑郁症的疗效;然而,与传统的、有证据支持的心理疗法相比,其疗效仍有待进一步研究。因此,我们进行了一项网络荟萃分析,比较运动训练(EX)、行为激活疗法(BA)、认知行为疗法(CBT)和非指导性支持疗法(NDST)的疗效。方法在7个相关数据库中进行检索(建立至2020年3月10日),并进行针对性随机试验,比较心理干预与常规治疗(TAU)或等候名单(WL)对照治疗成人(18岁或以上)抑郁症的效果。包括试验评估抑郁症使用有效的心理测量工具。结果来自28,716项研究,133项试验,14,493例患者(平均年龄45.8岁;71.9%为女性)。所有治疗组的表现都明显优于TAU(标准平均差[SMD]范围,-0.49至-0.95)和WL (SMD范围,-0.80至-1.26)对照组。从表面下累积排序(SUCRA)概率来看,BA最有可能具有最高的疗效(1.6),其次是CBT(1.9)、EX(2.8)和NDST(3.8)。BA和CBT (SMD = -0.09, 95% CI[-0.50至0.31])、BA和EX(-0.22,[-0.68至0.24])、CBT和EX(-0.12,[-0.42至0.17])之间的效应值估计值非常小,表明BA、CBT和EX的治疗效果相当。通过对EX、BA和CBT与NDST的个体比较,我们发现小到中等的效应值(0.09至0.46),表明EX、BA和CBT可能同样优于NDST。结论本研究结果为运动训练治疗成人抑郁症的临床应用提供了初步但具有警惕性的支持。必须考虑到研究的高度异质性和缺乏对运动的合理调查。需要继续的研究来定位运动训练作为一种循证疗法。
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 of Exercise Training and Conventional Psychotherapies for Adult Depression: A Network Meta-Analysis.
Objective An estimated 3.8% of the global population experiences depression, according to the [2019] WHO report. Evidence supports the efficacy of exercise training (EX) for depression; however, its comparative efficacy to conventional, evidence-supported psychotherapies remains understudied. Therefore, we conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy of exercise training (EX), behavioral activation therapy (BA), cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and non-directive supportive therapy (NDST). Methods Our search was performed in seven relevant databases (inception to March 10, 2020) and targeted randomized trials comparing psychological interventions head-to-head and/or to a treatment as usual (TAU) or waitlist (WL) control for the treatment of adults (18 years or older) with depression. Included trials assessed depression using a validated psychometric tool. Results From 28,716 studies, 133 trials with 14,493 patients (mean age of 45.8 years; 71.9% female) were included. All treatment arms significantly outperformed TAU (standard mean difference [SMD] range, -0.49 to -0.95) and WL (SMD range, -0.80 to -1.26) controls. According to surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities, BA was mostly likely to have the highest efficacy (1.6), followed by CBT (1.9), EX (2.8), and NDST (3.8). Effect size estimates between BA and CBT (SMD = -0.09, 95% CI [-0.50 to 0.31]), BA and EX (-0.22, [-0.68 to 0.24]), and CBT and EX (-0.12, [-0.42 to 0.17]) were very small, suggesting comparable treatment effects of BA, CBT, and EX. With individual comparisons of EX, BA, and CBT to NDST, we found small to moderate effect sizes (0.09 to 0.46), suggesting EX, BA, and CBT may equally outperform NDST. Conclusions Findings provide preliminary yet cautionary support for the clinical use of exercise training for adult depression. High study heterogeneity and lack of sound investigations of exercise must be considered. Continued research is needed to position exercise training as an evidence-based therapy.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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