Nicholas Hooper, Tessa Johnson, Michael Sachs, Alexis Silverio, Lin Zhu, Aisha Bhimla, Logan Teal, Stephanie Roth, Caitlin Lagrotte, Joyce Stravrakis, Frank Arcangelo
{"title":"运动训练与传统心理疗法对成人抑郁症的疗效比较:网络元分析","authors":"Nicholas Hooper, Tessa Johnson, Michael Sachs, Alexis Silverio, Lin Zhu, Aisha Bhimla, Logan Teal, Stephanie Roth, Caitlin Lagrotte, Joyce Stravrakis, Frank Arcangelo","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":72639,"journal":{"name":"Commonhealth (Philadelphia, Pa.)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10112821/pdf/nihms-1843521.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative Efficacy of Exercise Training and Conventional Psychotherapies for Adult Depression: A Network Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas Hooper, Tessa Johnson, Michael Sachs, Alexis Silverio, Lin Zhu, Aisha Bhimla, Logan Teal, Stephanie Roth, Caitlin Lagrotte, Joyce Stravrakis, Frank Arcangelo\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72639,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Commonhealth (Philadelphia, Pa.)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10112821/pdf/nihms-1843521.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Commonhealth (Philadelphia, Pa.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/4/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Commonhealth (Philadelphia, Pa.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/4/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目标:根据[2019]世卫组织报告,估计全球有 3.8%的人患有抑郁症。有证据支持运动训练(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,运动训练的疗效仍未得到充分研究。因此,我们进行了一项网络荟萃分析,以比较运动训练(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:我们在 7 个相关数据库中进行了检索(检索开始日期至 2020 年 3 月 10 日),并针对治疗成人(18 岁或以上)抑郁症患者的随机试验,对心理干预进行了头对头和/或与通常治疗(TAU)或候补名单(WL)对照的比较。纳入的试验使用有效的心理测量工具对抑郁症进行评估:从 28,716 项研究中,共纳入了 133 项试验,14,493 名患者(平均年龄 45.8 岁;71.9% 为女性)。所有治疗臂的治疗效果均明显优于TAU(标准平均差[SMD]范围为-0.49至-0.95)和WL(SMD范围为-0.80至-1.26)对照组。根据表面累积排名(SUCRA)概率,BA的疗效最高(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 to 0.31])、BA和EX(-0.22,[-0.68 to 0.24])以及CBT和EX(-0.12,[-0.42 to 0.17])之间的效应大小估计值非常小,表明BA、CBT和EX的治疗效果相当。在EX、BA和CBT与NDST的单项比较中,我们发现了小到中等的效应大小(0.09到0.46),这表明EX、BA和CBT可能同样优于NDST: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值得警惕的支持。必须考虑到研究的高度异质性和缺乏对运动的合理调查。要将运动训练定位为一种循证疗法,还需要继续开展研究。
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.