Dataset Information

Are Randomized Controlled Trials on Pharmacotherapy and Psychotherapy for Positive Symptoms of Schizophrenia Comparable? A Systematic Review of Patient and Study Characteristics.

ABSTRACT:

Background

We examined patient and study characteristics of pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy trials to establish whether the effects of these 2 treatment strategies can be compared meaningfully.

Methods

We inspected all randomized controlled trials included in 2 recent meta-analyses on antipsychotics and psychotherapy in patients with positive symptoms of schizophrenia, searching EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Differences between psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy trials were analyzed with Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney and chi-square tests.

Results

Eighty studies with 18 271 participants on antipsychotic drugs and 53 studies with 4068 participants on psychotherapy were included. Psychotherapy studies included less severely ill patients (P < .0001), with a shorter duration of illness (P = .021), lasted for a longer period (P < .0001), administered the intervention as add-on to antipsychotics (P < .0001), had higher risk of bias in some domains including blinding of outcome assessment (P < .0001), and were funded publicly more frequently (P < .0001). Antipsychotic trials had larger sample sizes (P < .0001) and more study centers (P < .0001), included more males (P = .0001), inpatients (P < .0001), and slightly older patients (P = .031), more often used diagnostic operationalized criteria (P = .006), and were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. They did not differ in conflict of interest (P = .24).

Conclusions

We found key differences between the 2 groups of studies that encompass higher risk of bias in psychotherapy studies and the inclusion of more severe patients in drug trials. These differences imply that study and patient characteristics should be carefully taken into account before considering a network meta-analysis. In the interest of patients, psychopharmacologists and psychotherapists should optimize their treatments rather than seeing them in competition.

SUBMITTER: Bighelli I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7147572 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:There is rising awareness that we need multidisciplinary approaches integrating psychological treatments for schizophrenia, but a comprehensive evidence based on their relative efficacy is lacking. We will conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA), integrating direct and indirect comparisons from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to rank psychological treatments for schizophrenia according to their efficacy, acceptability and tolerability. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will include all RCTs comparing a psychological treatment aimed at positive symptoms of schizophrenia with another psychological intervention or with a no treatment condition (waiting-list and treatment as usual). We will include studies on adult patients with schizophrenia, excluding specific subpopulations (eg, first-episode patients or patients with psychiatric comorbidities). Primary outcome will be the change in positive symptoms on a published rating scale. Secondary outcomes will be acceptability (dropout), change in overall and negative symptoms of schizophrenia, response, relapse, adherence, depression, quality of life, functioning and adverse events. Published and unpublished studies will be sought through database searches, trial registries and websites. Study selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct random-effects NMA to synthesise all evidences for each outcome and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all treatments. NMA will be conducted in Stata and R within a frequentist framework. The risk of bias in studies will be evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the credibility of the evidence will be evaluated using an adaptation of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework to NMA, recommended by the Cochrane guidance. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be conducted to assess the robustness of the findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:No ethical issues are foreseen. Results from this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at relevant conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42017067795.

Project description:ObjectivePositive psychotherapy (PPT) aims at increasing positive affect, meaning and engagement. We aimed to synthesise the available evidence on PPT efficacy.DesignWe conducted a preregistered systematic literature search and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials examining the efficacy of PPT for increasing positive (eg, satisfaction with life) or decreasing negative psychological outcomes (eg, depression).Data sourcesMedline, PsycINFO and Web of Science from 2006 (ie, inception of PPT) to February 2020 as well as related systematic reviews and meta-analyses.ResultsWe included 20 randomised controlled trial with a total of 1360 participants. Moderate effect sizes were found for increasing positive outcomes (g=-0.72, 95% CI: -1.31 to -0.14, k=10, numbers needed to treat (NNT)=2.55) and reducing negative outcomes (g=0.48, 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.78, k=8, NNT=3.76) when PPT was compared with waitlist control conditions at post-treatment assessment. When compared with active control conditions, PPT yielded large effect sizes for increasing positive outcomes (g=-0.92, 95% CI: -1.74 to -0.11, k=6, NNT=2.05) and reducing depression (g=0.94, 95% CI: 0.18 to 1.70, k=6, NNT=2.03) at post-treatment assessment. No significant differences in efficacy were found when compared with established treatments such as cognitive-behavioural therapy. Evidence was found to support an association between trial quality and effect sizes. For positive outcomes, higher trial quality was related to larger effect size. Whereas higher trial quality was associated with smaller effect size for depression. Follow-up assessments remained too scarce for most planned analyses.ConclusionsOur findings support the short-term efficacy of PPT. However, results are to be regarded with due caution in the light of low number of trials. More high-quality trials that assess efficacy at follow-ups are needed to draw firmer conclusions on the long-term efficacy of PPT.Prospero registration numberCRD42020173567.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Minimal/non-response to antipsychotic treatment, and persistent positive symptoms despite treatment, are common among patients with schizophrenia. The aim of this study was to characterize a US treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) population in terms of patient demographics, burden of symptoms, treatment history, and factors influencing therapeutic choice. METHODS:In an online survey, 204 psychiatrists self-selected and completed three patient records: two TRS and one schizophrenia ('non-TRS'). RESULTS:Respondents reported that 29.5% of their schizophrenia caseload had TRS. Selected TRS (n?=?408) vs non-TRS (n?=?204) patients were more likely to be unemployed (74.5% vs 45.1%, p?<?0.001), hospitalized at least once (93.4% vs 74.0%, p?<?0.001), and to have physical/psychiatric comorbidities including obesity (40.2% vs 23.5%, p?<?0.001) and depression (38.7% vs 25.0%, p?=?0.001). Psychiatric symptoms were more frequent and severe in TRS, and interfered more with social and functioning domains. Of positive symptoms, eliminating delusions and hallucinations was considered most important to improve a patient's long-term prognosis. In TRS, clozapine monotherapy was the most common treatment (15.9%), though ranked fifth of ten options to treat TRS. Psychiatrists typically increased the antipsychotic dose or added a second antipsychotic before initiating clozapine or switching antipsychotics. Antipsychotic switches were most commonly due to lack of efficacy (TRS?=?71.4% vs non-TRS?=?54.3%, p?<?0.001) and intolerability (34.4% vs 38.4%, p?=?0.22) with the prior antipsychotic. Persistent hallucinatory behavior was the top symptom leading to treatment switches in TRS (63.9% vs 37.1%, p?<?0.001). CONCLUSIONS:According to psychiatrists, symptoms have a greater clinical burden on patients with TRS than non-TRS. TRS is commonly managed by antipsychotic dose increases/combinations, with clozapine the fifth preference despite being the only approved TRS medication. New treatments are needed for patients who do not respond to available antipsychotics.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) is a prevalent and disabling preoccupation with a slight or imagined defect in appearance. Trials have investigated the use of serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs) and cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for BDD. OBJECTIVES:To assess the efficacy of pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy or a combination of both treatment modalities for body dysmorphic disorder. SEARCH STRATEGY:We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Trial Register (December 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2007), MEDLINE (January 1966 to December 2007), and PsycINFO (1967 to December 2007). Ongoing and unpublished trials were located through searching the metaRegister of Controlled Trials, the CRISP and WHO ICTRP search portals (databases searched in December 2007), and through contacting key researchers and pharmaceutical companies. Additional studies were located through study reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA:Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of patients meeting DSM or ICD diagnostic criteria for BDD, in which the trials compare pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy or multi-modal treatment groups with active or non-active control groups. Short or long-term trials were eligible. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two review authors independently assessed RCTs for inclusion in the review, collated trial data, and assessed trial quality. Investigators were contacted to obtain missing data. Summary effect sizes for dichotomous and continuous outcomes were calculated using a random effects model and heterogeneity was assessed. MAIN RESULTS:Two pharmacotherapy and three psychotherapy trials were eligible for inclusion in the review, with data from four short-term RCTs (169 participants) available for analysis. Response data from a single placebo-controlled trial of fluoxetine suggested overall superiority of medication relative to placebo (relative risk (RR) 3.07, 95% CI 1.4 to 6.72, n = 67). Symptom severity was also significantly reduced in the RCTs of fluoxetine and clomipramine (relative to desipramine), as well as in the two CBT trials (WMD -44.96, 95% CI -54.43 to -35.49, n = 73). A low relapse rate (4/22) was demonstrated in one trial of CBT. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Results from the small number of available RCTs suggest that SRIs and CBT may be useful in treating patients with BDD. The findings of these studies need to be replicated. In addition, future controlled studies in other samples, such as adolescents, and using other selective SRIs, as well as a range of psychological therapy approaches and modalities (alone and in combination), are essential in supplementing the sparse data currently available.