Effectiveness of Body Psychotherapy. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Rosendahl S
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8458738 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Objective A quantitative synthesis of online psychotherapies' effectiveness in managing COVID-19 related distress is lacking. This study aimed to estimate online psychological interventions' effectiveness and associated factors on COVID-19 related psychological distress. Methods Multi-databases including PubMed, EBSCO, ProQuest, and Cochrane were searched repeatedly till the end of June 2022. Hand-picking was also utilized for relevant papers. Depression, anxiety, stress, and quality of sleep were evaluated as outcomes. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane tool. Data analyses were conducted through Review Manager (version 5.4.1). Results A total of 13 studies involving 1,897 participants were included for meta-analysis. Results showed that online psychotherapy significantly reduced the levels of depression [standard mean difference, SMD = −0.45, 95% CI (−0.69, −0.20)], anxiety [SMD = −0.67, 95% CI (−0.99, −0.36)], and stress [SMD = −0.73, 95% CI (−1.11, −0.34)], but not quality of sleep [SMD = −0.53, 95% CI (−1.23, 0.17)]. In addition, guided therapies were more effective than self-help ones on reducing levels of anxiety (χ2 = 5.58, p = 0.02, and I2 = 82.1%), and ≤ 2 weeks' daily interventions were more effective on treating depression than 2-month weekly interventions (χ2 = 7.97, p = 0.005, I2 = 87.5%). Conclusion Online psychological interventions effectively reduced COVID-19 related depression, anxiety, and stress levels, and the effectiveness was influenced by settings like guidance and duration and frequency. Systematic review registration https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2022-7-0081/, identifier: INPLASY202270081.
| S-EPMC9682141 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInterpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) is an intervention that has established efficacy in the prevention and treatment of depressive disorders. Previous systematic reviews have not evaluated the effectiveness of IPT on symptoms of stress, anxiety, depression, quality of life, relationship satisfaction/quality, social supports, and an improved psychological sense of well-being. There is limited data regarding factors that moderate and mediate the effectiveness of IPT including the timing of the intervention or the mode of delivery of IPT intervention. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effectiveness, feasibility, and acceptability of IPT interventions to treat perinatal psychological distress and to summarize the evidence on predictors, mediators, and moderators of IPT.MethodsWe will include peer-reviewed studies that recruited perinatal women. The search strategy will involve the following databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Ovid), CINAHL with Full Text (EBSCO), Social Work Abstracts (EBSCO), SocINDEX with Full Text (EBSCO), Academic Search Complete (EBSCO), Family & Society Studies Worldwide (EBSCO), Family Studies Abstracts (EBSCO), and Scopus. Study inclusion criteria include (1) randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, and pre-post studies that evaluated the effectiveness of IPT; (2) qualitative studies that evaluated feasibility and acceptability of IPT; (3) study sample included and analyzed perinatal women; and (4) publication language was English. Using pilot-tested screening and data extraction forms, two reviewers will independently review studies in three steps: (1) abstract/title screening, (2) full-text screening of potentially accepted studies, and (3) data extraction of accepted studies. Disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. Studies will be aggregated for meta-synthesis and meta-analysis should the data allow for this. Two independent reviewers will grade methodological quality.DiscussionFindings from this review will inform future development and implementation of IPT intervention research for perinatal women. Identifying key factors of successful IPT interventions will inform intervention design and adaptation of IPT interventions to increase the likelihood that perinatal women will engage in and benefit from IPT interventions. This review will also identify key considerations for increasing the effectiveness of IPT interventions during the perinatal period.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42019114292.
| S-EPMC6819345 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Primary outcome(s): Colorectal cancer incidence, Colorectal tumor incidence
| 79216 | ecrin-mdr-crc
Project description:BACKGROUND: Smoking remains the leading preventable cause of premature deaths. Several pharmacological interventions now exist to aid smokers in cessation. These include Nicotine Replacement Therapy [NRT], bupropion, and varenicline. We aimed to assess their relative efficacy in smoking cessation by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched 10 electronic medical databases (inception to Sept. 2006) and bibliographies of published reviews. We selected randomized controlled trials [RCTs] evaluating interventions for smoking cessation at 1 year, through chemical confirmation. Our primary endpoint was smoking cessation at 1 year. Secondary endpoints included short-term smoking cessation (approximately 3 months) and adverse events. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression. We compared treatment effects across interventions using head-to-head trials and when these did not exist, we calculated indirect comparisons. RESULTS: We identified 70 trials of NRT versus control at 1 year, Odds Ratio [OR] 1.71, 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 1.55-1.88, P =< 0.0001). This was consistent when examining all placebo-controlled trials (49 RCTs, OR 1.78, 95% CI, 1.60-1.99), NRT gum (OR 1.60, 95% CI, 1.37-1.86) or patch (OR 1.63, 95% CI, 1.41-1.89). NRT also reduced smoking at 3 months (OR 1.98, 95% CI, 1.77-2.21). Bupropion trials were superior to controls at 1 year (12 RCTs, OR1.56, 95% CI, 1.10-2.21, P = 0.01) and at 3 months (OR 2.13, 95% CI, 1.72-2.64). Two RCTs evaluated the superiority of bupropion versus NRT at 1 year (OR 1.14, 95% CI, 0.20-6.42). Varenicline was superior to placebo at 1 year (4 RCTs, OR 2.96, 95% CI, 2.12-4.12, P =< 0.0001) and also at approximately 3 months (OR 3.75, 95% CI, 2.65-5.30). Three RCTs evaluated the effectiveness of varenicline versus bupropion at 1 year (OR 1.58, 95% CI, 1.22-2.05) and at approximately 3 months (OR 1.61, 95% CI, 1.16-2.21). Using indirect comparisons, varenicline was superior to NRT when compared to placebo controls (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.17-2.36, P = 0.004) or to all controls at 1 year (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.22-2.45, P = 0.001). This was also the case for 3-month data. Adverse events were not systematically different across studies. CONCLUSION: NRT, bupropion and varenicline all provide therapeutic effects in assisting with smoking cessation. Direct and indirect comparisons identify a hierarchy of effectiveness.
| S-EPMC1764891 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:In many countries, humanistic psychotherapy (HPT) is viewed as a broad psychotherapeutic approach and is accepted in health care systems. To qualify for reimbursement by health insurance in Germany, psychotherapy approaches have to be evaluated positively by the German Scientific Board of Psychotherapy (GSBP). The GSBP examined HPT and its subapproaches based on an application by a number of professional organizations affiliated with HPT (Work Group Humanistic Psychotherapy, WGHPT). The GSBP came to the decision that none of the HPT subapproaches provided sufficient evidence to be evaluated as evidence based. Potential reasons for the discrepancy between international recognition of HPT and GSBP's decision will be explored: researchers' allegiance may have led to a risk of bias disadvantaging HPT. Furthermore, the evaluation criteria of the GSBP did not systematically consider whether HPT was conceptualized bona fide and implemented with sufficient treatment integrity in the studies. OBJECTIVE:This systematic review will re-examine the studies included in the review of the GSBP. Within 2 comparisons (HPT vs control and HPT vs other psychotherapeutic interventions), we will examine moderating effects of treatment quality (bona fide and treatment integrity) and allegiance on the effectiveness of HPT. METHODS:This review is based on the prior systematic review by the GSBP. The GSBP examined randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and studies with non-RCTs of HPT interventions for individuals with mental disorders. All studies suggested by the WGHPT were included; moreover, the GSBP conducted searches in standard electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and PSYNDEX) and handsearches in relevant systematic reviews and contacted experts. A total of 2 independent GSBP reviewers performed study screening using a structured form. On the basis of the prior work of the GSBP, all studies that were positively screened by the GSBP will be included in this review. Data will be extracted independently by 4 authors. Standardized mean difference will be calculated, and possible publication bias will be tested using funnel plots and Egger test. A priori defined subgroup or meta-regression analyses will be performed for treatment quality, allegiance, type of nonactive control, study quality, type of subapproach, and target population (children and adolescents or adults). RESULTS:The GSBP identified 115 eligible studies that will be reanalyzed in this systematic review. CONCLUSIONS:Results about moderator effects of treatment quality and allegiance will provide important information about their impact on the evaluation of HPT and other psychotherapy approaches and can be used for further evaluation methods. TRIAL REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42019128983; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=128983. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID):PRR1-10.2196/15140.
| S-EPMC6902128 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to examine the effectiveness of psychological interventions for internalising disorders in youth when delivered in routine settings. Secondary aims were to examine the effectiveness of cognitive behavioural therapy and determine moderators of treatment response. The study was pre-registered (PROSPERO 2020 CRD42020202776). Databases were systematically searched (PsycINFO, Medline, Embase, PubMed, ERIC) in December 2022 and screened according to the PRISMA 2020 statement. Inclusion: School aged participants (4-18 years) with a primary internalising disorder; psychotherapy delivered in a routine setting (e.g. outpatient clinic, school) by setting staff; compared psychotherapy to any control in a randomised controlled trial; reported pre-to-post or pre-to-follow-up comparisons on the primary disorder according to child, parent or independent evaluator report; and was published in English. Risk of bias was assessed using the ROB 2.0 Cochrane tool. Results were synthesised using random effects to pool estimates. Risk ratios were used to analyse dichotomous data and standardised mean differences (SMD) for continuous data. Forty-five studies were included (N = 4901 participants; M = 13 years; range 8-16; SD = 2.5). Nine used waitlist control, 17 treatment as usual, 4 placebo; 15 compared psychotherapy to active control. Psychotherapy was associated with small significant effects pre- to post-treatment compared to non-active controls for anxiety (SMD = - 0.24 to 0.50) and depression (SMD = - 0.19 to 0.34) with effects differing by informant. Psychotherapy led to small significant pre-to-post-benefits in youth internalising disorders in routine settings. Results are limited by reporter type and follow-up.
| S-EPMC10465434 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceSeveral psychotherapy protocols have been evaluated as adjuncts to pharmacotherapy for patients with bipolar disorder, but little is known about their comparative effectiveness.ObjectiveTo use systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare the association of using manualized psychotherapies and therapy components with reducing recurrences and stabilizing symptoms in patients with bipolar disorder.Data sourcesMajor bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, PsychInfo, and Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews) and trial registries were searched from inception to June 1, 2019, for randomized clinical trials of psychotherapy for bipolar disorder.Study selectionOf 3255 abstracts, 39 randomized clinical trials were identified that compared pharmacotherapy plus manualized psychotherapy (cognitive behavioral therapy, family or conjoint therapy, interpersonal therapy, or psychoeducational therapy) with pharmacotherapy plus a control intervention (eg, supportive therapy or treatment as usual) for patients with bipolar disorder.Data extraction and synthesisBinary outcomes (recurrence and study retention) were compared across treatments using odds ratios (ORs). For depression or mania severity scores, data were pooled and compared across treatments using standardized mean differences (SMDs) (Hedges-adjusted g using weighted pooled SDs). In component network meta-analyses, the incremental effectiveness of 13 specific therapy components was examined.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was illness recurrence. Secondary outcomes were depressive and manic symptoms at 12 months and acceptability of treatment (study retention).ResultsA total of 39 randomized clinical trials with 3863 participants (2247 of 3693 [60.8%] with data on sex were female; mean [SD] age, 36.5 [8.2] years) were identified. Across 20 two-group trials that provided usable information, manualized treatments were associated with lower recurrence rates than control treatments (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43-0.74). Psychoeducation with guided practice of illness management skills in a family or group format was associated with reducing recurrences vs the same strategies in an individual format (OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.94). Cognitive behavioral therapy (SMD, -0.32; 95% CI, -0.64 to -0.01) and, with less certainty, family or conjoint therapy (SMD, -0.46; 95% CI, -1.01 to 0.08) and interpersonal therapy (SMD, -0.46; 95% CI, -1.07 to 0.15) were associated with stabilizing depressive symptoms compared with treatment as usual. Higher study retention was associated with family or conjoint therapy (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26-0.82) and brief psychoeducation (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23-0.85) compared with standard psychoeducation.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that outpatients with bipolar disorder may benefit from skills-based psychosocial interventions combined with pharmacotherapy. Conclusions are tempered by heterogeneity in populations, treatment duration, and follow-up.
| S-EPMC7557716 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe treatment of depression in patients with somatic disorders is crucial, given its negative impact on quality of life (QoL), functioning, and even on the somatic disease prognosis. We aimed to examine the most updated evidence on the effects of psychotherapy in patients with depression and somatic disorders, including HIV, oncological, cardiometabolic, and neurological disorders.MethodsWe conducted a meta-analysis of 75 randomized trials (8209 participants) of psychotherapy for adults with somatic disorders and a diagnosis or elevated symptoms of depression. Outcomes included depression, QoL, somatic health-related outcomes, and mortality.ResultsPsychotherapy significantly reduced the severity of depression at post-treatment across all categories of somatic disorders (Hedges'g = 0.65; 95% CI 0.52-0.79), with sustained effects at 6-11 months (g = 0.38; 95% CI 0.22-0.53) and at 12 months follow-up or longer (g = 0.13; 95% CI 0.04-0.21). Psychotherapy also showed significant effects on QoL (g = 0.26; 95% CI 0.17-0.35), maintained up to 11 months follow-up (g = 0.25; 95% CI 0.16-0.34). No significant effects were observed on the most frequently reported somatic health-related outcomes (glycemic control, pain), and neither on mortality. Heterogeneity in most analyses was very high, and only 29 (38%) trials were rated at low risk of bias (RoB).ConclusionsPsychotherapy may be an effective treatment option for patients with depression and somatic disorders, with long-term effects on depression severity and QoL. However, these results should be interpreted with caution due to heterogeneity and RoB.
| S-EPMC10123840 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Further research gaps exist in relation to the promotion of breastfeeding. Robust scientific evidence obtained by a meta-analysis would provide objectively summarized data while enabling the assessment of consistency of findings. This review includes the first documented meta-analysis done on the effectiveness of targeting fathers for promoting breastfeeding (BF). Assessments have been done for a primary outcome and for six more secondary outcomes. METHODS:PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, CENTRAL databases and unpublished researches were searched. Selections of randomized-controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were done in three rounds. Heterogeneity and potential publication bias were assessed. Eight studies were included in meta-analysis and others in narrative synthesis of the outcomes. Pooling was done with the Mental- Haenszel method using risk ratio (RR). Summary-of-Findings table was composed by Review-Manager (version 5.3) and GRADEproGDT applications. Subsequent sensitivity analysis was done. RESULTS:Selected eight interventional studies included 1852 families. Exclusive BF at six months was significantly higher (RR = 2.04, CI = 1.58-2.65) in the intervention groups. The RR at 4 months was 1.52 (CI = 1.14 to 2.03). Risk of full-formula-feeding (RR = 0.69, CI = 0.52-0.93) and the occurrence of lactation-related problems were lower in the intervention groups (RR = 0.24, CI = 0.10-0.57). More likelihood of rendering support in BF-related issues was seen in intervention groups (RR = 1.43, CI = 1.22-1.68). Increase of maternal knowledge and favorable attitudes on BF were higher in the intervention groups (P ≤; 0.001). The quality of evidence according to GRADE was "low" (for one outcome), "moderate" (for four outcomes), and "high" (for two outcomes). CONCLUSIONS:Targeting fathers in promotion of BF has provided favorable results for all seven outcomes with satisfactory quality of evidence. This review was registered in the PROSPERO-registry (ID: 2017-CRD42017076163) prior to its commencement.
| S-EPMC6154400 | biostudies-other
Project description:Background: Suicidal behavior is a major public health concern worldwide, and the interest in the development of novel and more efficient treatment strategies and therapies to reduce suicidal risk is increasing. Some recent studies have summarized the results of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of psychotherapeutic tools designed to treat patients at suicidal risk. However, observational studies, which reflect real-world effectiveness and may use original approaches, have not been reviewed. Method: The aim of this study is to systematically review the available scientific evidence issued from observational studies on the clinical effectiveness of psychotherapeutic tools designed to treat patients at suicide risk. We have thus performed a systematic search of PubMed and Web of Science databases. Results: Out of 1578 papers, 40 original observational studies fulfilled our selection criteria. The most used psychotherapeutic treatments were dialectical behavioral therapy (DBT, 27.5%) and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT, 15.0%) in patients with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (32.5%) and depression (15.0%). Despite the between-study heterogeneity, interventions lead to a reduction in suicidal outcomes, i.e., suicidal ideation (55.0%) and suicide attempts (37.5%). The content and reporting quality varied considerably between the studies. Conclusion: DBT and CBT are the most widely used psychotherapeutic interventions and show promising results in existing observational studies. Some of the included studies provide innovative approaches. Group therapies and internet-based therapies, which are cost-effective methods, are promising treatments and would need further study.
| S-EPMC6389707 | biostudies-literature