Technological and Digital Interventions for Mental Health and Wellbeing: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: De Witte NAJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8732948 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:An overview of systematic reviews with meta-analysis was developed to summarize evidence on the effectiveness of prenatal yoga-based interventions on pain, psychological symptoms, and quality of life during pregnancy. CINAHL (via EBSCOhost), Embase, PubMed, SPORTDiscus (via EBSCOhost), and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to 15 December 2022. The intervention of interest was any prenatal yoga-based intervention. Pain, psychological symptoms, and quality of life were considered as outcome measures. The methodological quality of systematic reviews was judged using AMSTAR 2. The primary study overlap among systematic reviews was evaluated, building a citation matrix and calculating the corrected covered area (CCA). A total of ten systematic reviews, including fifteen meta-analyses of interest and comprising 32 distinct primary clinical trials, were included. Meta-analyses on pain and quality of life were not found. Most meta-analyses (93%) showed that prenatal yoga-based interventions are more effective than control interventions in reducing anxiety, depression, and stress symptoms. However, the overall methodological quality of systematic reviews was judged as critically low, and primary study overlap among systematic reviews was very high (CCA = 16%). Altogether, prenatal yoga-based interventions could improve the mental health of pregnant women, although due to the important methodological flaws that were detected, future systematic reviews should improve their methodological quality before drawing firm conclusions on this topic.
| S-EPMC9863076 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Good mental health is related to mental and psychological well-being, and there is growing interest in the potential role of the built environment on mental health, yet the evidence base underpinning the direct or indirect effects of the built environment is not fully clear. The aim of this overview is to assess the effect of the built environment on mental health-related outcomes. Methods. This study provides an overview of published systematic reviews (SRs) that assess the effect of the built environment on mental health. We reported the overview according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Databases searched until November 2019 included the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, EMBASE, MEDLINE (OVID 1946 to present), LILACS, and PsycINFO. Two authors independently selected reviews, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of included reviews using the Assessing Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews-2 (AMSTAR-2). Results. In total, 357 records were identified from a structured search of five databases combined with the references of the included studies, and eleven SRs were included in the narrative synthesis. Outcomes included mental health and well-being, depression and stress, and psychological distress. According to AMSTAR-2 scores, the quality assessment of the included SRs was categorized as "high" in two SRs and as "critically low" in nine SRs. According to the conclusions of the SRs reported by the authors, only one SR reported a "beneficial" effect on mental health and well-being outcomes. Conclusion. There was insufficient evidence to make firm conclusions on the effects of built environment interventions on mental health outcomes (well-being, depression and stress, and psychological distress). The evidence collected reported high heterogeneity (outcomes and measures) and a moderate- to low-quality assessment among the included SRs.
| S-EPMC7106933 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction UK dentists experience high levels of stress, anxiety and burnout. Poor mental health can lead practitioners to exit the profession, contributing to workforce and service loss. Therefore, there is a need to focus on interventions to protect the mental health and wellbeing of dental teams. Three levels of intervention can be deployed in the workplace to support mental health and wellbeing: primary prevention, secondary prevention, and tertiary prevention.Aim The aim of this systematic review was to identify evidence on interventions used to prevent, improve or tackle mental health issues among dental team members and dental profession students in countries of very high development.Methods This systematic review was conducted according to a predefined protocol and reported according to PRISMA guidelines. The MEDLINE, Embase CINAHL, DOSS, Scopus, and PsycINFO databases were searched. Prospective empirical studies were considered for inclusion. The Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool (EPHPP) was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. The identified interventions were categorised according to level of prevention.Results The search yielded 12,919 results. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. All of the studies concerned dentists or dental students. There were no studies for other groups of dental professionals. No primary prevention-level studies were identified. Secondary prevention-level studies (n = 4) included various psychoeducational interventions aiming to raise awareness and improve coping skills and led to significant improvements in stress levels and burnout of dentists and dental students. Tertiary prevention-level studies (n = 4) mainly employed counselling which was shown to be beneficial for dentists and students experiencing psychological ill-health.Conclusions Mental wellbeing awareness should be put at the centre of dental education and the workplace. Leadership and innovation are required to design primary-level interventions which can be implemented in the UK dental sector, with its distinct organisational and service characteristics.
| S-EPMC9735078 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo systematically summarize evidence from multiple systematic reviews (SRs) examining interventions addressing medication nonadherence and to discern differences in effectiveness by intervention, patient, and study characteristics.SummaryMEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched for papers published from January 2004 to February 2017. English-language SRs examining benefits of medication adherence interventions were eligible. Inclusion was limited to adult patients prescribed medication for 1 of the following disease conditions: diabetes and prediabetes, heart conditions, hypertension and prehypertension, stroke, and cognitive impairment. Non-disease-specific SRs that considered medication adherence interventions for older adults, adults with chronic illness, and adults with known medication adherence problems were also included. Two researchers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles. They then extracted key variables from eligible SRs, reconciling discrepancies via discussion. A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) was used to assess SRs; those with scores below 8 were excluded. Conclusions regarding intervention effectiveness were extracted. Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was applied to assess evidence quality.ResultsOf 390 SRs, 25 met the inclusion criteria and assessed adherence as a primary outcome. Intervention types most consistently found to be effective were dose simplification, patient education, electronic reminders to patients, and reduced patient cost sharing or incentives. Of 50 conclusions drawn by the SRs, the underlying evidence was low or very low quality for 45 SRs.ConclusionDespite an abundance of primary studies and despite only examining high-quality SRs, the vast majority of primary studies supporting SR authors' conclusions were of low or very low quality. Nonetheless, health system leaders seeking to improve medication adherence should prioritize interventions that have been studied and found to be effective at improving patient adherence, including dose simplification, education, reminders, and financial incentives.
| S-EPMC6946938 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PURPOSE:To systematically evaluate and summarize evidence across multiple systematic reviews (SRs) examining interventions addressing polypharmacy. SUMMARY:MEDLINE, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) were searched for SRs evaluating interventions addressing polypharmacy in adults published from January 2004 to February 2017. Two authors independently screened, appraised, and extracted information. SRs with Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) scores below 8 were excluded. After extraction of relevant conclusions from each SR, evidence was summarized and conclusions compared. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess evidence quality. Six SRs met the inclusion criteria, 4 of which used meta-analytic pooling. Five SRs focused on older adults. Four were not restricted to any specific disease type, whereas 1 focused on proton pump inhibitors and another focused on patients with severe dementia. Care settings and measured outcomes varied widely. SRs examining the impact on patient-centered outcomes, including morbidity, mortality, patient satisfaction, and utilization, found inconsistent evidence regarding the benefit of polypharmacy interventions, but most concluded that interventions had either null or uncertain impact. Two SRs assessing medication appropriateness found very low-quality evidence of modest improvements with polypharmacy interventions. CONCLUSION:An overview of SRs of interventions to address polypharmacy found 6 recent and high-quality SRs, mostly focused on older adults, in which both process and outcome measures were used to evaluate interventions. Despite the low quality of evidence in the underlying primary studies, both SRs that assessed medication appropriateness found evidence that polypharmacy interventions improved it. However, there was no consistent evidence of any impact on downstream patient-centered outcomes such as healthcare utilization, morbidity, or mortality.
| S-EPMC7170727 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe introduction of new medical technologies such as sensors has accelerated the process of collecting patient data for relevant clinical decisions, which has led to the introduction of a new technology known as digital biomarkers.ObjectiveThis study aims to assess the methodological quality and quality of evidence from meta-analyses of digital biomarker-based interventions.MethodsThis study follows the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guideline for reporting systematic reviews, including original English publications of systematic reviews reporting meta-analyses of clinical outcomes (efficacy and safety endpoints) of digital biomarker-based interventions compared with alternative interventions without digital biomarkers. Imaging or other technologies that do not measure objective physiological or behavioral data were excluded from this study. A literature search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library was conducted, limited to 2019-2020. The quality of the methodology and evidence synthesis of the meta-analyses were assessed using AMSTAR-2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews 2) and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations), respectively. This study was funded by the National Research, Development and Innovation Fund of Hungary.ResultsA total of 25 studies with 91 reported outcomes were included in the final analysis; 1 (4%), 1 (4%), and 23 (92%) studies had high, low, and critically low methodologic quality, respectively. As many as 6 clinical outcomes (7%) had high-quality evidence and 80 outcomes (88%) had moderate-quality evidence; 5 outcomes (5%) were rated with a low level of certainty, mainly due to risk of bias (85/91, 93%), inconsistency (27/91, 30%), and imprecision (27/91, 30%). There is high-quality evidence of improvements in mortality, transplant risk, cardiac arrhythmia detection, and stroke incidence with cardiac devices, albeit with low reporting quality. High-quality reviews of pedometers reported moderate-quality evidence, including effects on physical activity and BMI. No reports with high-quality evidence and high methodological quality were found.ConclusionsResearchers in this field should consider the AMSTAR-2 criteria and GRADE to produce high-quality studies in the future. In addition, patients, clinicians, and policymakers are advised to consider the results of this study before making clinical decisions regarding digital biomarkers to be informed of the degree of certainty of the various interventions investigated in this study. The results of this study should be considered with its limitations, such as the narrow time frame.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.2196/28204.
| S-EPMC9813819 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveThe role of telemonitoring interventions (TIs) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has been studied in many systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs), but robust conclusions have not been reached due to wide variations in scopes, qualities, and outcomes. The aim of this overview was to determine the effectiveness of TIs on COPD patients.MethodsPubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched for all reviews on the topic of TI in treating COPD from inception to July 8, 2019, without restrictions on language. According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the retrieved literature studies were screened to select SRs and MAs of randomized control trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effects of TIs in COPD patients. The methodological quality of SRs and MAs was assessed with the AMSTAR-2 tool, and the strength of evidence was assessed with the grades of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation (GRADE) system for concerned outcomes in terms of mortality, quality of life (SGRQ total scores), exercise capacity (6MWD), and exacerbation-related outcomes (hospitalizations, exacerbation rate, and emergency room visits).ResultsOur overview included eight SRs and MAs published in 2011 to 2019, from 95 RCTs involving 10632 participants. After strict evaluation by the AMSTAR-2 tool, 75% of the SRs and MAs in this overview had either low or critically low methodological quality. The effects of TIs for COPD on mortality, quality of life, exercise capacity, and exacerbation-related outcomes are limited, and all of these outcomes scored either low or very low quality of evidence on the GRADE system.ConclusionsThere might be insufficient evidence to support the effectiveness of TIs for COPD currently, but the results of this overview should be interpreted dialectically and prudently, and the role of TIs in COPD needs further exploration.
| S-EPMC6988702 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has shifted mental health care delivery to digital platforms, videoconferencing, and other mobile communications. However, existing reviews of digital health interventions are narrow in scope and focus on a limited number of mental health conditions.ObjectiveTo address this gap, we conducted a comprehensive systematic meta-review of the literature to assess the state of digital health interventions for the treatment of mental health conditions.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE for secondary literature published between 2010 and 2021 on the use, efficacy, and appropriateness of digital health interventions for the delivery of mental health care.ResultsOf the 3022 records identified, 466 proceeded to full-text review and 304 met the criteria for inclusion in this study. A majority (52%) of research involved the treatment of substance use disorders, 29% focused on mood, anxiety, and traumatic stress disorders, and >5% for each remaining mental health conditions. Synchronous and asynchronous communication, computerized therapy, and cognitive training appear to be effective but require further examination in understudied mental health conditions. Similarly, virtual reality, mobile apps, social media platforms, and web-based forums are novel technologies that have the potential to improve mental health but require higher quality evidence.ConclusionsDigital health interventions offer promise in the treatment of mental health conditions. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, digital health interventions provide a safer alternative to face-to-face treatment. However, further research on the applications of digital interventions in understudied mental health conditions is needed. Additionally, evidence is needed on the effectiveness and appropriateness of digital health tools for patients who are marginalized and may lack access to digital health interventions.
| S-EPMC9109782 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMedication adherence is critical to the effectiveness of psychopharmacologic therapy. Psychiatric disorders present special adherence considerations, notably an altered capacity for decision making and the increased street value of controlled substances. A wide range of interventions designed to improve adherence in mental health and substance use disorders have been studied; recently, many have incorporated information technology (eg, mobile phone apps, electronic pill dispensers, and telehealth). Many intervention components have been studied across different disorders. Furthermore, many interventions incorporate multiple components, making it difficult to evaluate the effect of individual components in isolation.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to conduct a systematic scoping review to develop a literature-driven, transdiagnostic taxonomic framework of technology-based medication adherence intervention and measurement components used in mental health and substance use disorders.MethodsThis review was conducted based on a published protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42018067902) in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses systematic review guidelines. We searched 7 electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Engineering Village, and ClinicalTrials.gov from January 2000 to September 2018. Overall, 2 reviewers independently conducted title and abstract screens, full-text screens, and data extraction. We included all studies that evaluate populations or individuals with a mental health or substance use disorder and contain at least 1 technology-delivered component (eg, website, mobile phone app, biosensor, or algorithm) designed to improve medication adherence or the measurement thereof. Given the wide variety of studied interventions, populations, and outcomes, we did not conduct a risk of bias assessment or quantitative meta-analysis. We developed a taxonomic framework for intervention classification and applied it to multicomponent interventions across mental health disorders.ResultsThe initial search identified 21,749 results; after screening, 127 included studies remained (Cohen kappa: 0.8, 95% CI 0.72-0.87). Major intervention component categories include reminders, support messages, social support engagement, care team contact capabilities, data feedback, psychoeducation, adherence-based psychotherapy, remote care delivery, secure medication storage, and contingency management. Adherence measurement components include self-reports, remote direct visualization, fully automated computer vision algorithms, biosensors, smart pill bottles, ingestible sensors, pill counts, and utilization measures. Intervention modalities include short messaging service, mobile phone apps, websites, and interactive voice response. We provide graphical representations of intervention component categories and an element-wise breakdown of multicomponent interventions.ConclusionsMany technology-based medication adherence and monitoring interventions have been studied across psychiatric disease contexts. Interventions that are useful in one psychiatric disorder may be useful in other disorders, and further research is necessary to elucidate the specific effects of individual intervention components. Our framework is directly developed from the substance use disorder and mental health treatment literature and allows for transdiagnostic comparisons and an organized conceptual mapping of interventions.
| S-EPMC6434404 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDeprescribing (reduction or cessation) of prescribed opioids can be challenging for both patients and healthcare professionals.ObjectiveTo synthesize and evaluate evidence from systematic reviews examining the effectiveness and outcomes of patient-targeted opioid deprescribing interventions for all types of pain.MethodsSystematic searches were conducted in five databases with results screened against predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Primary outcomes were (i) reduction in opioid dose, reported as change in oral Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose (oMEDD) and (ii) success of opioid deprescribing, reported as the proportion of the sample for which opioid use declined. Secondary outcomes included pain severity, physical function, quality of life and adverse events. The certainty of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.FindingsTwelve reviews were eligible for inclusion. Interventions were heterogeneous in nature and included pharmacological (n = 4), physical (n = 3), procedural (n = 3), psychological or behavioural (n = 3) and mixed (n = 5) interventions. Multidisciplinary care programmes appeared to be the most effective intervention for opioid deprescribing; however, the certainty of evidence was low, with significant variability in opioid reduction across interventions.ConclusionsEvidence is too uncertain to draw firm conclusions about specific populations who may derive the greatest benefit from opioid deprescribing, warranting further investigation.
| S-EPMC10953356 | biostudies-literature