Interventions for mental health, cognition, and psychological wellbeing in long COVID: a systematic review of registered trials.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Among patients diagnosed with COVID-19, a substantial proportion are experiencing ongoing symptoms for months after infection, known as 'long COVID'. Long COVID is associated with a wide range of physical and neuropsychological symptoms, including impacts on mental health, cognition, and psychological wellbeing. However, intervention research is only beginning to emerge. This systematic review synthesizes currently registered trials examining interventions for mental health, cognition, and psychological wellbeing in patients with long COVID.Methods
Standard systematic review guidelines were followed. Trials registered in two large trial registries in 2020 to May 2022 were reviewed. Included studies were narratively synthesized by type of intervention and a risk-of-bias assessment was conducted.Results
Forty-two registered trials were included, with a total target sample size of 5814 participants. These include 11 psychological interventions, five pharmacological and other medical interventions, and five evaluating herbal, nutritional, or natural supplement interventions. An additional nine trials are examining cognitive and neurorehabilitation interventions and 12 are examining physiotherapy or physical rehabilitation. Most trials are randomized, but many are feasibility trials; trials are evaluating a wide spectrum of outcomes.Conclusions
While there is a newly emerging body of research testing interventions for mental health, cognition, and psychological wellbeing in long COVID, the breadth and scope of the research remains limited. It is urgently incumbent on researchers to expand upon the intervention research currently under way, in order to generate high-quality evidence on a wide range of candidate interventions for diverse long COVID patient populations.
SUBMITTER: Hawke LD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9300978 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background: Research increasingly shows how selective and targeted use of technology within care and welfare can have several advantages including improved quality of care and active user involvement. Purpose: The current overview of reviews aims to summarize the research on the effectiveness of technology for mental health and wellbeing. The goal is to highlight and structure the diverse combinations of technologies and interventions used so far, rather than to summarize the effectiveness of singular approaches. Methods: The current overview includes reviews published in the past five years with a focus on effectiveness of digital and technological interventions targeting mental health and wellbeing. Results: A total of 246 reviews could be included. All reviews examined the effectiveness of digital and technological interventions in the context of care and welfare. A combination of two taxonomies was created through qualitative analysis, based on the retrieved interventions and technologies in the reviews. Review classification shows a predominance of reviews on psychotherapeutic interventions using computers and smartphones. It is furthermore shown that when smartphone applications as stand-alone technology are researched, the primary focus is on self-help, and that extended reality is the most researched emerging technology to date. Conclusion: This overview of reviews shows that a wide range of interventions and technologies, with varying focus and target populations, have been studied in the field of care and wellbeing. The current overview of reviews is a first step to add structure to this rapidly changing field and may guide both researchers and clinicians in further exploring the evidence-base of particular approaches.
| S-EPMC8732948 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOver 600 RCTs have demonstrated the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for children and young people's mental health, but little is known about the long-term outcomes. This systematic review sought to establish whether the effects of selective and indicated interventions were sustained at 12 months.MethodWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on studies reporting medium term outcomes (12 months after end of intervention).FindingsWe identified 138 trials with 12-month follow-up data, yielding 165 comparisons, 99 of which also reported outcomes at end of intervention, yielding 117 comparisons. We found evidence of effect relative to control at end of intervention (K = 115, g = 0.39; 95% CI: 0.30-0.47 I2 = 84.19%, N = 13,982) which was maintained at 12 months (K = 165, g = 0.31, CI: 0.25-0.37, I2 = 77.35%, N = 25,652) across a range of diagnostic groups. We explored the impact of potential moderators on outcome, including modality, format and intensity of intervention, selective or indicated intervention, site of delivery, professional/para-professional and fidelity of delivery. We assessed both risk of study bias and publication bias.ConclusionsPsychosocial interventions provided in a range of settings by professionals and paraprofessionals can deliver lasting benefits. High levels of heterogeneity, moderate to high risk of bias for most studies and evidence of publication bias require caution in interpreting the results. Lack of studies in diagnostic groups such as ADHD and self-harm limit the conclusions that can be drawn. Programmes that increase such interventions' availability are justified by the benefits to children and young people and the decreased likelihood of disorder in adulthood.
| S-EPMC7668611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many researchers in China have performed related clinical research. However, systematic reviews of the registered clinical trials are still lacking. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of clinical trials for COVID-19 to summarize their characteristics.MethodsThis study is based on the PRISMA recommendations in the Cochrane handbook. The Chinese Clinical Registration Center and the ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched to identify registered clinical trials related to COVID-19. The retrieval inception date was February 9, 2020. Two researchers independently selected the literature based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and evaluated the risk of bias.ResultsA total of 75 registered clinical trials (63 interventional studies and 12 observational studies) for COVID-19 were identified. The majority of clinical trials were sponsored by Chinese hospitals. Only 11 trials have begun to recruit patients, and none of the registered clinical trials have been completed; 34 trials were early clinical exploratory trials or in the pre-experiment stage, 13 trials were phase III, and four trials were phase IV. The intervention methods included traditional Chinese medicine in 26 trials, Western medicine in 30 trials, and integrated traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine in 19 trials. The subjects were primarily non-critical adult patients (≥ 18 years old). The median sample size of the trials was 100 (IQR: 60-200), and the median length of the trial periods was 179 d (IQR: 94-366 d). The main outcomes were clinical observation and examinations. Overall, the methodological quality of both the interventional trials and observational studies was low.ConclusionsIntensive clinical trials on the treatment of COVID-19 using traditional Chinese medicine and Western medicine are ongoing or will be performed in China. However, based on the uncertain methodological quality, small sample size, and long trial duration, we will not be able to obtain reliable, high-quality clinical evidence regarding the treatment of COVID-19 in the near future. Improving the quality of study design, prioritizing promising drugs, and using different designs and statistical methods are worth advocating and recommending for clinical trials of COVID-19 in the future.
| S-EPMC7338108 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesDue to the rapid spread of COVID-19 worldwide, many countries have designed clinical trials to find efficient treatments. We aimed to critically report the characteristics of all the registered and published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) conducted on COVID-19, and summarize the evaluation of potential therapies developed in various regions.Evidence acquisitionWe comprehensively searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, and Clinicaltrial.gov databases to retrieve all the relevant studies up to July 19, 2021, in conformity with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flowchart. We included all English-language published/registered RCTs on COVID-19, and excluded non-RCT, in-vitro/in-vivo, editorials, and review studies. Two reviewers independently evaluated all the records, and then analyzed by using SPSS 17.ResultsWithin 3018 included studies, 2801 (92.8%) and 217 (7.2%) were registered or published RCTs consisting of about 600 synthetic drugs. Herbal medicines have been studied in 23 trials (10.6%) among the published RCTs and in 357 registered RCTs (12.7%). Hydroxychloroquine 23 (10.6%) and convalescent plasma 194 (6.9%) alone or in combination with other agents were the most frequently used interventions in published and registered RCTs, respectively. Most published RCTs have been conducted in Western Pacific Region (WPRO) (50 trials, 23.0%) including 45 trials from China. Also, a greater proportion of registered RCTs have been conducted in the Region of the Americas (PAHO) (885 trials, 31.6%) including 596 RCTs from the United States (U.S). Globally, 283 registered trials have been conducted to assess new developed vaccines for COVID or previously established for other disorders.ConclusionThe present study highlighted the wide range of potential therapeutic agents in published and registered COVID-19 clinical trials across a wide range of regions. However, it is urgently required to global coordination in order to conduct more well-designed trials and progress in discovering safe and effective treatments.
| S-EPMC8581284 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the evidence for the use of psychological and psychosocial interventions offered to forensic mental health inpatients.DesignCINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ScienceDirect and Web of Science databases were searched for research published in English between 1 January 1990 and 31 May 2018.Outcome measuresDisturbance, mental well-being, quality of life, recovery, violence/risk, satisfaction, seclusion, symptoms, therapeutic relationship and ward environment. There were no limits on the length of follow-up.Eligibility criteriaWe included randomised controlled trial (RCT) studies of any psychological or psychosocial intervention in an inpatient forensic setting. Pilot or feasibility studies were included if an RCT design was used.We restricted our search criteria to inpatients in low, medium and high secure units aged over 18. We focused on interventions considered applicable to most patients residing in forensic mental health settings.Data extraction and synthesisTwo independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias.Results17 232 citations were identified with 195 full manuscripts examined in detail. Nine papers were included in the review. The heterogeneity of the identified studies meant that meta-analysis was inappropriate. The results were presented in table form together with a narrative synthesis. Only 7 out of 91 comparisons revealed statistically significant results with no consistent significant findings. The most frequently reported outcomes were violence/risk and symptoms. 61% of the violence/risk comparisons and 79% of the symptom comparisons reported improvements in the intervention groups compared with the control groups.ConclusionsCurrent practice is based on limited evidence with no consistent significant findings. This review suggests psychoeducational and psychosocial interventions did not reduce violence/risk, but there is tentative support they may improve symptoms. More RCTs are required with: larger sample sizes, representative populations, standardised outcomes and control group interventions similar in treatment intensity to the intervention.Prospero registration numberCRD42017067099.
| S-EPMC6475151 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThere is an increased awareness of the effect of a bladder cancer diagnosis and its treatments on the mental wellbeing of patients. However, few studies have evaluated the efficacy, feasibility and acceptability of interventions to improve this mental wellbeing. This systematic review is the first phase of the Medical Research Council Framework for developing complex interventions and provides an overview of the published mental wellbeing interventions that could be used to design an intervention specific for BC patients.MethodsThis review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines in January 2019 and studies were identified by conducting searches for Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Ovid Gateway. All included studies met the following criteria: mental wellbeing interventions of adults with medically confirmed diagnosis of any type of urological cancer, reported outcomes for specific HRQoL domains including psychological factors. The quality of evidence was assessed according to Down and Black 27-item checklist.ResultsA total of 15,094 records were collected from the literature search and 10 studies matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, nine interventions were for patients with prostate cancer and one for patients with kidney cancer. No studies were found for other urological cancers. Depression was the most commonly reported endpoint measured. Of the included studies with positive efficacy, three were group interventions and two were couple interventions. In the group interventions, all showed a reduction in depressive symptoms and in the couple interventions, there was a reduction in depressive symptoms and a favourable relationship cohesion. The couple interventions were the most feasible and acceptable, but further research was required for most of the studies.ConclusionWhile awareness of the importance of mental wellbeing in bladder cancer patients is growing, this systematic literature review highlights the gap of feasible and acceptable interventions for this patient population.
| S-EPMC7842965 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With the intent of improving transparency in clinical research, the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) established guidelines in 2005 regarding prospective clinical trial registration. This action worked to address bias related to selective outcome reporting in the medical literature. The objective of this study was to assess and characterize the quality of registration of clinical trials appearing in shoulder arthroplasty-related medical journals.All randomized trials involving human subjects, pertaining to shoulder arthroplasty, published between July 1, 2005 and December 31, 2015, and indexed in either PubMed or SportDISCUS were analyzed. We assessed the prevalence of registration, the timing of registration relative to patient enrollment periods, and the variable rates of orthopedic journal compliance with ICMJE and Food and Drug Administration clinical registration standards for our study.Of the 382 articles identified, 345 (90.3%) were excluded due to failure to meet inclusion criteria. From the remaining 37, only 12 (32.4%) studies were found to be registered in a trial registry. Ten (10/12, 83.3%) of these provided their registration information within the body of the article. None of the included studies from ICMJE-recognized journals were registered. From 34 included studies from non-ICMJE recognized journals, 12 (35.3%) were registered.The level of compliance with clinical trial registration guidelines in the decade since their release among shoulder arthroplasty trials in orthopedic journals is poor. Given the importance of the issue, the prevalence of the problem, and the fact that many other medical specialties have already made efforts to improve ICMJE compliance, further work on the part of orthopedic surgery journal authors and editors is needed to ensure the publication of unbiased results.UMIN000022487.
| S-EPMC5072652 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this systematic review was to describe the characteristics of clinical trials that focused on COVID-19 patients with cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and the variability in CRS definitions. Two authors independently searched three clinical trial registries and included interventional clinical trials on COVID-19 hospitalized patients that required at least one elevated inflammatory biomarker. Relevant data, including the type and cutoff of the measured biomarker, oxygen/respiratory criteria, fever, radiologic criteria, and medications, were summarized. A total of 47 clinical trials were included. The included studies considered the following criteria: oxygen/respiratory criteria in 42 trials (89%), radiologic criteria in 29 trials (62%), and fever in 6 trials (18%). Serum ferritin was measured in 35 trials (74%), CRP in 34 trials (72%), D-dimer in 26 trials (55%), LDH in 24 trials (51%), lymphocyte count in 14 trials (30%), and IL-6 in 8 trials (17%). The cutoff values were variable for the included biomarkers. The most commonly used medications were tocilizumab, in 15 trials (32%), and anakinra in 10 trials (24.4%). This systematic review found high variability in CRS definitions and associated biomarker cutoff values in COVID-19 clinical trials. We call for a standardized definition of CRS, especially in COVID-19 patients.
| S-EPMC8229812 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Our study takes advantage of unique data to quantify deficits in the psychosocial and cognitive resources of an extremely vulnerable subpopulation-those experiencing housing vulnerability-in an advanced, high-income country (Australia). Groups such as these are often impossible to study using nationally representative data sources because they make up a small share of the overall population. We show that those experiencing housing vulnerability sleep less well, have more limited cognitive functioning, and less social capital than do those in the general population. They are also less emotionally stable, less conscientious, more external, and more risk tolerant. Collectively, these deficits in psychosocial and cognitive resources account for between 24-42% of their reduced life satisfaction and their increased mental distress and loneliness. These traits also account for a large proportion of the gap in mental wellbeing across different levels of housing vulnerability.
| S-EPMC8509876 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMental health issues and disorders are major public health challenges, particularly in low- and middle-income countries in Southeast Asia, where chronic shortages in mental health services and human resources exist. The development of effective and accessible mental health systems in Southeast Asia will require evidence based psychological and social interventions. This systematic review provides a narrative synthesis of the evidence on the effectiveness of such interventions for mental health issues and disorders in Southeast Asia.MethodsA comprehensive literature search of 7 electronic databases (PsycINFO, Medline (Ovid), Cochrane library, EMBASE, SCOPUS, APA PsycArticles, and Social Care Online) was undertaken.ResultsThirty two studies employing RCT designs to evaluate the effectiveness of a range of psychological and social mental health interventions on a number of different mental health outcomes were included in this review. The disparate intervention programmes reviewed were categorised as: lay delivered, yoga, aerobic and/or meditation based, cognitive behavioural therapy oriented, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing based (EMDR), health worker delivered, and hybrid programmes. The majority of the studies included in this review were of low to moderate quality due to the variability in the quality of the study design. The highest quality, and most promising evidence came from the evaluations of lay delivered interventions. This evidence demonstrates the feasibility and potential sustainability of implementing such interventions in resource constrained contexts.ConclusionsThe review findings indicate that a disparate array of mental health interventions can be implemented effectively in a range of Southeast Asian mental health and health settings. There is a clear need for significantly more research however, through higher quality and larger scale RCTs before it will be known more definitively, if these interventions are effective, and for whom they are most effective in different Southeast Asian contexts.
| S-EPMC8178881 | biostudies-literature