Self-help interventions for the prevention of relapse in mood disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Family practice Pub Date : 2024-07-17 DOI:10.1093/fampra/cmae036
Heidi Ka-Ying Lo, Fiona Yan-Yee Ho, Jerry Wing-Fai Yeung, Stephy Tim-Wai Ng, Eva Yuen-Ting Wong, Ka-Fai Chung
{"title":"Self-help interventions for the prevention of relapse in mood disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Heidi Ka-Ying Lo, Fiona Yan-Yee Ho, Jerry Wing-Fai Yeung, Stephy Tim-Wai Ng, Eva Yuen-Ting Wong, Ka-Fai Chung","doi":"10.1093/fampra/cmae036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Self-help interventions may offer a scalable adjunct to traditional care, but their effectiveness in relapse prevention is not well-established. Objectives: This review aimed to assess their effectiveness in preventing relapses among individuals with mood disorders.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically reviewed the pertinent trial literature in Web of Science, EMBASE, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases until May 2024. Randomized controlled trials that examined the self-help interventions among individuals diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BD) were included. The random-effects model computed the pooled risk ratios of relapse, with subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses to explore heterogeneity sources.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifteen papers and 16 comparisons of randomized trials involving 2735 patients with mood disorders were eligible for this meta-analysis. Adjunct self-help interventions had a small but significant effect on reducing the relapse rates of major depressive disorder (pooled risk ratio: 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.66-0.92, P = 0.0032, NNT = 11), and were marginally better in bipolar disorder (pooled risk ratio: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.40-0.97, P = .0344, NNT = 12), as compared to treatment as usual (TAU). No subgroup difference was found based on intervention components, settings, delivery method, or guidance levels. The average dropout rate for self-help interventions (18.9%) did not significantly differ from TAU dropout rates. The examination of treatment adherence was highly variable, precluding definitive conclusions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Self-help interventions demonstrate a modest preventative effect on relapse in mood disorders, despite low to very low certainty. Future research is essential to identify which elements of self-help interventions are most effective.</p>","PeriodicalId":12209,"journal":{"name":"Family practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmae036","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Self-help interventions may offer a scalable adjunct to traditional care, but their effectiveness in relapse prevention is not well-established. Objectives: This review aimed to assess their effectiveness in preventing relapses among individuals with mood disorders.

Methods: We systematically reviewed the pertinent trial literature in Web of Science, EMBASE, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases until May 2024. Randomized controlled trials that examined the self-help interventions among individuals diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BD) were included. The random-effects model computed the pooled risk ratios of relapse, with subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses to explore heterogeneity sources.

Results: Fifteen papers and 16 comparisons of randomized trials involving 2735 patients with mood disorders were eligible for this meta-analysis. Adjunct self-help interventions had a small but significant effect on reducing the relapse rates of major depressive disorder (pooled risk ratio: 0.78, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.66-0.92, P = 0.0032, NNT = 11), and were marginally better in bipolar disorder (pooled risk ratio: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.40-0.97, P = .0344, NNT = 12), as compared to treatment as usual (TAU). No subgroup difference was found based on intervention components, settings, delivery method, or guidance levels. The average dropout rate for self-help interventions (18.9%) did not significantly differ from TAU dropout rates. The examination of treatment adherence was highly variable, precluding definitive conclusions.

Conclusions: Self-help interventions demonstrate a modest preventative effect on relapse in mood disorders, despite low to very low certainty. Future research is essential to identify which elements of self-help interventions are most effective.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
预防情绪障碍复发的自助干预:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
导言:自助干预可作为传统治疗的一种可扩展的辅助手段,但其在预防复发方面的有效性尚未得到充分证实。目的:本综述旨在评估自助干预在预防情绪病患者复发方面的有效性:本综述旨在评估自助干预在预防情绪障碍患者复发方面的有效性:我们系统地查阅了 Web of Science、EMBASE、PubMed、PsycINFO 和 Cochrane 数据库中截至 2024 年 5 月的相关试验文献。纳入的随机对照试验研究了被诊断为重度抑郁障碍(MDD)或双相情感障碍(BD)患者的自助干预措施。随机效应模型计算了总的复发风险比,并通过亚组分析和元回归分析来探索异质性的来源:共有15篇论文和16项随机试验比较,涉及2735名情绪障碍患者,符合荟萃分析的条件。与常规治疗(TAU)相比,辅助自助干预对降低重度抑郁障碍的复发率有微小但显著的效果(汇总风险比:0.78,95% 置信区间(CI):0.66-0.92,P = 0.0032,NNT = 11),对双相情感障碍的效果略好(汇总风险比:0.62,95% 置信区间(CI):0.40-0.97,P = 0.0344,NNT = 12)。根据干预内容、环境、实施方法或指导水平,没有发现亚组差异。自助干预的平均辍学率(18.9%)与TAU辍学率没有显著差异。对治疗依从性的检查结果差异很大,因此无法得出明确的结论:自助干预对情绪障碍的复发有一定的预防作用,尽管确定性较低或非常低。未来的研究对于确定自助干预中哪些因素最有效至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Family practice
Family practice 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
144
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Family Practice is an international journal aimed at practitioners, teachers, and researchers in the fields of family medicine, general practice, and primary care in both developed and developing countries. Family Practice offers its readership an international view of the problems and preoccupations in the field, while providing a medium of instruction and exploration. The journal''s range and content covers such areas as health care delivery, epidemiology, public health, and clinical case studies. The journal aims to be interdisciplinary and contributions from other disciplines of medicine and social science are always welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Impact of implementing primary care-based medication for opioid use disorder on provider and staff perceptions. The effect and implementation of the COVID Box, a remote patient monitoring system for patients with a COVID-19 infection in primary care: a matched cohort study. Can patient education initiatives in primary care increase patient knowledge of appropriate antibiotic use and decrease expectations for unnecessary antibiotic prescriptions? Clinical effects of accreditation in general practice: a pragmatic randomized controlled study. School absence policy and healthcare use: a difference-in-difference cohort analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1