Evidence-Based Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions for Mental Health Management Post-Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-10 DOI:10.1097/HTR.0000000000000984
Cecilia Flores-Sandoval, Robert Teasell, Heather M MacKenzie, Amanda McIntyre, Ujjoyinee Barua, Swati Mehta, Mark Bayley, Emma A Bateman
{"title":"Evidence-Based Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions for Mental Health Management Post-Moderate to Severe Traumatic Brain Injury.","authors":"Cecilia Flores-Sandoval, Robert Teasell, Heather M MacKenzie, Amanda McIntyre, Ujjoyinee Barua, Swati Mehta, Mark Bayley, Emma A Bateman","doi":"10.1097/HTR.0000000000000984","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To present an evidence-based review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions for mental health post-moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (post-MSTBI), as part of an extensive database that has been conceptualized as a living systematic review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Systematic searches were conducted for RCTs published in the English language in MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, up to and including December 2022, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The methodological quality of RCTs was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale, and the level of evidence was assigned using a modified Sackett scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-seven RCTs examining mental health interventions and outcome measures post-MSTBI were included. These studies collectively enrolled 6471 participants. A total of 41 RCTs (47.1%) were conducted in the United States and 56 studies (64.4%) were published after 2010. A total of 62 RCTs (71.3%) examined nonpharmacological interventions and 25 RCTs (28.7%) examined pharmacological interventions. Effective pharmacological treatments included desipramine and cerebrolysin; methylphenidate and rivastigmine showed conflicting evidence. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was found to be effective for hopelessness, stress, and anxiety, compared to usual care; however, it may be as effective as supportive psychotherapy for depression. CBT combined with motivational interviewing may be as effective as CBT combined with nondirective counseling for depression, stress, and anxiety. Acceptance and commitment therapy was effective for anxiety, stress, and depression. Tai Chi, dance, and walking appeared to be effective for depression and stress, while other nonpharmacological treatments such as peer mentoring showed limited effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This evidence-based review provides a comprehensive overview of the research landscape of RCTs addressing mental health post-MSTBI. The findings from these RCTs may be valuable for health care professionals, researchers, and policymakers involved in the field of mental health and neurorehabilitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":15901,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation","volume":"39 5","pages":"342-358"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HTR.0000000000000984","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To present an evidence-based review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating interventions for mental health post-moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (post-MSTBI), as part of an extensive database that has been conceptualized as a living systematic review.

Methods: Systematic searches were conducted for RCTs published in the English language in MEDLINE, PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, up to and including December 2022, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The methodological quality of RCTs was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale, and the level of evidence was assigned using a modified Sackett scale.

Results: Eighty-seven RCTs examining mental health interventions and outcome measures post-MSTBI were included. These studies collectively enrolled 6471 participants. A total of 41 RCTs (47.1%) were conducted in the United States and 56 studies (64.4%) were published after 2010. A total of 62 RCTs (71.3%) examined nonpharmacological interventions and 25 RCTs (28.7%) examined pharmacological interventions. Effective pharmacological treatments included desipramine and cerebrolysin; methylphenidate and rivastigmine showed conflicting evidence. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) was found to be effective for hopelessness, stress, and anxiety, compared to usual care; however, it may be as effective as supportive psychotherapy for depression. CBT combined with motivational interviewing may be as effective as CBT combined with nondirective counseling for depression, stress, and anxiety. Acceptance and commitment therapy was effective for anxiety, stress, and depression. Tai Chi, dance, and walking appeared to be effective for depression and stress, while other nonpharmacological treatments such as peer mentoring showed limited effectiveness.

Conclusion: This evidence-based review provides a comprehensive overview of the research landscape of RCTs addressing mental health post-MSTBI. The findings from these RCTs may be valuable for health care professionals, researchers, and policymakers involved in the field of mental health and neurorehabilitation.

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
基于证据的中重度脑损伤后心理健康管理干预随机对照试验综述。
目的:对评估中重度创伤性脑损伤(MSTBI)后心理健康干预措施的随机对照试验(RCT)进行循证综述,作为广泛数据库的一部分,该数据库已被概念化为一个活的系统综述:方法:根据《系统综述和元分析首选报告项目》指南,对截至 2022 年 12 月(含 2022 年 12 月)在 MEDLINE、PubMed、Scopus、CINAHL、EMBASE 和 PsycINFO 上发表的英文 RCT 进行了系统检索。采用物理治疗证据数据库量表对研究性临床试验的方法学质量进行评估,并采用修改后的萨基特量表确定证据等级:结果:共纳入 87 项研究,这些研究对创伤性脑损伤后的心理健康干预措施和结果测量进行了研究。这些研究共招募了 6471 名参与者。共有 41 项 RCT(占 47.1%)在美国进行,56 项研究(占 64.4%)发表于 2010 年之后。共有 62 项研究性试验(71.3%)对非药物干预措施进行了研究,25 项研究性试验(28.7%)对药物干预措施进行了研究。有效的药物治疗包括地西泮和脑复康;哌醋甲酯和利巴斯的明的证据相互矛盾。研究发现,与常规治疗相比,认知行为疗法(CBT)对绝望、压力和焦虑有效;然而,它可能与支持性心理治疗对抑郁症同样有效。在抑郁、压力和焦虑方面,CBT 与动机访谈相结合可能与 CBT 与非指导性咨询相结合一样有效。接纳与承诺疗法对焦虑、压力和抑郁有效。太极拳、舞蹈和步行似乎对抑郁和压力有效,而同伴指导等其他非药物疗法的效果有限:本循证综述全面概述了针对创伤后和非创伤性脑损伤后心理健康的 RCT 研究情况。这些 RCT 的研究结果可能对心理健康和神经康复领域的医护人员、研究人员和政策制定者很有价值。
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
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
4.20%
发文量
153
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation is a leading, peer-reviewed resource that provides up-to-date information on the clinical management and rehabilitation of persons with traumatic brain injuries. Six issues each year aspire to the vision of “knowledge informing care” and include a wide range of articles, topical issues, commentaries and special features. It is the official journal of the Brain Injury Association of America (BIAA).
期刊最新文献
Effects of Home Neighborhood Tree Canopy Coverage on Mental Health Outcomes: A Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems Investigation. Reciprocal Causation Among Pain, Physical Health, and Mental Health 1 Year Post-Traumatic Brain Injury: A Cross-Lagged Panel Model From the TRACK-TBI Study. Association of Frailty, Comorbidities and Muscularity With GOS and 30-Day Mortality After TBI in Elderly Patients-A Retrospective Study in 1104 Patients. Relationships Between Neighborhood Disadvantage, Race/Ethnicity, and Neurobehavioral Symptoms Among Veterans With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury. Cross-Lagged Associations Among Sleep, Headache, and Pain in Pediatric Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: An A-CAP Study.
×
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