Abhishek Ghosh, Nirvana Morgan, Tanya Calvey, Florian Scheibein, Ioannis Angelakis, Maria Panagioti, Marica Ferri, Dzmitry Krupchanka
{"title":"社会心理干预对酒精使用障碍的疗效:系统综述和荟萃分析更新。","authors":"Abhishek Ghosh, Nirvana Morgan, Tanya Calvey, Florian Scheibein, Ioannis Angelakis, Maria Panagioti, Marica Ferri, Dzmitry Krupchanka","doi":"10.1080/00952990.2024.2350056","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><i>Background:</i> Given the accumulating research, evolving psychosocial treatment, and equivocal findings, updating WHO's Mental Health Gap Action Programme-2015 was necessary to ensure guidelines reflect effective strategies for alcohol use disorder (AUD).<i>Objective:</i> To estimate the effects of psychosocial interventions on drinking and related outcomes.<i>Methods:</i> We included randomized controlled trials published between January 2015 and June 2022 on adults with alcohol dependence (ICD 10/DSM-IV) and moderate to severe AUD (DSM-5), and those examined psychosocial interventions against treatment-as-usual (TAU) and active controls. Eight databases and registries were searched. Relative Risk (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used for dichotomous and continuous outcomes. We used Cochrane's risk of bias assessment (RoB2).<i>Results:</i> Of 873 screened records, 14 and 13 studies in the narrative synthesis and meta-analysis. Of the 2,575 participants, 71.5% were men. Thirteen studies used ICD 10/DSM IV diagnosis. Compared to TAU, any psychosocial intervention increased the relative risk of abstinence by 28% [<i>N</i> = 7, RR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.53, <i>p</i> = .01, NNT = 9]. There were minimal heterogeneity and no evidence of publication bias. Psychosocial interventions were not effective in reducing the drinking frequency (<i>n</i> = 2, Hedge's g = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.46 to 0.26, <i>p</i> = .57) and drinks/drinking days (<i>N</i> = 5, g = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.37 to 0.16, <i>p</i> = .43). Treatment discontinuation did not differ between intervention and control groups [RR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.66 to 1.80].<i>Conclusion:</i> Psychosocial interventions are effective in improving abstinence but not in reducing drinking frequency or amount. Policymakers must consider this evidence to generate AUD treatment guidelines.<i>Registration:</i> PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022342608.</p>","PeriodicalId":48957,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for alcohol use disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis update.\",\"authors\":\"Abhishek Ghosh, Nirvana Morgan, Tanya Calvey, Florian Scheibein, Ioannis Angelakis, Maria Panagioti, Marica Ferri, Dzmitry Krupchanka\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00952990.2024.2350056\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><i>Background:</i> Given the accumulating research, evolving psychosocial treatment, and equivocal findings, updating WHO's Mental Health Gap Action Programme-2015 was necessary to ensure guidelines reflect effective strategies for alcohol use disorder (AUD).<i>Objective:</i> To estimate the effects of psychosocial interventions on drinking and related outcomes.<i>Methods:</i> We included randomized controlled trials published between January 2015 and June 2022 on adults with alcohol dependence (ICD 10/DSM-IV) and moderate to severe AUD (DSM-5), and those examined psychosocial interventions against treatment-as-usual (TAU) and active controls. Eight databases and registries were searched. Relative Risk (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used for dichotomous and continuous outcomes. We used Cochrane's risk of bias assessment (RoB2).<i>Results:</i> Of 873 screened records, 14 and 13 studies in the narrative synthesis and meta-analysis. Of the 2,575 participants, 71.5% were men. Thirteen studies used ICD 10/DSM IV diagnosis. Compared to TAU, any psychosocial intervention increased the relative risk of abstinence by 28% [<i>N</i> = 7, RR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.53, <i>p</i> = .01, NNT = 9]. There were minimal heterogeneity and no evidence of publication bias. Psychosocial interventions were not effective in reducing the drinking frequency (<i>n</i> = 2, Hedge's g = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.46 to 0.26, <i>p</i> = .57) and drinks/drinking days (<i>N</i> = 5, g = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.37 to 0.16, <i>p</i> = .43). Treatment discontinuation did not differ between intervention and control groups [RR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.66 to 1.80].<i>Conclusion:</i> Psychosocial interventions are effective in improving abstinence but not in reducing drinking frequency or amount. Policymakers must consider this evidence to generate AUD treatment guidelines.<i>Registration:</i> PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022342608.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48957,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00952990.2024.2350056\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00952990.2024.2350056","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for alcohol use disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis update.
Background: Given the accumulating research, evolving psychosocial treatment, and equivocal findings, updating WHO's Mental Health Gap Action Programme-2015 was necessary to ensure guidelines reflect effective strategies for alcohol use disorder (AUD).Objective: To estimate the effects of psychosocial interventions on drinking and related outcomes.Methods: We included randomized controlled trials published between January 2015 and June 2022 on adults with alcohol dependence (ICD 10/DSM-IV) and moderate to severe AUD (DSM-5), and those examined psychosocial interventions against treatment-as-usual (TAU) and active controls. Eight databases and registries were searched. Relative Risk (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used for dichotomous and continuous outcomes. We used Cochrane's risk of bias assessment (RoB2).Results: Of 873 screened records, 14 and 13 studies in the narrative synthesis and meta-analysis. Of the 2,575 participants, 71.5% were men. Thirteen studies used ICD 10/DSM IV diagnosis. Compared to TAU, any psychosocial intervention increased the relative risk of abstinence by 28% [N = 7, RR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.53, p = .01, NNT = 9]. There were minimal heterogeneity and no evidence of publication bias. Psychosocial interventions were not effective in reducing the drinking frequency (n = 2, Hedge's g = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.46 to 0.26, p = .57) and drinks/drinking days (N = 5, g = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.37 to 0.16, p = .43). Treatment discontinuation did not differ between intervention and control groups [RR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.66 to 1.80].Conclusion: Psychosocial interventions are effective in improving abstinence but not in reducing drinking frequency or amount. Policymakers must consider this evidence to generate AUD treatment guidelines.Registration: PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022342608.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse (AJDAA) is an international journal published six times per year and provides an important and stimulating venue for the exchange of ideas between the researchers working in diverse areas, including public policy, epidemiology, neurobiology, and the treatment of addictive disorders. AJDAA includes a wide range of translational research, covering preclinical and clinical aspects of the field. AJDAA covers these topics with focused data presentations and authoritative reviews of timely developments in our field. Manuscripts exploring addictions other than substance use disorders are encouraged. Reviews and Perspectives of emerging fields are given priority consideration.
Areas of particular interest include: public health policy; novel research methodologies; human and animal pharmacology; human translational studies, including neuroimaging; pharmacological and behavioral treatments; new modalities of care; molecular and family genetic studies; medicinal use of substances traditionally considered substances of abuse.