Yingying Wang, Clara Miguel, Marketa Ciharova, Arpana Amarnath, Jingyuan Lin, Ruiying Zhao, Marieke B J Toffolo, Sascha Y Struijs, Leonore M de Wit, Pim Cuijpers
{"title":"强迫症心理治疗的有效性:对过去 30 年发表的随机对照试验的荟萃分析。","authors":"Yingying Wang, Clara Miguel, Marketa Ciharova, Arpana Amarnath, Jingyuan Lin, Ruiying Zhao, Marieke B J Toffolo, Sascha Y Struijs, Leonore M de Wit, Pim Cuijpers","doi":"10.1017/S0033291724001375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although numerous studies have examined the effects of psychological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), their overall effectiveness remains unclear. We aimed to estimate their overall effect by combining all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychological treatments to control groups for OCD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a meta-analysis of 48 RCTs with 55 comparisons published between 1992 and 1 January 2023. The primary outcome was OCD symptom severity, with Hedges' g calculated at post-treatment and follow-up. Random-effects models were employed for all analyses, and the risk of bias was assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In general, psychological treatments demonstrated a significantly large effect (<i>g</i> = -1.14; 95% CI [-1.31 to -0.97]; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 72.23%) on reducing OCD symptom severity post-treatment, this finding remained consistent across measures and after excluding outliers, but lost significance in the sensitivity analysis for only studies with low risk of bias. Type of treatment, control group and treatment format were associated with treatment effects. Moreover, more severe baseline OCD symptom severity predicted higher degree of treatment efficacy. No significant differences were observed in dropout rates between the treatment and control groups. Treatment effects lost significance at 3-6 and 6-12 month follow-ups. 87% of RCTs were rated at high risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Psychological treatments are effective in reducing OCD symptom severity. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting these results due to the high heterogeneity and risk of bias across RCTs. Future studies with more rigorous methodology are required, as well as studies examining their long-term effectiveness.</p>","PeriodicalId":20891,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effectiveness of psychological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorders: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published over last 30 years.\",\"authors\":\"Yingying Wang, Clara Miguel, Marketa Ciharova, Arpana Amarnath, Jingyuan Lin, Ruiying Zhao, Marieke B J Toffolo, Sascha Y Struijs, Leonore M de Wit, Pim Cuijpers\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0033291724001375\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Although numerous studies have examined the effects of psychological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), their overall effectiveness remains unclear. We aimed to estimate their overall effect by combining all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychological treatments to control groups for OCD.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a meta-analysis of 48 RCTs with 55 comparisons published between 1992 and 1 January 2023. The primary outcome was OCD symptom severity, with Hedges' g calculated at post-treatment and follow-up. Random-effects models were employed for all analyses, and the risk of bias was assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In general, psychological treatments demonstrated a significantly large effect (<i>g</i> = -1.14; 95% CI [-1.31 to -0.97]; <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 72.23%) on reducing OCD symptom severity post-treatment, this finding remained consistent across measures and after excluding outliers, but lost significance in the sensitivity analysis for only studies with low risk of bias. Type of treatment, control group and treatment format were associated with treatment effects. Moreover, more severe baseline OCD symptom severity predicted higher degree of treatment efficacy. No significant differences were observed in dropout rates between the treatment and control groups. Treatment effects lost significance at 3-6 and 6-12 month follow-ups. 87% of RCTs were rated at high risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Psychological treatments are effective in reducing OCD symptom severity. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting these results due to the high heterogeneity and risk of bias across RCTs. Future studies with more rigorous methodology are required, as well as studies examining their long-term effectiveness.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20891,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291724001375\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291724001375","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
The effectiveness of psychological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorders: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials published over last 30 years.
Background: Although numerous studies have examined the effects of psychological treatments for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), their overall effectiveness remains unclear. We aimed to estimate their overall effect by combining all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychological treatments to control groups for OCD.
Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of 48 RCTs with 55 comparisons published between 1992 and 1 January 2023. The primary outcome was OCD symptom severity, with Hedges' g calculated at post-treatment and follow-up. Random-effects models were employed for all analyses, and the risk of bias was assessed.
Results: In general, psychological treatments demonstrated a significantly large effect (g = -1.14; 95% CI [-1.31 to -0.97]; I2 = 72.23%) on reducing OCD symptom severity post-treatment, this finding remained consistent across measures and after excluding outliers, but lost significance in the sensitivity analysis for only studies with low risk of bias. Type of treatment, control group and treatment format were associated with treatment effects. Moreover, more severe baseline OCD symptom severity predicted higher degree of treatment efficacy. No significant differences were observed in dropout rates between the treatment and control groups. Treatment effects lost significance at 3-6 and 6-12 month follow-ups. 87% of RCTs were rated at high risk of bias.
Conclusions: Psychological treatments are effective in reducing OCD symptom severity. However, caution should be exercised when interpreting these results due to the high heterogeneity and risk of bias across RCTs. Future studies with more rigorous methodology are required, as well as studies examining their long-term effectiveness.
期刊介绍:
Now in its fifth decade of publication, Psychological Medicine is a leading international journal in the fields of psychiatry, related aspects of psychology and basic sciences. From 2014, there are 16 issues a year, each featuring original articles reporting key research being undertaken worldwide, together with shorter editorials by distinguished scholars and an important book review section. The journal''s success is clearly demonstrated by a consistently high impact factor.