综述:动物辅助干预儿童注意力缺陷/多动障碍-系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 6.8 3区 医学 Q1 PEDIATRICS Child and Adolescent Mental Health Pub Date : 2025-01-10 DOI:10.1111/camh.12744
Shuxin Yu, Hui Xue, Yuqing Xie, Guanyue Shao, Yihui Hao, Lijun Fan, Wei Du
{"title":"综述:动物辅助干预儿童注意力缺陷/多动障碍-系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Shuxin Yu,&nbsp;Hui Xue,&nbsp;Yuqing Xie,&nbsp;Guanyue Shao,&nbsp;Yihui Hao,&nbsp;Lijun Fan,&nbsp;Wei Du","doi":"10.1111/camh.12744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) have emerged as a promising nonpharmacological intervention option for children diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, recent systematic reviews have been primarily narrative. Additionally, the pooled effectiveness of AAIs was absent from these systematic reviews.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis, searching multiple databases, including Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, PsycINFO, EMBASE and Cochrane, from inception of the databases to March 2024. We retrieved 17 randomised controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies and used Review Manager 5.4.1 software to perform a meta-analysis of the effects of AAIs in treating children with ADHD. We conducted a set of random-effects meta-analyses to estimate standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using subgroup data by different outcome domains extracted from eight randomised controlled trials, in relation to changes in behavioural, mental and physical functioning in a total of 307 children with ADHD before and after the intervention.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>In comparison with non-AAI groups, AAIs significantly improved attention problems in children with ADHD (SMD = −0.42, 95% CI = −0.71 to −0.13), self-esteem (0.46, 0.14 to 0.78), learning and cognition problems (−0.69, −0.98 to −0.39) and motor proficiency (0.77, 0.11 to 1.42). The pooled effect of AAIs on the severity of ADHD symptoms in the experimental group was not significantly different from the effect of conventional treatments in the control group (0.10, −0.31 to 0.52). Similarly, AAIs had no significant positive effects on social interaction (−0.22, −0.51 to 0.06), social skills (−0.32, −0.87 to 0.24), problematic behaviours (−0.10, −0.54 to 0.35) or emotional problems, including depression and anxiety (−0.13, −0.51 to 0.24).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>As an ADHD management strategy complementary to gold-standard approaches, such as medication or multimodal interventions, AAIs did not appear to be more effective in improving the majority of core ADHD outcomes in children. Future studies should incorporate rigorous study designs with large sample sizes and a standard protocol to achieve more valid and reliable conclusion.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":49291,"journal":{"name":"Child and Adolescent Mental Health","volume":"30 1","pages":"34-52"},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Review: Animal-assisted intervention for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder – a systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Shuxin Yu,&nbsp;Hui Xue,&nbsp;Yuqing Xie,&nbsp;Guanyue Shao,&nbsp;Yihui Hao,&nbsp;Lijun Fan,&nbsp;Wei Du\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/camh.12744\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) have emerged as a promising nonpharmacological intervention option for children diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, recent systematic reviews have been primarily narrative. Additionally, the pooled effectiveness of AAIs was absent from these systematic reviews.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis, searching multiple databases, including Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, PsycINFO, EMBASE and Cochrane, from inception of the databases to March 2024. We retrieved 17 randomised controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies and used Review Manager 5.4.1 software to perform a meta-analysis of the effects of AAIs in treating children with ADHD. We conducted a set of random-effects meta-analyses to estimate standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using subgroup data by different outcome domains extracted from eight randomised controlled trials, in relation to changes in behavioural, mental and physical functioning in a total of 307 children with ADHD before and after the intervention.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>In comparison with non-AAI groups, AAIs significantly improved attention problems in children with ADHD (SMD = −0.42, 95% CI = −0.71 to −0.13), self-esteem (0.46, 0.14 to 0.78), learning and cognition problems (−0.69, −0.98 to −0.39) and motor proficiency (0.77, 0.11 to 1.42). The pooled effect of AAIs on the severity of ADHD symptoms in the experimental group was not significantly different from the effect of conventional treatments in the control group (0.10, −0.31 to 0.52). Similarly, AAIs had no significant positive effects on social interaction (−0.22, −0.51 to 0.06), social skills (−0.32, −0.87 to 0.24), problematic behaviours (−0.10, −0.54 to 0.35) or emotional problems, including depression and anxiety (−0.13, −0.51 to 0.24).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>As an ADHD management strategy complementary to gold-standard approaches, such as medication or multimodal interventions, AAIs did not appear to be more effective in improving the majority of core ADHD outcomes in children. Future studies should incorporate rigorous study designs with large sample sizes and a standard protocol to achieve more valid and reliable conclusion.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Child and Adolescent Mental Health\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"34-52\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Child and Adolescent Mental Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/camh.12744\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PEDIATRICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child and Adolescent Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/camh.12744","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:动物辅助干预(AAIs)已成为诊断为注意力缺陷/多动障碍(ADHD)儿童的一种有前途的非药物干预选择。然而,最近的系统综述主要是叙述性的。此外,在这些系统评价中缺乏AAIs的综合有效性。方法:检索Web of Science、MEDLINE、CINAHL、Scopus、PsycINFO、EMBASE、Cochrane等数据库,从建库至2024年3月,进行综合系统评价和meta分析。我们检索了17项随机对照试验或准实验研究,并使用Review Manager 5.4.1软件对人工智能治疗儿童多动症的效果进行了荟萃分析。我们进行了一组随机效应荟萃分析,使用从8项随机对照试验中提取的不同结果域的亚组数据,估计与干预前后307名ADHD儿童的行为、精神和身体功能变化有关的标准化平均差异(SMD), 95%置信区间(CI)。结果:与非aai组相比,aai显著改善了ADHD儿童的注意力问题(SMD = -0.42, 95% CI = -0.71 ~ -0.13)、自尊(0.46,0.14 ~ 0.78)、学习和认知问题(-0.69,-0.98 ~ -0.39)和运动熟练程度(0.77,0.11 ~ 1.42)。实验组AAIs对ADHD症状严重程度的综合影响与对照组常规治疗的影响无显著差异(0.10,-0.31 ~ 0.52)。同样,人工智能对社会互动(-0.22,-0.51至0.06),社交技能(-0.32,-0.87至0.24),问题行为(-0.10,-0.54至0.35)或情绪问题,包括抑郁和焦虑(-0.13,-0.51至0.24)没有显著的积极影响。结论:作为一种与金标准方法(如药物或多模式干预)相补充的ADHD管理策略,人工智能在改善儿童大多数核心ADHD结局方面似乎并不更有效。未来的研究应纳入严格的大样本量研究设计和标准方案,以获得更有效和可靠的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Review: Animal-assisted intervention for children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder – a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) have emerged as a promising nonpharmacological intervention option for children diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, recent systematic reviews have been primarily narrative. Additionally, the pooled effectiveness of AAIs was absent from these systematic reviews.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis, searching multiple databases, including Web of Science, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Scopus, PsycINFO, EMBASE and Cochrane, from inception of the databases to March 2024. We retrieved 17 randomised controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies and used Review Manager 5.4.1 software to perform a meta-analysis of the effects of AAIs in treating children with ADHD. We conducted a set of random-effects meta-analyses to estimate standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using subgroup data by different outcome domains extracted from eight randomised controlled trials, in relation to changes in behavioural, mental and physical functioning in a total of 307 children with ADHD before and after the intervention.

Results

In comparison with non-AAI groups, AAIs significantly improved attention problems in children with ADHD (SMD = −0.42, 95% CI = −0.71 to −0.13), self-esteem (0.46, 0.14 to 0.78), learning and cognition problems (−0.69, −0.98 to −0.39) and motor proficiency (0.77, 0.11 to 1.42). The pooled effect of AAIs on the severity of ADHD symptoms in the experimental group was not significantly different from the effect of conventional treatments in the control group (0.10, −0.31 to 0.52). Similarly, AAIs had no significant positive effects on social interaction (−0.22, −0.51 to 0.06), social skills (−0.32, −0.87 to 0.24), problematic behaviours (−0.10, −0.54 to 0.35) or emotional problems, including depression and anxiety (−0.13, −0.51 to 0.24).

Conclusions

As an ADHD management strategy complementary to gold-standard approaches, such as medication or multimodal interventions, AAIs did not appear to be more effective in improving the majority of core ADHD outcomes in children. Future studies should incorporate rigorous study designs with large sample sizes and a standard protocol to achieve more valid and reliable conclusion.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Child and Adolescent Mental Health
Child and Adolescent Mental Health PEDIATRICS-PSYCHIATRY
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
3.30%
发文量
77
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Child and Adolescent Mental Health (CAMH) publishes high quality, peer-reviewed child and adolescent mental health services research of relevance to academics, clinicians and commissioners internationally. The journal''s principal aim is to foster evidence-based clinical practice and clinically orientated research among clinicians and health services researchers working with children and adolescents, parents and their families in relation to or with a particular interest in mental health. CAMH publishes reviews, original articles, and pilot reports of innovative approaches, interventions, clinical methods and service developments. The journal has regular sections on Measurement Issues, Innovations in Practice, Global Child Mental Health and Humanities. All published papers should be of direct relevance to mental health practitioners and clearly draw out clinical implications for the field.
期刊最新文献
Debate: Where to next for universal school-based mental health interventions? Can research led by young people shape universal solutions for mental health and suicide prevention in school settings? Issue Information Clinical research updates Debate: Where to next for universal school-based mental health interventions? The value of student voices in informing the design and implementation of universal school-based mental health interventions Editorial Perspective: What do we need to know about the manosphere and young people's mental health?
×
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