应用支持的智能手机干预心理健康问题的效果:随机对照试验的荟萃分析

IF 60.5 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY World Psychiatry Pub Date : 2019-09-09 DOI:10.1002/wps.20673
J. Linardon, P. Cuijpers, P. Carlbring, Mariel Messer, M. Fuller‐Tyszkiewicz
{"title":"应用支持的智能手机干预心理健康问题的效果:随机对照试验的荟萃分析","authors":"J. Linardon, P. Cuijpers, P. Carlbring, Mariel Messer, M. Fuller‐Tyszkiewicz","doi":"10.1002/wps.20673","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although impressive progress has been made toward developing empirically‐supported psychological treatments, the reality remains that a significant proportion of people with mental health problems do not receive these treatments. Finding ways to reduce this treatment gap is crucial. Since app‐supported smartphone interventions are touted as a possible solution, access to up‐to‐date guidance around the evidence base and clinical utility of these interventions is needed. We conducted a meta‐analysis of 66 randomized controlled trials of app‐supported smartphone interventions for mental health problems. Smartphone interventions significantly outperformed control conditions in improving depressive (g=0.28, n=54) and generalized anxiety (g=0.30, n=39) symptoms, stress levels (g=0.35, n=27), quality of life (g=0.35, n=43), general psychiatric distress (g=0.40, n=12), social anxiety symptoms (g=0.58, n=6), and positive affect (g=0.44, n=6), with most effects being robust even after adjusting for various possible biasing factors (type of control condition, risk of bias rating). Smartphone interventions conferred no significant benefit over control conditions on panic symptoms (g=–0.05, n=3), post‐traumatic stress symptoms (g=0.18, n=4), and negative affect (g=–0.08, n=5). Studies that delivered a cognitive behavior therapy (CBT)‐based app and offered professional guidance and reminders to engage produced larger effects on multiple outcomes. Smartphone interventions did not differ significantly from active interventions (face‐to‐face, computerized treatment), although the number of studies was low (n≤13). The efficacy of app‐supported smartphone interventions for common mental health problems was thus confirmed. Although mental health apps are not intended to replace professional clinical services, the present findings highlight the potential of apps to serve as a cost‐effective, easily accessible, and low intensity intervention for those who cannot receive standard psychological treatment.","PeriodicalId":49357,"journal":{"name":"World Psychiatry","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":60.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/wps.20673","citationCount":"362","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The efficacy of app‐supported smartphone interventions for mental health problems: a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials\",\"authors\":\"J. Linardon, P. Cuijpers, P. Carlbring, Mariel Messer, M. Fuller‐Tyszkiewicz\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/wps.20673\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although impressive progress has been made toward developing empirically‐supported psychological treatments, the reality remains that a significant proportion of people with mental health problems do not receive these treatments. Finding ways to reduce this treatment gap is crucial. Since app‐supported smartphone interventions are touted as a possible solution, access to up‐to‐date guidance around the evidence base and clinical utility of these interventions is needed. We conducted a meta‐analysis of 66 randomized controlled trials of app‐supported smartphone interventions for mental health problems. Smartphone interventions significantly outperformed control conditions in improving depressive (g=0.28, n=54) and generalized anxiety (g=0.30, n=39) symptoms, stress levels (g=0.35, n=27), quality of life (g=0.35, n=43), general psychiatric distress (g=0.40, n=12), social anxiety symptoms (g=0.58, n=6), and positive affect (g=0.44, n=6), with most effects being robust even after adjusting for various possible biasing factors (type of control condition, risk of bias rating). Smartphone interventions conferred no significant benefit over control conditions on panic symptoms (g=–0.05, n=3), post‐traumatic stress symptoms (g=0.18, n=4), and negative affect (g=–0.08, n=5). Studies that delivered a cognitive behavior therapy (CBT)‐based app and offered professional guidance and reminders to engage produced larger effects on multiple outcomes. Smartphone interventions did not differ significantly from active interventions (face‐to‐face, computerized treatment), although the number of studies was low (n≤13). The efficacy of app‐supported smartphone interventions for common mental health problems was thus confirmed. Although mental health apps are not intended to replace professional clinical services, the present findings highlight the potential of apps to serve as a cost‐effective, easily accessible, and low intensity intervention for those who cannot receive standard psychological treatment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49357,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Psychiatry\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":60.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/wps.20673\",\"citationCount\":\"362\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20673\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"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":"World Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20673","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 362

摘要

尽管在开发经验支持的心理治疗方面取得了令人印象深刻的进展,但现实情况仍然是,很大一部分有心理健康问题的人没有接受这些治疗。找到缩小这一治疗差距的方法至关重要。由于应用程序支持的智能手机干预措施被吹捧为一种可能的解决方案,因此需要获得有关这些干预措施的证据基础和临床应用的最新指导。我们对66项应用支持的智能手机干预心理健康问题的随机对照试验进行了荟萃分析。智能手机干预在改善抑郁(g=0.28, n=54)和广泛性焦虑(g=0.30, n=39)症状、压力水平(g=0.35, n=27)、生活质量(g=0.35, n=43)、一般精神困扰(g=0.40, n=12)、社交焦虑症状(g=0.58, n=6)和积极情绪(g=0.44, n=6)方面显著优于对照条件,即使在调整了各种可能的偏倚因素(对照条件类型、偏倚风险评级)后,大多数效果仍然稳健。与对照组相比,智能手机干预在恐慌症状(g= -0.05, n=3)、创伤后应激症状(g=0.18, n=4)和负面情绪(g= -0.08, n=5)方面没有显著的益处。研究提供了基于认知行为疗法(CBT)的应用程序,并提供了专业的指导和提醒,对多种结果产生了更大的影响。尽管研究数量较少(n≤13),但智能手机干预与主动干预(面对面、计算机化治疗)并无显著差异。因此,应用支持的智能手机干预常见心理健康问题的有效性得到了证实。虽然心理健康应用程序并不打算取代专业的临床服务,但目前的研究结果强调了应用程序作为一种成本效益高、易于获取、低强度干预的潜力,可以为那些无法接受标准心理治疗的人提供帮助。
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
The efficacy of app‐supported smartphone interventions for mental health problems: a meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials
Although impressive progress has been made toward developing empirically‐supported psychological treatments, the reality remains that a significant proportion of people with mental health problems do not receive these treatments. Finding ways to reduce this treatment gap is crucial. Since app‐supported smartphone interventions are touted as a possible solution, access to up‐to‐date guidance around the evidence base and clinical utility of these interventions is needed. We conducted a meta‐analysis of 66 randomized controlled trials of app‐supported smartphone interventions for mental health problems. Smartphone interventions significantly outperformed control conditions in improving depressive (g=0.28, n=54) and generalized anxiety (g=0.30, n=39) symptoms, stress levels (g=0.35, n=27), quality of life (g=0.35, n=43), general psychiatric distress (g=0.40, n=12), social anxiety symptoms (g=0.58, n=6), and positive affect (g=0.44, n=6), with most effects being robust even after adjusting for various possible biasing factors (type of control condition, risk of bias rating). Smartphone interventions conferred no significant benefit over control conditions on panic symptoms (g=–0.05, n=3), post‐traumatic stress symptoms (g=0.18, n=4), and negative affect (g=–0.08, n=5). Studies that delivered a cognitive behavior therapy (CBT)‐based app and offered professional guidance and reminders to engage produced larger effects on multiple outcomes. Smartphone interventions did not differ significantly from active interventions (face‐to‐face, computerized treatment), although the number of studies was low (n≤13). The efficacy of app‐supported smartphone interventions for common mental health problems was thus confirmed. Although mental health apps are not intended to replace professional clinical services, the present findings highlight the potential of apps to serve as a cost‐effective, easily accessible, and low intensity intervention for those who cannot receive standard psychological treatment.
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
World Psychiatry
World Psychiatry 医学-精神病学
自引率
7.40%
发文量
124
期刊介绍: World Psychiatry is the official journal of the World Psychiatric Association. It is published in three issues per year. The journal is sent free of charge to psychiatrists whose names and addresses are provided by WPA member societies and sections. World Psychiatry is also freely accessible on Wiley Online Library and PubMed Central. The main aim of World Psychiatry is to disseminate information on significant clinical, service, and research developments in the mental health field. The journal aims to use a language that can be understood by the majority of mental health professionals worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Augmenting trauma-focused cognitive behavior therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder with memory specificity training: a randomized controlled trial. Changing approaches to interventions for autistic adults. Dispelling "pleasing myths" about the integration of ecological momentary assessment and intervention into clinical research and practice. Effectiveness of a stepped-care programme of WHO psychological interventions in a population of migrants: results from the RESPOND randomized controlled trial. The current clinical approach to feeding and eating disorders aimed to increase personalization of management.
×
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