慢性病患者抑郁和焦虑的认知行为疗法:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 13.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Clinical Psychology Review Pub Date : 2023-10-16 DOI:10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102353
Amelia J. Scott , Madelyne A. Bisby , Andreea I. Heriseanu , Yalda Salameh , Eyal Karin , Rhiannon Fogliati , Joanne Dudeney , Milena Gandy , Lauren F. McLellan , Bethany Wootton , Sarah McDonald , Ashleigh Correa , Nick Titov , Blake F. Dear
{"title":"慢性病患者抑郁和焦虑的认知行为疗法:一项系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Amelia J. Scott ,&nbsp;Madelyne A. Bisby ,&nbsp;Andreea I. Heriseanu ,&nbsp;Yalda Salameh ,&nbsp;Eyal Karin ,&nbsp;Rhiannon Fogliati ,&nbsp;Joanne Dudeney ,&nbsp;Milena Gandy ,&nbsp;Lauren F. McLellan ,&nbsp;Bethany Wootton ,&nbsp;Sarah McDonald ,&nbsp;Ashleigh Correa ,&nbsp;Nick Titov ,&nbsp;Blake F. Dear","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Anxiety and depression in chronic disease are common and burdensome co-morbidities. There has been growing interest in cognitive and behavioral therapies (CBTs) for anxiety and depression in chronic disease, however their efficacy has not been well-established. This study examined the efficacy of CBTs for depression and/or anxiety symptoms within chronic disease and explored the moderating role of clinical and methodological characteristics.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Following prospective registration, electronic databases were searched up to 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining CBTs for depression and/or anxiety in any adult chronic disease population.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We included 56 RCTs. The overall effect of CBTs was g = 0.61 (95% CI, 0.49, 0.72) for depression and g = 0.56 (95% CI, 0.42, 0.70) for anxiety. A range of methodological features significantly moderated the effect sizes obtained, including type of control group and the outcome measure used. Risk of Bias ratings indicated some concerns regarding RCT conduct and reporting.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>CBTs lead to moderate improvements in both depression and anxiety symptoms among people with chronic disease. However, the efficacy of CBT should be interpreted considering certain study and sample characteristics. It is recommended that future studies make improvements to study methodology and reporting.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cognitive behavioral therapies for depression and anxiety in people with chronic disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Amelia J. Scott ,&nbsp;Madelyne A. Bisby ,&nbsp;Andreea I. Heriseanu ,&nbsp;Yalda Salameh ,&nbsp;Eyal Karin ,&nbsp;Rhiannon Fogliati ,&nbsp;Joanne Dudeney ,&nbsp;Milena Gandy ,&nbsp;Lauren F. McLellan ,&nbsp;Bethany Wootton ,&nbsp;Sarah McDonald ,&nbsp;Ashleigh Correa ,&nbsp;Nick Titov ,&nbsp;Blake F. Dear\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cpr.2023.102353\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Anxiety and depression in chronic disease are common and burdensome co-morbidities. There has been growing interest in cognitive and behavioral therapies (CBTs) for anxiety and depression in chronic disease, however their efficacy has not been well-established. This study examined the efficacy of CBTs for depression and/or anxiety symptoms within chronic disease and explored the moderating role of clinical and methodological characteristics.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Following prospective registration, electronic databases were searched up to 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining CBTs for depression and/or anxiety in any adult chronic disease population.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We included 56 RCTs. The overall effect of CBTs was g = 0.61 (95% CI, 0.49, 0.72) for depression and g = 0.56 (95% CI, 0.42, 0.70) for anxiety. A range of methodological features significantly moderated the effect sizes obtained, including type of control group and the outcome measure used. Risk of Bias ratings indicated some concerns regarding RCT conduct and reporting.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>CBTs lead to moderate improvements in both depression and anxiety symptoms among people with chronic disease. However, the efficacy of CBT should be interpreted considering certain study and sample characteristics. It is recommended that future studies make improvements to study methodology and reporting.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48458,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735823001113\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735823001113","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

目的:慢性病患者的焦虑和抑郁是常见的、负担沉重的合并症。人们对治疗慢性病焦虑和抑郁的认知和行为疗法(CBT)越来越感兴趣,但其疗效尚未得到证实。本研究检验了CBT对慢性病中抑郁和/或焦虑症状的疗效,并探讨了临床和方法学特征的调节作用。方法:在前瞻性登记后,检索电子数据库,直到2023年,进行随机对照试验(RCT),检查任何成年慢性病人群的抑郁和/或焦虑的CBT。结果:我们纳入了56项随机对照试验。CBTs对抑郁的总体疗效为g=0.61(95%CI,0.49,0.72),对焦虑的总体效果为g=0.56(95%CI:0.42,0.70)。一系列方法学特征显著调节了所获得的效果大小,包括对照组的类型和所使用的结果测量。偏倚风险评级表明了对随机对照试验行为和报告的一些担忧。结论:CBT可适度改善慢性病患者的抑郁和焦虑症状。然而,CBT的疗效应根据某些研究和样本特征进行解释。建议今后的研究改进研究方法和报告。
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
Cognitive behavioral therapies for depression and anxiety in people with chronic disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

Anxiety and depression in chronic disease are common and burdensome co-morbidities. There has been growing interest in cognitive and behavioral therapies (CBTs) for anxiety and depression in chronic disease, however their efficacy has not been well-established. This study examined the efficacy of CBTs for depression and/or anxiety symptoms within chronic disease and explored the moderating role of clinical and methodological characteristics.

Methods

Following prospective registration, electronic databases were searched up to 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining CBTs for depression and/or anxiety in any adult chronic disease population.

Results

We included 56 RCTs. The overall effect of CBTs was g = 0.61 (95% CI, 0.49, 0.72) for depression and g = 0.56 (95% CI, 0.42, 0.70) for anxiety. A range of methodological features significantly moderated the effect sizes obtained, including type of control group and the outcome measure used. Risk of Bias ratings indicated some concerns regarding RCT conduct and reporting.

Conclusions

CBTs lead to moderate improvements in both depression and anxiety symptoms among people with chronic disease. However, the efficacy of CBT should be interpreted considering certain study and sample characteristics. It is recommended that future studies make improvements to study methodology and reporting.

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
Clinical Psychology Review
Clinical Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
23.10
自引率
1.60%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology. While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.
期刊最新文献
Factors related to help-seeking and service utilization for professional mental healthcare among young people: An umbrella review Positive health outcomes of mindfulness-based interventions for cancer patients and survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis Sleep and paranoia: A systematic review and meta-analysis Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder: Systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrating the impact of study quality on prevalence rates Gender nonconformity and common mental health problems: A meta-analysis
×
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