scholarly journals Efficacy and acceptability of psychosocial interventions in asylum seekers and refugees: systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (04) ◽  
pp. 376-388 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Turrini ◽  
M. Purgato ◽  
C. Acarturk ◽  
M. Anttila ◽  
T. Au ◽  
...  

AbstractAimsIn the past few years, there has been an unprecedented increase in the number of forcibly displaced migrants worldwide, of which a substantial proportion is refugees and asylum seekers. Refugees and asylum seekers may experience high levels of psychological distress, and show high rates of mental health conditions. It is therefore timely and particularly relevant to assess whether current evidence supports the provision of psychosocial interventions for this population. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy and acceptability of psychosocial interventions compared with control conditions (treatment as usual/no treatment, waiting list, psychological placebo) aimed at reducing mental health problems in distressed refugees and asylum seekers.MethodsWe used Cochrane procedures for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. We searched for published and unpublished RCTs assessing the efficacy and acceptability of psychosocial interventions in adults and children asylum seekers and refugees with psychological distress. Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depressive and anxiety symptoms at post-intervention were the primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes include: PTSD, depressive and anxiety symptoms at follow-up, functioning, quality of life and dropouts due to any reason.ResultsWe included 26 studies with 1959 participants. Meta-analysis of RCTs revealed that psychosocial interventions have a clinically significant beneficial effect on PTSD (standardised mean difference [SMD] = −0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI] −1.01 to −0.41; I2 = 83%; 95% CI 78–88; 20 studies, 1370 participants; moderate quality evidence), depression (SMD = −1.02; 95% CI −1.52 to −0.51; I2 = 89%; 95% CI 82–93; 12 studies, 844 participants; moderate quality evidence) and anxiety outcomes (SMD = −1.05; 95% CI −1.55 to −0.56; I2 = 87%; 95% CI 79–92; 11 studies, 815 participants; moderate quality evidence). This beneficial effect was maintained at 1 month or longer follow-up, which is extremely important for populations exposed to ongoing post-migration stressors. For the other secondary outcomes, we identified a non-significant trend in favour of psychosocial interventions. Most evidence supported interventions based on cognitive behavioural therapies with a trauma-focused component. Limitations of this review include the limited number of studies collected, with a relatively low total number of participants, and the limited available data for positive outcomes like functioning and quality of life.ConclusionsConsidering the epidemiological relevance of psychological distress and mental health conditions in refugees and asylum seekers, and in view of the existing data on the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions, these interventions should be routinely made available as part of the health care of distressed refugees and asylum seekers. Evidence-based guidelines and implementation packages should be developed accordingly.

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 96-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abd Moain Abu Dabrh ◽  
Adam T Hill ◽  
Claudia C Dobler ◽  
Noor Asi ◽  
Wigdan H Farah ◽  
...  

BackgroundSeveral pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies are used to treat stable bronchiectasis of non-cystic fibrosis (CF) aetiology.ObjectiveWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the evidence of the effectiveness of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatment options in patients with stable non-CF bronchiectasis with a focus on reducing exacerbations.Study selectionMultiple databases were searched through September 2017. Outcomes included the number of patients with exacerbation events, mean number of exacerbations, hospitalisations, mortality, quality of life measures, and safety and adverse effects. Meta-analysis was conducted using the random effects model.Findings30 randomised controlled trials enrolled subjects with non-CF bronchiectasis using different interventions. Moderate-quality evidence supported the effect of long-term antibiotics (≥3 months) on lowering the number of patients experiencing exacerbation events (relative risk 0.77 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.89)), reducing number of exacerbations (incidence rate ratio 0.62 (95% CI 0.49 to 0.78)), improving forced expiratory volume (litre) in the first second (FEV1) (weighted mean difference (WMD); 0.02 (95% CI 0.00 to 0.04)), decreasing sputum purulence scores (numerical scale of 1-8) (WMD −0.90 (95% CI −1.58 to −0.22)) and improving quality of life scores assessed by the St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (WMD −6.07 (95% CI −10.7 to −1.43)). Bronchospasm increased with inhaled antibiotics while diarrhoea increased particularly with oral macrolide therapy.ConclusionsModerate-quality evidence supports long-term antibiotic therapy for preventing exacerbations in stable non-CF bronchiectasis. However, data about the optimum agent, mode of therapy and length of treatment are limited. There is paucity of high-quality evidence to support the management of stable non-CF bronchiectasis including prevention of exacerbations.


2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (22) ◽  
pp. 1340-1350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sally Hopewell ◽  
Bethan Copsey ◽  
Philippa Nicolson ◽  
Busola Adedire ◽  
Graham Boniface ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo assess the longer term effects of multifactorial interventions for preventing falls in older people living in the community, and to explore whether prespecific trial-level characteristics are associated with greater fall prevention effects.DesignSystematic review with meta-analysis and meta-regression.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, CENTRAL and trial registries were searched up to 25 July 2018.Study selectionWe included randomised controlled trials (≥12 months’ follow-up) evaluating the effects of multifactorial interventions on falls in older people aged 65 years and over, living in the community, compared with either usual care or usual care plus advice.Review methodsTwo authors independently verified studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. Rate ratios (RaR) with 95% CIs were calculated for rate of falls, risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and standardised mean difference for continuous outcomes. Data were pooled using a random effects model. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation was used to assess the quality of the evidence.ResultsWe included 41 trials totalling 19 369 participants; mean age 72–85 years. Exercise was the most common prespecified component of the multifactorial interventions (85%; n=35/41). Most trials were judged at unclear or high risk of bias in ≥1 domain. Twenty trials provided data on rate of falls and showed multifactorial interventions may reduce the rate at which people fall compared with the comparator (RaR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.88; 20 trials; 10 116 participants; I2=90%; low-quality evidence). Multifactorial interventions may also slightly lower the risk of people sustaining one or more falls (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.00; 30 trials; 13 817 participants; I2=56%; moderate-quality evidence) and recurrent falls (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.00; 15 trials; 7277 participants; I2=46%; moderate-quality evidence). However, there may be little or no difference in other fall-related outcomes, such as fall-related fractures, falls requiring hospital admission or medical attention and health-related quality of life. Very few trials (n=3) reported on adverse events related to the intervention. Prespecified subgroup analyses showed that the effect on rate of falls may be smaller when compared with usual care plus advice as opposed to usual care only. Overall, heterogeneity remained high and was not explained by the prespecified characteristics included in the meta-regression.ConclusionMultifactorial interventions (most of which include exercise prescription) may reduce the rate of falls and slightly reduce risk of older people sustaining one or more falls and recurrent falls (defined as two or more falls within a specified time period).Trial registration numberCRD42018102549.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-13
Author(s):  
Yuan-Bin Chen ◽  
Johannah L Shergis ◽  
Zhen-Hu Wu ◽  
Xin-Feng Guo ◽  
Anthony L Zhang ◽  
...  

Introduction. Herbal medicine is commonly used by patients with chronic cough, but the role of herbal medicine for cough variant asthma (CVA) has not yet been clearly defined. For the first time, we performed a meta-analysis to integrate the current evidence of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on this topic and assess the efficacy of herbal medicine in adults with CVA. Methods. A comprehensive search was conducted in electronic databases to identify RCTs of herbal medicine for adult CVA. Cochrane systematic review methods were followed, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation was performed to evaluate the quality of evidence. Results. Twenty-eight RCTs were included. Compared with placebo, moderate-quality evidence from two studies showed that herbal medicine was associated with reduced cough symptom score (CSS) (MD −1.15 points; 95% CI, −1.67 to −0.63) and visual analogue scale (VAS) (MD −1.76 points; 95% CI, −2.66 to −0.86). Compared with montelukast, low- to moderate-quality evidence from 11 studies indicated that herbal medicine was associated with improved Leicester Cough Questionnaire (LCQ) (MD 2.38 points; 95% CI, 1.32 to 3.44), reduced CSS (SMD −0.81 points; 95% CI, −1.09 to −0.53), and VAS (MD −1.34 points; 95% CI, −1.82 to −0.86). There were no significant differences between herbal medicine and ICS plus bronchodilator. Conclusions. In adults with CVA, herbal medicine may result in improved quality of life and reduced cough frequency and severity scores compared with placebo or montelukast. Herbal medicine was not better than ICS plus a bronchodilator but the evidence is very uncertain.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. e005029
Author(s):  
Giulia Turrini ◽  
Federico Tedeschi ◽  
Pim Cuijpers ◽  
Cinzia Del Giovane ◽  
Ahlke Kip ◽  
...  

IntroductionRefugees and asylum seekers are vulnerable to common mental disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Using a network meta-analysis (NMA) approach, the present systematic review compared and ranked psychosocial interventions for the treatment of PTSD in adult refugees and asylum seekers.MethodsRandomised studies of psychosocial interventions for adult refugees and asylum seekers with PTSD were systematically identified. PTSD symptoms at postintervention was the primary outcome. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) and ORs were pooled using pairwise and NMA. Study quality was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) tool, and certainty of evidence was assessed through the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis application.ResultsA total of 23 studies with 2308 participants were included. Sixteen studies were conducted in high-income countries, and seven in low-income or middle-income countries. Most studies were at low risk of bias according to the Cochrane RoB tool. NMA on PTSD symptoms showed that cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) (SMD=−1.41; 95% CI −2.43 to −0.38) and eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR) (SMD=−1.30; 95% CI −2.40 to −0.20) were significantly more effective than waitlist (WL). CBT was also associated with a higher decrease in PTSD symptoms than treatment as usual (TAU) (SMD −1.51; 95% CI −2.67 to −0.36). For all other interventions, the difference with WL and TAU was not significant. CBT and EMDR ranked best according to the mean surface under the cumulative ranking. Regarding acceptability, no intervention had less dropouts than inactive interventions.ConclusionCBT and EMDR appeared to have the greatest effects in reducing PTSD symptoms in asylum seekers and refugees. This evidence should be considered in guidelines and implementation packages to facilitate dissemination and uptake in refugee settings.


2017 ◽  
Vol 210 (5) ◽  
pp. 324-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danyael Lutgens ◽  
Genevieve Gariepy ◽  
Ashok Malla

BackgroundNegative symptoms observed in patients with psychotic disorders undermine quality of life and functioning. Antipsychotic medications have a limited impact. Psychological and psychosocial interventions, with medication, are recommended. However, evidence for the effectiveness of specific non-biological interventions warrants detailed examination.AimsTo conduct a meta-analytic and systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of non-biological treatments for negative symptoms in psychotic disorders.MethodWe searched for randomised controlled studies of psychological and psychosocial interventions in psychotic disorders that reported outcome on negative symptoms. Standardised mean differences (SMDs) in values of negative symptoms at the end of treatment were calculated across study domains as the main outcome measure.ResultsA total of 95 studies met our criteria and 72 had complete quantitative data. Compared with treatment as usual cognitive–behavioural therapy (pooled SMD −0.34, 95% CI −0.55 to −0.12), skills-based training (pooled SMD −0.44, 95% CI −0.77 to −0.10), exercise (pooled SMD −0.36, 95% CI −0.71 to −0.01), and music treatments (pooled SMD −0.58, 95% CI −0.82 to −0.33) provide significant benefit. Integrated treatment models are effective for early psychosis (SMD −0.38, 95% CI −0.53 to −0.22) as long as the patients remain in treatment. Overall quality of evidence was moderate with a high level of heterogeneity.ConclusionsSpecific psychological and psychosocial interventions have utility in ameliorating negative symptoms in psychosis and should be included in the treatment of negative symptoms. However, more effective treatments for negative symptoms need to be developed.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e12290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Szmulewicz ◽  
Kerollos N. Wanis ◽  
Ashley Gripper ◽  
Federico Angriman ◽  
Jeff Hawel ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 584-606 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hilde P. A. van der Aa ◽  
Tom H. Margrain ◽  
Ger H. M. B. van Rens ◽  
Martijn W. Heymans ◽  
Ruth M. A. van Nispen

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document