scholarly journals Psychological interventions for coronary heart disease: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 247-259 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne H Richards ◽  
Lindsey Anderson ◽  
Caroline E Jenkinson ◽  
Ben Whalley ◽  
Karen Rees ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Psychological Interventions ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Considerable Uncertainty

Background Although psychological interventions are recommended for the management of coronary heart disease (CHD), there remains considerable uncertainty regarding their effectiveness. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of psychological interventions for CHD. Methods The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched to April 2016. Retrieved papers, systematic reviews and trial registries were hand-searched. We included RCTs with at least 6 months of follow-up, comparing the direct effects of psychological interventions to usual care for patients following myocardial infarction or revascularisation or with a diagnosis of angina pectoris or CHD defined by angiography. Two authors screened titles for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Studies were pooled using random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression was used to explore study-level predictors. Results Thirty-five studies with 10,703 participants (median follow-up 12 months) were included. Psychological interventions led to a reduction in cardiovascular mortality (rfcelative risk 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 0.98), although no effects were observed for total mortality, myocardial infarction or revascularisation. Psychological interventions improved depressive symptoms (standardised mean difference [SMD] –0.27, 95% CI –0.39 to –0.15), anxiety (SMD –0.24, 95% CI –0.38 to –0.09) and stress (SMD –0.56, 95% CI –0.88 to –0.24) compared with controls. Conclusions We found that psychological intervention improved psychological symptoms and reduced cardiac mortality for people with CHD. However, there remains considerable uncertainty regarding the magnitude of these effects and the specific techniques most likely to benefit people with different presentations of CHD.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of TCMI in Patients With Combined Coronary Heart Disease and Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penglu Wei ◽  
Kuo Yang ◽  
Dehuai Long ◽  
Yupei Tan ◽  
Wenlong Xing ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Failure ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Brain Natriuretic Peptide ◽  
Natriuretic Peptide ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Effectiveness Rate

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of conventional treatments (CTs) to those that included traditional Chinese medicine injections (TCMIs) in patients with combined coronary heart disease and heart failure (CHD-HF).Methods: Eight electronic literature databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure Database, Chinese Scientific Journal Database, Wanfang Database, Chinese Biomedical Database) were searched from their inceptions to May 18, 2021, to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The primary outcomes analyzed included the total effectiveness rate and adverse events (ADRs). The secondary outcomes analyzed included the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), and 6-min walk test (6MWT). Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess quality of the analyzed RCTs. Stata and OpenBUGS software were used to prior to the systematic review and network meta-analysis.Results: Sixty-one eligible trials involved 5,567 patients and one of the following 15 TCMIs: Shuxuetong, Shenmai, Shenfu, Shengmai, Danshenduofenyansuan, Danhong, Dazhuhongjingtian, Xinmailong, Dengzhanxixin, Gualoupi, Shuxuening, Xuesaitong, Yiqi Fumai, Shenqi Fuzheng, Huangqi. Network meta-analysis revealed that Shuxuetong injection + CT group was superior to CT only in improving the total effectiveness rate [odds ratio (OR): 7.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17–27.41]. Shenmai injection + CT was superior to CT only for LVEF (OR: 8.97, CI: 4.67–13.18), Xinmailong injection + CT was superior to CT only for NT-proBNP (OR: −317.70, CI: −331.10–303.10), Shenqi Fuzheng injection + CT was superior to CT only for BNP (OR: −257.30, CI: −308.40–242.80); and Danhong injection + CT was superior to CT only for 6MWT (OR: 84.40, CI: 62.62−106.20). Different TCMIs had different toxicity spectrums.Conclusion: TCMIs combined with CT are better than CT alone in treating CHD-HF. Different TCMIs improve different outcomes. Additional properly designed RCTs are needed to conduce a more refined comparison of various TCMIs.Systematic Review Registration: [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], identifier [CRD42021258263].

scholarly journals Psychological interventions for chronic non-specific low back pain: protocol of a systematic review with network meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. e034996
Author(s):  
Emma Ho ◽  
Manuela Ferreira ◽  
Lingxiao Chen ◽  
Milena Simic ◽  
Claire Ashton-James ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Psychological Interventions ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Fear Avoidance

IntroductionPsychological factors such as fear avoidance beliefs, depression, anxiety, catastrophic thinking and familial and social stress, have been associated with high disability levels in people with chronic low back pain (LBP). Guidelines endorse the integration of psychological interventions in the management of chronic LBP. However, uncertainty surrounds the comparative effectiveness of different psychological approaches. Network meta-analysis (NMA) allows comparison and ranking of numerous competing interventions for a given outcome of interest. Therefore, we will perform a systematic review with a NMA to determine which type of psychological intervention is most effective for adults with chronic non-specific LBP.Methods and analysisWe will search electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, SCOPUS and CINAHL) from inception until 22 August 2019 for randomised controlled trials comparing psychological interventions to any comparison interventions in adults with chronic non-specific LBP. There will be no restriction on language. The primary outcomes will include physical function and pain intensity, and secondary outcomes will include health-related quality of life, fear avoidance, intervention compliance and safety. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2) tool and confidence in the evidence will be assessed using the Confidence in NMA (CINeMA) framework. We will conduct a random-effects NMA using a frequentist approach to estimate relative effects for all comparisons between treatments and rank treatments according to the mean rank and surface under the cumulative ranking curve values. All analyses will be performed in Stata.Ethics and disseminationNo ethical approval is required. The research will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019138074.

scholarly journals Comparative Effect of Statins and Omega-3 Supplementation on Cardiovascular Events: Meta-Analysis and Network Meta-Analysis of 63 Randomized Controlled Trials Including 264,516 Participants

Nutrients ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (8) ◽  
pp. 2218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tung Hoang ◽  
Jeongseon Kim
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Omega 3 ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Statins and omega-3 supplementation have been recommended for cardiovascular disease prevention, but comparative effects have not been investigated. This study aimed to summarize current evidence of the effect of statins and omega-3 supplementation on cardiovascular events. A meta-analysis and a network meta-analysis of 63 randomized controlled trials were used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the effects of specific statins and omega-3 supplementation compared with controls. Overall, the statin group showed significant risk reductions in total cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, and stroke; however, omega-3 supplementation significantly decreased the risks of coronary heart disease and myocardial infarction only, in the comparison with the control group. In comparison with omega-3 supplementation, pravastatin significantly reduced the risks of total cardiovascular disease (RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.72–0.91), coronary heart disease (RR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.60–0.94), and myocardial infarction (RR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.55–0.94). Risks of total cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, and stroke in the atorvastatin group were statistically lower than those in the omega-3 group, with RRs (95% CIs) of 0.80 (0.73–0.88), 0.64 (0.50–0.82), 0.75 (0.60–0.93), and 0.81 (0.66–0.99), respectively. The findings of this study suggest that pravastatin and atorvastatin may be more beneficial than omega-3 supplementation in reducing the risk of total cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, and myocardial infarction.

scholarly journals Anti-inflammatory Therapies for Coronary Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haiming Wang ◽  
Min Jiang ◽  
Xin Li ◽  
Yunzhang Zhao ◽  
Junjie Shao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
End Points ◽  
Recurrent Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Anti Inflammatory

Background: Anti-inflammatory therapy has been proposed as a promising treatment for coronary heart disease (CHD) that could reduce residual inflammation risk (RIR) and therefore major adverse cardiovascular events. We implemented a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the clinical benefits of anti-inflammatory agents in patients with CHD based on secondary cardiovascular prevention.Methods: We systemically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for RCTs (published between Jan 1, 1950, and June 1, 2021; no language restrictions) that focused on anti-inflammatory therapy for coronary heart disease. Our primary end points of interest were a composite of all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction and stroke. We processed pooled data using a random-effects model.Results: Of 1497 selected studies, 18 studies with 67,449 participants met our inclusion criteria and were included in the present meta-analysis. Comparing anti-inflammatory agents with placebo, there was no significant decrease in risk of primary end points, secondary end points, all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke or revascularization. Further subgroup analysis indicated that anti-inflammatory agents led to a significant reduction in secondary end points (OR 0.87, CI 0.77–0.99; P = 0.03), recurrent myocardial infarction (OR 0.86, CI 0.78–0.95; P = 0.003) and revascularization (OR 0.81, CI 0.70–0.92; P = 0.001) in patients with stable CHD compared with placebo. Moreover, stable CHD patients had a lower propensity for recurrent myocardial infarction than acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients when using anti-inflammatory agents (P = 0.03). The colchicine subgroup analysis showed that colchicine yielded a promising reduction in the primary end points (OR 0.81, CI 0.70–0.95; P = 0.009) compared with placebo. Anti-inflammatory agents were associated with a higher risk of infection (OR 1.13, CI 1.03–1.23; P = 0.007) and negligible effects on cancers (OR 0.98, CI 0.90–1.06; P = 0.61).Conclusion: Anti-inflammatory agents appear to have beneficial effects in reducing the risk of recurrent myocardial infarction in patients with stable CHD, albeit at the cost of increased infection. Notably, colchicine demonstrates a promising cardioprotective effect with a lower incidence of major cardiovascular events and thus is a potential therapeutic strategy for stable CHD patients.Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO, identifier CRD42021245514.

Panic disorder and incident coronary heart disease: a systematic review and meta-regression in 1 131 612 persons and 58 111 cardiac events

2015 ◽  
Vol 45 (14) ◽  
pp. 2909-2920 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. J. Tully ◽  
D. A. Turnbull ◽  
J. Beltrame ◽  
J. Horowitz ◽  
S. Cosh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Coronary Heart Disease ◽  
Heart Disease ◽  
Panic Disorder ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Reverse Causality ◽  
Cardiac Events ◽  
Model Studies ◽  
Hazard Ratios

Background.Substantial healthcare resources are devoted to panic disorder (PD) and coronary heart disease (CHD); however, the association between these conditions remains controversial. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of studies assessing the association between PD, related syndromes, and incident CHD.Method.Relevant studies were retrieved from Medline, EMBASE, SCOPUS and PsycINFO without restrictions from inception to January 2015 supplemented with hand-searching. We included studies that reported hazard ratios (HR) or sufficient data to calculate the risk ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) which were pooled using a random-effects model. Studies utilizing self-reported CHD were ineligible. Twelve studies were included comprising 1 131 612 persons and 58 111 incident CHD cases.Results.PD was associated with the primary incident CHD endpoint [adjusted HR (aHR) 1.47, 95% CI 1.24–1.74, p < 0.00001] even after excluding angina (aHR 1.49, 95% CI 1.22–1.81, p < 0.00001). High to moderate quality evidence suggested an association with incident major adverse cardiac events (MACE; aHR 1.40, 95% CI 1.16–1.69, p = 0.0004) and myocardial infarction (aHR 1.36, 95% CI 1.12–1.66, p = 0.002). The risk for CHD was significant after excluding depression (aHR 1.64, 95% CI 1.45–1.85) and after depression adjustment (aHR 1.38, 95% CI 1.03–1.87). Age, sex, length of follow-up, socioeconomic status and diabetes were sources of heterogeneity in the primary endpoint.Conclusions.Meta-analysis showed that PD was independently associated with incident CHD, myocardial infarction and MACE; however, reverse causality cannot be ruled out and there was evidence of heterogeneity.

scholarly journals Effect of Psychological Intervention on Fear of Cancer Recurrence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (31) ◽  
pp. 2899-2915 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina M. Tauber ◽  
Mia S. O’Toole ◽  
Andreas Dinkel ◽  
Jacqueline Galica ◽  
Gerry Humphris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychological Intervention ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cancer Recurrence ◽  
Fear Of Cancer Recurrence ◽  
Psychological Interventions ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Fear Of Cancer

PURPOSE Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a significantly distressing problem that affects a substantial number of patients with and survivors of cancer; however, the overall efficacy of available psychological interventions on FCR remains unknown. We therefore evaluated this in the present systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS We searched key electronic databases to identify trials that evaluated the effect of psychological interventions on FCR among patients with and survivors of cancer. Controlled trials were subjected to meta-analysis, and the moderating influence of study characteristics on the effect were examined. Overall quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE system. Open trials were narratively reviewed to explore ongoing developments in the field (PROSPERO registration no.: CRD42017076514). RESULTS A total of 23 controlled trials (21 randomized controlled trials) and nine open trials were included. Small effects (Hedges’s g) were found both at postintervention ( g = 0.33; 95% CI, 0.20 to 0.46; P < .001) and at follow-up ( g = 0.28; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.40; P < .001). Effects at postintervention of contemporary cognitive behavioral therapies (CBTs; g = 0.42) were larger than those of traditional CBTs ( g = 0.24; β = .22; 95% CI, .04 to .41; P = .018). At follow-up, larger effects were associated with shorter time to follow-up (β = −.01; 95% CI, −.01 to −.00; P = .027) and group-based formats (β = .18; 95% CI, .01 to .36; P = .041). A GRADE evaluation indicated evidence of moderate strength for effects of psychological intervention for FCR. CONCLUSION Psychological interventions for FCR revealed a small but robust effect at postintervention, which was largely maintained at follow-up. Larger postintervention effects were found for contemporary CBTs that were focused on processes of cognition—for example, worry, rumination, and attentional bias—rather than the content, and aimed to change the way in which the individual relates to his or her inner experiences. Future trials could investigate how to further optimize and tailor interventions to individual patients’ FCR presentation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document