scholarly journals Response rates in patients with schizophrenia and positive symptoms receiving cognitive behavioural therapy: a systematic review and single-group meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Irene Bighelli ◽  
Maximilian Huhn ◽  
Johannes Schneider-Thoma ◽  
Marc Krause ◽  
Cornelia Reitmeir ◽  
...  
2014 ◽  
Vol 204 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Jauhar ◽  
P. J. McKenna ◽  
J. Radua ◽  
E. Fung ◽  
R. Salvador ◽  
...  

BackgroundCognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) is considered to be effective for the symptoms of schizophrenia. However, this view is based mainly on meta-analysis, whose findings can be influenced by failure to consider sources of bias.AimsTo conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of CBT for schizophrenic symptoms that includes an examination of potential sources of bias.MethodData were pooled from randomised trials providing end-of-study data on overall, positive and negative symptoms. The moderating effects of randomisation, masking of outcome assessments, incompleteness of outcome data and use of a control intervention were examined. Publication bias was also investigated.ResultsPooled effect sizes were −0.33 (95% CI −0.47 to −0.19) in 34 studies of overall symptoms, −0.25 (95% CI −0.37 to −0.13) in 33 studies of positive symptoms and −0.13 (95% CI −0.25 to −0.01) in 34 studies of negative symptoms. Masking significantly moderated effect size in the meta-analyses of overall symptoms (effect sizes −0.62 (95% CI −0.88 to −0.35) v. −0.15 (95% CI −0.27 to −0.03), P = 0.001) and positive symptoms (effect sizes −0.57 (95% CI −0.76 to −0.39) v. −0.08 (95% CI −0.18 to 0.03), P<0.001). Use of a control intervention did not moderate effect size in any of the analyses. There was no consistent evidence of publication bias across different analyses.ConclusionsCognitive–behavioural therapy has a therapeutic effect on schizophrenic symptoms in the ‘small’ range. This reduces further when sources of bias, particularly masking, are controlled for.


Author(s):  
Harry Banyard ◽  
Alex J. Behn ◽  
Jaime Delgadillo

Abstract Background Previous reviews indicate that depressed patients with a comorbid personality disorder (PD) tend to benefit less from psychotherapies for depression and thus personality pathology needs to be the primary focus of treatment. This review specifically focused on studies of Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) for depression examining the influence of comorbid PD on post-treatment depression outcomes. Methods This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies identified through PubMed, PsychINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus. A review protocol was pre-registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42019128590). Results Eleven eligible studies (N = 769) were included in a narrative synthesis, and ten (N = 690) provided sufficient data for inclusion in random effects meta-analysis. All studies were rated as having “low” or “moderate” risk of bias and there was no significant evidence of publication bias. A small pooled effect size indicated that patients with PD had marginally higher depression severity after CBT compared to patients without PD (g = 0.26, [95% CI: 0.10, 0.43], p = .002), but the effect was not significant in controlled trials (p = .075), studies with low risk of bias (p = .107) and studies that adjusted for intake severity (p = .827). Furthermore, PD cases showed symptomatic improvements across studies, particularly those with longer treatment durations (16–20 sessions). Conclusions The apparent effect of PD on depression outcomes is likely explained by higher intake severity rather than treatment resistance. Excluding these patients from evidence-based care for depression is unjustified, and adequately lengthy CBT should be routinely offered.


2008 ◽  
Vol 117 (6) ◽  
pp. 403-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. J. Hendriks ◽  
R. C. Oude Voshaar ◽  
G. P. J. Keijsers ◽  
C. A. L. Hoogduin ◽  
A. J. L. M. van Balkom

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 449-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Hutton ◽  
P. J. Taylor

BackgroundClinical equipoise regarding preventative treatments for psychosis has encouraged the development and evaluation of psychosocial treatments, such as cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT).MethodA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, examining the evidence for the effectiveness of CBT-informed treatment for preventing psychosis in people who are not taking antipsychotic medication, when compared to usual or non-specific control treatment. Included studies had to meet basic quality criteria, such as concealed and random allocation to treatment groups.ResultsOur search produced 1940 titles, out of which we found seven completed trials (six published). The relative risk (RR) of developing psychosis was reduced by more than 50% for those receiving CBT at every time point [RR at 6 months 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27–0.82, p = 0.008 (fixed-effects only: six randomized controlled trials (RCTs), n = 800); RR at 12 months 0.45, 95% CI 0.28–0.73, p = 0.001 (six RCTs, n = 800); RR at 18–24 months 0.41, 95% CI 0.23–0.72, p = 0.002 (four RCTs, n = 452)]. Heterogeneity was low in every analysis and the results were largely robust to the risk of an unpublished 12-month study having unfavourable results. CBT was also associated with reduced subthreshold symptoms at 12 months, but not at 6 or 18–24 months. No effects on functioning, symptom-related distress or quality of life were observed. CBT was not associated with increased rates of clinical depression or social anxiety (two studies).ConclusionsCBT-informed treatment is associated with a reduced risk of transition to psychosis at 6, 12 and 18–24 months, and reduced symptoms at 12 months. Methodological limitations and recommendations for trial reporting are discussed.


2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 731-741 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kishaan Jeyanantham ◽  
Dipak Kotecha ◽  
Devsaagar Thanki ◽  
Rebecca Dekker ◽  
Deirdre A. Lane

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document