scholarly journals Effective maNagement of Depression among Patients witH cANCEr (ENHANCE): A Protocol for a Hybrid Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Interventions for Depressive Symptoms.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Margareta Pertl ◽  
Perez ◽  
Sonya Collier ◽  
Emer Guinan ◽  
Garret Monahan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Relative Effectiveness ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Systematic Review Methodology ◽  
Patients With Cancer

Abstract Background: Depression is common among patients with cancer and is associated with lower treatment participation, lower satisfaction with care, poorer quality of life, greater symptom burden, and higher healthcare costs. Various types of interventions (e.g., pharmacological, psychotherapy) are used for the treatment of depression. However, evidence for these among patients with cancer is limited. Furthermore, the relative effectiveness and acceptability of different approaches is unknown because a direct comparison between all available treatments has not been carried out. We will address this by conducting a network meta-analysis (NMA) of interventions for depression among people with cancer using a hybrid overview of reviews and systematic review methodology. Methods: We will search for and extract data from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of depression interventions for patients with cancer from inception, before performing a supplemental search for more recent RCTs. We will include RCTs comparing pharmacological, psychotherapy, exercise, combination therapy, collaborative care, or complementary and alternative medicine interventions with pill placebo, no treatment, waitlist, treatment as usual, or minimal treatment control groups, or directly in head-to-head trials, among adults who have a current or previous diagnosis of cancer and elevated depressive symptoms (scores above a cut-off on validated scales or meeting diagnostic criteria). Our primary outcomes will be change in depressive symptoms (standardised mean difference) and intervention acceptability (% who withdrew). Our secondary outcomes will be 6-month change in depressive symptoms, health-related quality of life, adverse events and mortality. We will independently screen for eligibility, extract data, and assess risk of bias using the RoB2 tool. We will use frequentist random-effects multivariate NMA in Stata, Rankograms and surface under the cumulative ranking curves to synthesize evidence and obtain a ranking of intervention groups. We will explore heterogeneity and inconsistency using local and global measures and evaluate the credibility of results using the Confidence in NEtwork Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) framework.Discussion: Our findings will provide the best available evidence for managing depression among patients with cancer. Such information will help to inform clinical guidelines, evidence-based treatment decisions and future research by identifying gaps in the current literature. Systematic review registration: Submitted to PROSPERO (record number: 290145), awaiting registration

scholarly journals Mindfulness-based and acceptance-based programmes in the treatment of obsessive–compulsive disorder: a study protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e050329
Author(s):  
Johannes Julian Bürkle ◽  
Johannes Caspar Fendel ◽  
Stefan Schmidt
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Obsessive Compulsive ◽  
Compulsive Disorder

IntroductionCognitive–behavioural therapy (CBT) with exposure and response prevention is the recommended standard for the treatment of obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD). However, a high proportion of patients refuse this treatment, do not respond or relapse shortly after treatment. Growing evidence suggests that mindfulness-based and acceptance-based programmes (MABPs) are an effective option for the treatment of OCD. This systematic review and meta-analysis will examine the effectiveness of MABPs in treating OCD. We also aimed to explore potential moderators of the programmes’ effectiveness.Methods and analysisWe will systematically search MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, PSYINDEX, Web of Science, CINAHL and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (no language restrictions) for studies that evaluate the effect of MABPs on patients with OCD. We will conduct backward and forward citation searches of included studies and relevant reviews and contact corresponding authors. The primary outcome will be pre-post intervention change in symptom severity. A secondary outcome will be change in depressive symptoms. Two reviewers will independently screen the records, extract the data and rate the methodological quality of the studies. We will include both controlled and uncontrolled trials. Randomised controlled trials will be meta-analysed, separately assessing between-group effects. A second meta-analysis will assess the within-group effect of all eligible studies. We will explore moderators and sources of heterogeneity such as the specific programme, study design, changes in depressive symptoms, hours of guided treatment, control condition and prior therapy (eg, CBT) using metaregression and subgroup analyses. We will perform sensitivity analyses using follow-up data. A narrative synthesis will also be pursued. We will use the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the quality of the evidence.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences.

scholarly journals Additional effects of psychological interventions on subjective and objective outcomes compared with exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation alone in patients with cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 1035-1049 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Albus ◽  
Christoph Herrmann-Lingen ◽  
Katrin Jensen ◽  
Matthes Hackbusch ◽  
Nina Münch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Depressive Symptoms ◽  
Cardiac Rehabilitation ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Total Mortality ◽  
Lifestyle Change ◽  
Psychological Interventions ◽  
Cardiac Morbidity

Background Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (ebCR) often includes various psychological interventions for lifestyle change or distress management. However, the additional benefit of specific psychological interventions on depression, anxiety, quality of life, cardiac morbidity and cardiovascular or total mortality is not well investigated. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods Randomized controlled trials and controlled cohort trials published between January 1995 and October 2017 comparing ebCR with or without pre-specified psychosocial interventions were selected and evaluated on the basis of predefined inclusion and outcome criteria. Results Out of 15,373 records, 20 studies were identified, including 4450 patients with coronary artery disease (88.5%) or congestive heart failure (11.5%), respectively. Studies were of low to moderate quality and methodological heterogeneity was high. As compared with ebCR alone, additional psychological interventions for lifestyle change or distress management showed a trend to reduce depressive symptoms (standardized mean difference –0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) –0.30; 0.05). Furthermore, during a follow-up of five years, distress management was associated with a trend to reduce cardiac morbidity (risk ratio 0.74, 95% CI 0.51; 1.07). There was no evidence for an additional impact of either psychological lifestyle change interventions or distress management on anxiety, quality of life, cardiovascular or total mortality. Conclusions Specific psychological interventions offered during ebCR may contribute to a reduction of depressive symptoms and cardiac morbidity, but there remains considerable uncertainty under which conditions these interventions exert their optimal effects. (CRD42015025920).

scholarly journals The comparison between total hip arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty in patients with femoral neck fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on 25 randomized controlled trials

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiumei Tang ◽  
Duan Wang ◽  
Ying Liu ◽  
Jiali Chen ◽  
Zongke Zhou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Femoral Neck Fractures ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Acetabular Erosion

Abstract Background We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis which enrolled 25 prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the outcomes between total hip arthroplasty (THA) and hemiarthroplasty (HA) in patients with femoral neck fractures (FNFs). Methods We searched English databases which included PubMed, Embase (vis OvidSP), The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, and Chinese databases Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, Wang Fang, and China Biology Medicine Disc (CBM) in July 2020. The quality of each study was assessed according to the Cochrane Collaboration’s Risk of Bias. Risk ratios (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were pooled with random-effects models. Data regarding baseline characteristics, hospital and surgery outcomes, clinical outcomes, patients’ quality of life, common complications, prothesis-related complications, mortality, and costs were reported. Results A total of 25 RCTs involving 3223 patients (1568 THA and 1655 HA) were included. THA had longer hospital length (WMD = 0.721, P < 0.0001) and surgery time (WMD = 20.044, P < 0.0001), and more blood loss compared with HA (WMD = 69.109, P < 0.0001). THA showed better ratings in the Harris Hip Score during follow-up periods between 1 and 5 years while no differences within 6 months and after 9 years. THA was associated with higher quality-of-life EuroQol-5 Dimension (EQ-5D) scores after 2 years of surgery but no difference within 1 year. There was no difference in common complications. THA had significant higher rate of dislocation (WMD = 1.897, P = 0.002) and lower acetabular erosion (WMD = 0.030, P = 0.001). For mortality, there was no difference during all the follow-up periods except for slightly higher 2-year mortality after surgery. Conclusion This meta-analysis demonstrates that THA has better medium-term functional results and quality of life and lower acetabular erosion rate, while HA shows better in reducing hospital stay, surgery time, and blood loss and also has lower dislocation rate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document