-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2021Autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) is an increasingly recognised neurodevelopmental condition; that is, a neurologically-based condition which interferes with the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) is an increasingly recognised neurodevelopmental condition; that is, a neurologically-based condition which interferes with the acquisition, retention or application of specific skills. ASD is characterised by challenges with socialisation and communication, and by stereotyped and repetitive behaviours. A stereotyped behaviour is one which is repeated over and over again and which seems not to have any useful function. ASD often co-occurs with mental health disorders, including obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). People with ASD may show certain cognitive differences (i.e. differences in ways of thinking) which influence their response to therapies. Thus, there is a need for evidence-based guidelines to treat mental health issues in this group. OCD, a common condition characterised by repeated obsessional thoughts and compulsive acts, occurs with greater frequency in persons with ASD than in the general population. Genetic, anatomic, neurobiological and psychological factors have been proposed to explain this co-occurrence. However, care should be taken to distinguish stereotyped and repetitive behaviours characteristic of ASD from obsessive compulsive acts in OCD. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is the recommended treatment for OCD, but studies have suggested that this treatment may be less effective in those with OCD co-occurring with ASD. Hence, modifications to CBT treatment may be helpful when treating OCD co-occurring with ASD to optimise outcomes.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of behavioural and cognitive behavioural therapy for obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) in children and adults with autism spectrum disorder (ASD).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched for studies in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, five other bibliographic databases, international trial registries and other sources of grey literature (to 24 August 2020). We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews to identify additional studies missed from the original electronic searches. We contacted subject experts for further information when needed.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cross-over, cluster- and quasi-randomised controlled trials involving both adults and children with diagnoses of OCD and ASD. We included studies of participants with co-occurring conditions (i.e. those experiencing other mental illnesses or neurodevelopmental conditions at the same time), but we did not include individuals who had a co-occurring global learning difficulty. Treatment could be in any setting or format and include behavioural therapy (BT) and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), which may have been adapted for those with ASD. Comparator interventions included no treatment, waiting list, attention placebo (where the control group receives non-specific aspects of therapy, but not the active ingredient) and treatment as usual (TAU, where the control group receives the usual treatment, according to accepted standards).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently screened studies for inclusion. The authors extracted relevant data from the one eligible study, assessed the risk of bias and certainty of evidence (GRADE). Outcomes of interest were changes in OCD symptoms and treatment completion (primary outcome), and severity of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms and behavioural difficulties, as well as degree of family accommodation (secondary outcomes). We did not conduct meta-analyses as only one study met the selection criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
We included only one RCT of 46 participants in our analysis. This study compared CBT for OCD in persons with high-functioning ASD with a control group who received anxiety management only. There were no differences in rates of treatment completion between the CBT (87%) and anxiety management (87%) groups (risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80 to 1.25; low-certainty evidence). Behavioural difficulties were not included as an outcome measure in the study. This study showed that there may be a benefit at the end of treatment favouring CBT compared with anxiety management in OCD symptoms (mean difference (MD) -3.00, 95% CI -8.02 to 2.02), depression symptoms (MD -1.80, 95% CI -11.50 to 7.90), anxiety symptoms (MD -3.20, 95% CI -11.38 to 4.98), and quality of life (MD 5.20, 95% CI -1.41 to 11.81), but the evidence was of low certainty. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence is limited regarding the efficacy of CBT for treatment of OCD in ASD. There is much scope for future study, not only examining the efficacy of CBT for OCD in ASD, but also the particular ways that OCD manifests in and affects people with ASD and the role of the family in treatment response.
Topics: Adult; Anxiety; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Behavior Therapy; Child; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Humans; Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
PubMed: 34693989
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013173.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2020Previous Cochrane Reviews have shown that cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is effective in treating childhood anxiety disorders. However, questions remain regarding... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Previous Cochrane Reviews have shown that cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is effective in treating childhood anxiety disorders. However, questions remain regarding the following: up-to-date evidence of the relative efficacy and acceptability of CBT compared to waiting lists/no treatment, treatment as usual, attention controls, and alternative treatments; benefits across a range of outcomes; longer-term effects; outcomes for different delivery formats; and amongst children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) and children with intellectual impairments.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effect of CBT for childhood anxiety disorders, in comparison with waitlist/no treatment, treatment as usual (TAU), attention control, alternative treatment, and medication.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (all years to 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO (each to October 2019), international trial registries, and conducted grey literature searches.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of CBT that involved direct contact with the child, parent, or both, and included non-CBT comparators (waitlist/no treatment, treatment as usual, attention control, alternative treatment, medication). Participants were younger than age 19, and met diagnostic criteria for an anxiety disorder diagnosis. Primary outcomes were remission of primary anxiety diagnosis post-treatment, and acceptability (number of participants lost to post-treatment assessment), and secondary outcomes included remission of all anxiety diagnoses, reduction in anxiety symptoms, reduction in depressive symptoms, improvement in global functioning, adverse effects, and longer-term effects.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures as recommended by Cochrane. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 87 studies and 5964 participants in quantitative analyses. Compared with waitlist/no treatment, CBT probably increases post-treatment remission of primary anxiety diagnoses (CBT: 49.4%, waitlist/no treatment: 17.8%; OR 5.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.90 to 7.60; n = 2697, 39 studies, moderate quality); NNTB 3 (95% CI 2.25 to 3.57) and all anxiety diagnoses (OR 4.43, 95% CI 2.89 to 6.78; n = 2075, 28 studies, moderate quality). Low-quality evidence did not show a difference between CBT and TAU in post-treatment primary anxiety disorder remission (OR 3.19, 95% CI 0.90 to 11.29; n = 487, 8 studies), but did suggest CBT may increase remission from all anxiety disorders compared to TAU (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.16 to 6.46; n = 203, 5 studies). Compared with attention control, CBT may increase post-treatment remission of primary anxiety disorders (OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.89; n = 822, 10 studies, low quality) and all anxiety disorders (OR 2.75, 95% CI 1.22 to 6.17; n = 378, 5 studies, low quality). There was insufficient available data to compare CBT to alternative treatments on post-treatment remission of primary anxiety disorders, and low-quality evidence showed there may be little to no difference between these groups on post-treatment remission of all anxiety disorders (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.23; n = 401, 4 studies) Low-quality evidence did not show a difference for acceptability between CBT and waitlist/no treatment (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.41; n=3158, 45 studies), treatment as usual (OR 1.37, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.56; n = 441, 8 studies), attention control (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.49; n = 797, 12 studies) and alternative treatment (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.61 to 4.13; n=515, 7 studies). No adverse effects were reported across all studies; however, in the small number of studies where any reference was made to adverse effects, it was not clear that these were systematically monitored. Results from the anxiety symptom outcomes, broader outcomes, longer-term outcomes and subgroup analyses are provided in the text. We did not find evidence of consistent differences in outcomes according to delivery formats (e.g. individual versus group; amount of therapist contact time) or amongst samples with and without ASD, and no studies included samples of children with intellectual impairments.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
CBT is probably more effective in the short-term than waiting lists/no treatment, and may be more effective than attention control. We found little to no evidence across outcomes that CBT is superior to usual care or alternative treatments, but our confidence in these findings are limited due to concerns about the amount and quality of available evidence, and we still know little about how best to efficiently improve outcomes.
Topics: Adolescent; Anxiety Disorders; Bias; Child; Child, Preschool; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Confidence Intervals; Depression; Humans; Lost to Follow-Up; Parents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Remission Induction; Time Factors; Waiting Lists
PubMed: 33196111
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013162.pub2 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023The findings of clinical studies exploring essential oils (EOs) for anxiety remain disputed, and no studies have yet clarified the differences in the efficacy of EOs.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The findings of clinical studies exploring essential oils (EOs) for anxiety remain disputed, and no studies have yet clarified the differences in the efficacy of EOs. The purpose of the study was to directly or indirectly compare the efficacy of different types of EOs on anxiety by pooling the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
METHODS
PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were searched from inception to November 2022. Only full texts of RCTs that investigated the effects of EOs on anxiety were included. The trial data were extracted and the risk of bias was assessed by two reviewers independently. Pairwise meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were performed by Stata 15.1 or R 4.1.2 software.
RESULTS
Forty-four RCTs (fifty study arms) involving 10 kinds of EOs and 3419 anxiety patients (1815 patients in EOs group and 1604 patients in control group) were included. Pairwise meta-analyses showed that EOs were effective in reducing State Anxiety Inventory scores (SAIS) [WMD = -6.63, 95% CI-8.17, -5.08] and Trait Anxiety Inventory scores (TAIS) [WMD = -4.97, 95% CI-6.73, -3.20]. Additionally, EOs could decrease systolic blood pressure (SBP) [WMD = -6.83, (95% CI -10.53, -3.12), < 0.001] and heart rate (HR) [WMD = -3.43, (95% CI -5.51, -1.36), < 0.001]. Network meta-analyses demonstrated that regarding the outcome of SAIS, was the most effective with a weighted mean difference (WMD) of-13.61 (95% CrI-24.79, -2.48). Followed by , which had a WMD of-9.62 (95% CrI-13.32, -5.93). Moderate effect sizes were observed for . ( (WMD = -6.78, 95% CrI-10.14, -3.49) and . ( (WMD = -5.41, 95% CrI-7.86, -2.98). Regarding the results of TAIS, . was the best ranked intervention with a WMD of-9.62 (95% CrI-15.62, -3.7). Moderate-to-large effect sizes were observed for . ( (WMD:-8.48; 95% CrI-16.67, -0.33) and (WMD:-5.5; 95% CrI-8.7, -2.46).
CONCLUSION
According to the comprehensive analysis, EOs are effective in reducing both state anxiety and trait anxiety, and . essential oil seems to be the most recommended type of EO for treating anxiety because of its significant effects in reducing SAIS and TAIS.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42022331319.
Topics: Humans; Oils, Volatile; Network Meta-Analysis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Anxiety Disorders; Anxiety
PubMed: 37325306
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1144404 -
Journal of Alternative and... Dec 2014To assess existing reported human trials of Withania somnifera (WS; common name, ashwagandha) for the treatment of anxiety. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess existing reported human trials of Withania somnifera (WS; common name, ashwagandha) for the treatment of anxiety.
DESIGN
Systematic review of the literature, with searches conducted in PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL, and Google Scholar by a medical librarian. Additionally, the reference lists of studies identified in these databases were searched by a research assistant, and queries were conducted in the AYUSH Research Portal. Search terms included "ashwagandha," "Withania somnifera," and terms related to anxiety and stress. Inclusion criteria were human randomized controlled trials with a treatment arm that included WS as a remedy for anxiety or stress. The study team members applied inclusion criteria while screening the records by abstract review.
INTERVENTION
Treatment with any regimen of WS.
OUTCOME MEASURES
Number and results of studies identified in the review.
RESULTS
Sixty-two abstracts were screened; five human trials met inclusion criteria. Three studies compared several dosage levels of WS extract with placebos using versions of the Hamilton Anxiety Scale, with two demonstrating significant benefit of WS versus placebo, and the third demonstrating beneficial effects that approached but did not achieve significance (p=0.05). A fourth study compared naturopathic care with WS versus psychotherapy by using Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) scores as an outcome; BAI scores decreased by 56.5% in the WS group and decreased 30.5% for psychotherapy (p<0.0001). A fifth study measured changes in Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) scores in WS group versus placebo; there was a 44.0% reduction in PSS scores in the WS group and a 5.5% reduction in the placebo group (p<0.0001). All studies exhibited unclear or high risk of bias, and heterogenous design and reporting prevented the possibility of meta-analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
All five studies concluded that WS intervention resulted in greater score improvements (significantly in most cases) than placebo in outcomes on anxiety or stress scales. Current evidence should be received with caution because of an assortment of study methods and cases of potential bias.
Topics: Anxiety; Anxiety Disorders; Humans; Medicine, Ayurvedic; Phytotherapy; Plant Extracts; Psychotherapy
PubMed: 25405876
DOI: 10.1089/acm.2014.0177 -
Autism : the International Journal of... Nov 2021Requests for diagnoses of pathological demand avoidance have increased over recent years, but pathological demand avoidance remains a controversial issue. The concept of...
Requests for diagnoses of pathological demand avoidance have increased over recent years, but pathological demand avoidance remains a controversial issue. The concept of pathological demand avoidance has been criticised for undermining the self-advocacy of autistic people and neglecting the potential role of anxiety as a possible underlying or contributing cause. The current study was undertaken to summarise and review the methodological quality and findings from current research into pathological demand avoidance in children and adolescents. Further aims were to describe how pathological demand avoidance has been identified and to explore the relationships with autism and other developmental and psychiatric disorders. After a comprehensive search, 13 relevant studies using a wide range of methods were identified and systematic quality assessments were undertaken. All the studies had based the identification of pathological demand avoidance, directly or indirectly, on descriptions from the original study by Newson and colleagues. However, the methods used to develop these criteria were not clearly described. Most studies relied exclusively on parental report for data, and there was a general failure to take account of alternative explanations for the behaviours under study. No studies explored the views of individuals with pathological demand avoidance themselves. Problems concerning definition and measurement in the reviewed studies currently limit any conclusions regarding the uniformity or stability of the behaviours described, or the characteristics of individuals displaying them. Relationships between pathological demand avoidance and other emotional and behavioural difficulties should be explored in future research, as should the perspectives of individuals with pathological demand avoidance themselves.
Topics: Adolescent; Anxiety; Anxiety Disorders; Autism Spectrum Disorder; Autistic Disorder; Child; Child Development Disorders, Pervasive; Humans
PubMed: 34320869
DOI: 10.1177/13623613211034382 -
Psychiatric Services (Washington, D.C.) Apr 2021Two primary compounds of the cannabis plant (), delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), differentially and dose-dependently affect mood and anxiety. In...
OBJECTIVE
Two primary compounds of the cannabis plant (), delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD), differentially and dose-dependently affect mood and anxiety. In this systematic review, the authors summarize the design and results of controlled trials assessing the effects of THC and CBD on affective disorders, anxiety disorders, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
METHODS
A keyword search of eight online literature databases identified eight randomized controlled trials of defined CBD or THC doses for the target populations.
RESULTS
A 1-month trial of daily THC (up to 3 mg per day) for anxiety disorder reduced anxiety symptoms, but symptoms were very low throughout the study. Another trial of sequential, single-day, low-dose THC in social anxiety disorder found no symptom changes. Two studies reported that single-dose CBD pretreatment reduced anxiety in laboratory paradigms among individuals with social anxiety disorder. A study of daily CBD for 4 weeks among adolescents with social anxiety disorder indicated modest symptom improvements. One crossover trial involving 10 patients with PTSD showed that THC added to standard pharmacotherapy reduced self-reported nightmares. Two small studies of THC for hospitalized patients with unipolar or bipolar depression found no improvement of depression; instead, anxiety and psychotic symptoms emerged in >50% of patients.
CONCLUSIONS
With only eight very small studies, insufficient evidence was found for efficacy of CBD and THC to manage affective disorders, anxiety disorders, or PTSD. Therefore, medical cannabis should not be recommended for treating patients with these disorders. Further research should investigate the safety and efficacy of managing psychiatric disorders with cannabinoids.
Topics: Adolescent; Anxiety Disorders; Cannabidiol; Cannabinoids; Humans; Mood Disorders; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic
PubMed: 33530732
DOI: 10.1176/appi.ps.202000189 -
PLoS Medicine Sep 2020Globally, the number of refugees and asylum seekers has reached record highs. Past research in refugee mental health has reported wide variation in mental illness... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Globally, the number of refugees and asylum seekers has reached record highs. Past research in refugee mental health has reported wide variation in mental illness prevalence data, partially attributable to methodological limitations. This systematic review aims to summarise the current body of evidence for the prevalence of mental illness in global refugee populations and overcome methodological limitations of individual studies.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
A comprehensive search of electronic databases was undertaken from 1 January 2003 to 4 February 2020 (MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, EBM Reviews, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, PILOTS, Web of Science). Quantitative studies were included if diagnosis of mental illness involved a clinical interview and use of a validated assessment measure and reported at least 50 participants. Study quality was assessed using a descriptive approach based on a template according to study design (modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale). Random-effects models, based on inverse variance weights, were conducted. Subgroup analyses were performed for sex, sample size, displacement duration, visa status, country of origin, current residence, type of interview (interpreter-assisted or native language), and diagnostic measure. The systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD) 42016046349. The search yielded a result of 21,842 records. Twenty-six studies, which included one randomised controlled trial and 25 observational studies, provided results for 5,143 adult refugees and asylum seekers. Studies were undertaken across 15 countries: Australia (652 refugees), Austria (150), China (65), Germany (1,104), Italy (297), Lebanon (646), Nepal (574), Norway (64), South Korea (200), Sweden (86), Switzerland (164), Turkey (238), Uganda (77), United Kingdom (420), and the United States of America (406). The prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was 31.46% (95% CI 24.43-38.5), the prevalence of depression was 31.5% (95% CI 22.64-40.38), the prevalence of anxiety disorders was 11% (95% CI 6.75-15.43), and the prevalence of psychosis was 1.51% (95% CI 0.63-2.40). A limitation of the study is that substantial heterogeneity was present in the prevalence estimates of PTSD, depression, and anxiety, and limited covariates were reported in the included studies.
CONCLUSIONS
This comprehensive review generates current prevalence estimates for not only PTSD but also depression, anxiety, and psychosis. Refugees and asylum seekers have high and persistent rates of PTSD and depression, and the results of this review highlight the need for ongoing, long-term mental health care beyond the initial period of resettlement.
Topics: Anxiety; Anxiety Disorders; Depression; Depressive Disorder; Female; Humans; Male; Mental Disorders; Mental Health; Prevalence; Refugees; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic
PubMed: 32956381
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003337 -
International Journal of Environmental... Mar 2021Heart Rate Variability Biofeedback (HRVB) is a treatment in which patients learn self-regulation of a physiological dysregulated vagal nerve function. While the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Heart Rate Variability Biofeedback (HRVB) is a treatment in which patients learn self-regulation of a physiological dysregulated vagal nerve function. While the therapeutic approach of HRVB is promising for a variety of disorders, it has not yet been regularly offered in a mental health treatment setting.
AIM
To provide a systematic review about the efficacy of HRV-Biofeedback in treatment of anxiety, depression, and stress related disorders.
METHOD
Systematic review in PubMed and Web of Science in 2020 with terms HRV, biofeedback, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), depression, panic disorder, and anxiety disorder. Selection, critical appraisal, and description of the Random Controlled Trials (RCT) studies. Combined with recent meta-analyses.
RESULTS
The search resulted in a total of 881 studies. After critical appraisal, nine RCTs have been selected as well as two other relevant studies. The RCTs with control groups treatment as usual, muscle relaxation training and a "placebo"-biofeedback instrument revealed significant clinical efficacy and better results compared with control conditions, mostly significant. In the depression studies average reduction at the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) scale was 64% (HRVB plus Treatment as Usual (TAU) versus 25% (control group with TAU) and 30% reduction (HRVB) at the PSQ scale versus 7% (control group with TAU). In the PTSD studies average reduction at the BDI-scale was 53% (HRV plus TAU) versus 24% (control group with TAU) and 22% (HRVB) versus 10% (TAU) with the PTSD Checklist (PCL). In other systematic reviews significant effects have been shown for HRV-Biofeedback in treatment of asthma, coronary artery disease, sleeping disorders, postpartum depression and stress and anxiety.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review shows significant improvement of the non-invasive HRVB training in stress related disorders like PTSD, depression, and panic disorder, in particular when combined with cognitive behavioral therapy or different TAU. Effects were visible after four weeks of training, but clinical practice in a longer daily self-treatment of eight weeks is more promising. More research to integrate HRVB in treatment of stress related disorders in psychiatry is warranted, as well as research focused on the neurophysiological mechanisms.
Topics: Anxiety; Anxiety Disorders; Autonomic Nervous System; Biofeedback, Psychology; Depression; Female; Heart Rate; Humans; Self-Control; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic
PubMed: 33804817
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18073329 -
BMC Health Services Research Jul 2018Anxiety disorders are common, yet treatment options in general practice are often limited to medication or CBT. There is a lack of evidence for the effectiveness of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Anxiety disorders are common, yet treatment options in general practice are often limited to medication or CBT. There is a lack of evidence for the effectiveness of exercise in the treatment of anxiety in patients who present to general practice and also about the intensity of exercise required to lead to improvement. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the use of exercise versus waiting list control groups in the treatment of anxiety and also to assess the benefit of high intensity exercise vs low intensity exercise. Long term follow up scores were also analysed. We included patients who met diagnostic criteria for anxiety disorders or had clinically raised anxiety levels on a validated rating scale and performed a subgroup analysis of the outcomes between the two groups. The intervention was any aerobic exercise programme carried out for at least two weeks, or exercise carried out at high intensity for at least two weeks. The comparison groups were either a waiting list control group or low intensity exercise.
METHOD
Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Three databases were searched; CENTRAL, Medline and Embase. Outcome assessment was based on validated anxiety rating scales. The quality of the studies was appraised according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Effect sizes were calculated using the standardised mean difference.
RESULTS
Fifteen studies were identified with a total of 675 patients. Nine trials had participants with diagnosed anxiety disorders and six trials had participants with raised anxiety on a validated rating scale. Aerobic exercise was effective in the treatment of raised anxiety compared to waiting list control groups (effect size - 0.41, 95% CI = - 0.70 to - 0.12). High intensity exercise programmes showed greater effects than low intensity programmes. There was no significant difference in outcomes between groups of patients with diagnosed anxiety disorders and patients who had raised anxiety on a rating scale. Conclusions were limited by the small number of studies and wide variation in the delivery of exercise interventions.
CONCLUSION
Exercise programmes are a viable treatment option for the treatment of anxiety. High intensity exercise regimens were found to be more effective than low intensity regimens. The results have implications for the use of exercise schemes in General Practice.
Topics: Anxiety Disorders; Control Groups; Exercise; Exercise Therapy; General Practice; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Waiting Lists
PubMed: 30012142
DOI: 10.1186/s12913-018-3313-5 -
JAMA Psychiatry Mar 2024Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders in adults. Psychotherapies are among the most recommended treatments for GAD, but which... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders in adults. Psychotherapies are among the most recommended treatments for GAD, but which should be considered as first-line treatment needs to be clarified.
OBJECTIVE
To use a network meta-analysis to examine the short- and long-term associations of different psychotherapies with outcomes of effectiveness and acceptability in adults with GAD.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials were searched from database inception to January 1, 2023, to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of psychotherapies for adults with GAD.
STUDY SELECTION
RCTs comparing any type of psychotherapy against another or with a control condition for the treatment of adults (≥18 years, both sexes) with a primary diagnosis of GAD were eligible for inclusion.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
This study followed Cochrane standards for extracting data and assessing data quality and used the PRISMA guideline for reporting. Risk of bias of individual studies was assessed using the second version of the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis was used to rate the certainty of evidence for meta-analytical results.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Eight psychotherapies were compared against one another and with 2 control conditions. Primary outcomes were severity of GAD symptoms and acceptability of the psychotherapies. Random-effects model pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted. For effectiveness, standardized mean differences (SMDs) were pooled, and for acceptability, relative risks with 95% CIs were calculated.
RESULTS
Data from 65 RCTs were included. Effect size estimates on data from 5048 participants (mean [SD], 70.9% [11.9%] women; mean [SD] age, 42.2 [12.5] years) suggested that third-wave cognitive behavior therapies (CBTs) (SMD, -0.76 [95% CI, -1.15 to -0.36]; certainty, moderate), CBT (SMD, -0.74 [95% CI, -1.09 to -0.38]; certainty, moderate), and relaxation therapy (SMD, -0.59 [95% CI, -1.07 to -0.11]; certainty, low) were associated with reduced GAD symptoms vs treatment as usual. Relative risks for all-cause discontinuation (indication of acceptability) signaled no differences compared with treatment as usual for all psychotherapies (eg, relative risk, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.64-1.67] for CBT vs treatment as usual). When excluding studies at high risk of bias, relaxation therapy lost its superiority over treatment as usual (SMD, -0.47; 95% CI, -1.18 to 0.23). When considering anxiety severity at 3 to 12 months after completion of the intervention, only CBT remained significantly associated with greater effectiveness than treatment as usual (SMD, -0.60; 95% CI, -0.99 to -0.21).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Given the evidence in this systematic review and network meta-analysis for its associations with both acute and long-term effectiveness, CBT may represent the first-line therapy of GAD. Third-wave CBTs and relaxation therapy were associated with short-term effectiveness and may also be offered.
Topics: Humans; Anxiety Disorders; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Network Meta-Analysis; Psychotherapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37851421
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2023.3971