-
JMIR MHealth and UHealth Oct 2021Postpartum depression (PPD) is a prevalent mental health problem with serious adverse consequences for affected women and their infants. Clinical trials have found that... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Postpartum depression (PPD) is a prevalent mental health problem with serious adverse consequences for affected women and their infants. Clinical trials have found that telehealth interventions for women with PPD result in increased accessibility and improved treatment effectiveness. However, no comprehensive synthesis of evidence from clinical trials by systematic review has been conducted.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of telehealth interventions in reducing depressive symptoms and anxiety in women with PPD. To enhance the homogeneity and interpretability of the findings, this systematic review focuses on PPD measured by the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS).
METHODS
PubMed, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CNKI, and Wanfang were electronically searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effectiveness of telehealth interventions for women with PPD from inception to February 28, 2021. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two researchers. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool, and meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.
RESULTS
Following the search, 9 RCTs with a total of 1958 women with PPD were included. The EPDS (mean difference=-2.99, 95% CI -4.52 to -1.46; P<.001) and anxiety (standardized mean difference=-0.39, 95% CI -0.67 to -0.12; P=.005) scores were significantly lower in the telehealth group compared with the control group. Significant subgroup differences were found in depressive symptoms according to the severity of PPD, telehealth technology, specific therapy, and follow-up time (P<.001).
CONCLUSIONS
Telehealth interventions could effectively reduce the symptoms of depression and anxiety in women with PPD. However, better designed and more rigorous large-scale RCTs targeting specific therapies are needed to further explore the potential of telehealth interventions for PPD.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42021258541; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=258541.
Topics: Anxiety; Depression, Postpartum; Female; Humans; Infant; Telemedicine; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34617909
DOI: 10.2196/32544 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2021Evidence is limited regarding the most effective pharmacological treatment for psychotic depression: monotherapy with an antidepressant, monotherapy with an... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Evidence is limited regarding the most effective pharmacological treatment for psychotic depression: monotherapy with an antidepressant, monotherapy with an antipsychotic, another treatment (e.g. mifepristone), or combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic. This is an update of a review first published in 2005 and last updated in 2015.
OBJECTIVES
1. To compare the clinical efficacy of pharmacological treatments for patients with an acute psychotic depression: antidepressant monotherapy, antipsychotic monotherapy, mifepristone monotherapy, and the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic versus placebo and/or each other. 2. To assess whether differences in response to treatment in the current episode are related to non-response to prior treatment.
SEARCH METHODS
A search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR); Ovid MEDLINE (1950-); Embase (1974-); and PsycINFO (1960-) was conducted on 21 February 2020. Reference lists of all included studies and related reviews were screened and key study authors contacted.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that included participants with acute major depression with psychotic features, as well as RCTs consisting of participants with acute major depression with or without psychotic features, that reported separately on the subgroup of participants with psychotic features.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias in the included studies, according to criteria from the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data were entered into RevMan 5.1. We used intention-to-treat data. Primary outcomes were clinical response for efficacy and overall dropout rate for harm/tolerance. Secondary outcome were remission of depression, change from baseline severity score, quality of life, and dropout rate due to adverse effects. For dichotomous efficacy outcomes (i.e. response and overall dropout), risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Regarding the primary outcome of harm, only overall dropout rates were available for all studies. If the study did not report any of the response criteria as defined above, remission as defined here could be used as an alternative. For continuously distributed outcomes, it was not possible to extract data from the RCTs. MAIN RESULTS: The search identified 3947 abstracts, but only 12 RCTs with a total of 929 participants could be included in the review. Because of clinical heterogeneity, few meta-analyses were possible. The main outcome was reduction in severity (response) of depression, not of psychosis. For depression response, we found no evidence of a difference between antidepressant and placebo (RR 8.40, 95% CI 0.50 to 142.27; participants = 27, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or between antipsychotic and placebo (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.73; participants = 201, studies = 2; very low-certainty evidence). Furthermore, we found no evidence of a difference in overall dropouts with antidepressant (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.34 to 4.51; participants = 27, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.08; participants = 201, studies = 2; very low-certainty evidence). No evidence suggests a difference in depression response (RR 2.09, 95% CI 0.64 to 6.82; participants = 36, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) or overall dropouts (RR 1.79, 95% CI 0.18 to 18.02; participants = 36, studies = 1; very low-certainty evidence) between antidepressant and antipsychotic. For depression response, low- to very low-certainty evidence suggests that the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic may be more effective than antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.40 to 2.38; participants = 447, studies = 4), more effective than antidepressant monotherapy (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.80; participants = 245, studies = 5), and more effective than placebo (RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.82; participants = 148, studies = 2). Very low-certainty evidence suggests no difference in overall dropouts between the combination of an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic versus antipsychotic monotherapy (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.01; participants = 447, studies = 4), antidepressant monotherapy (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.50; participants = 245, studies = 5), or placebo alone (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.18; participants = 148, studies = 2). No study measured change in depression severity from baseline, quality of life, or dropouts due to adverse events. We found no RCTs with mifepristone that fulfilled our inclusion criteria. Risk of bias is considerable: we noted differences between studies with regards to diagnosis, uncertainties around randomisation and allocation concealment, treatment interventions (pharmacological differences between various antidepressants and antipsychotics), and outcome criteria.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Psychotic depression is heavily under-studied, limiting confidence in the conclusions drawn. Some evidence indicates that combination therapy with an antidepressant plus an antipsychotic is more effective than either treatment alone or placebo. Evidence is limited for treatment with an antidepressant alone or with an antipsychotic alone. Evidence for efficacy of mifepristone is lacking.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Psychotic Disorders; Systematic Reviews as Topic
PubMed: 34875106
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004044.pub5 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2021Many studies have recently been conducted to assess the antidepressant efficacy of glutamate modification in mood disorders. This is an update of a review first... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Many studies have recently been conducted to assess the antidepressant efficacy of glutamate modification in mood disorders. This is an update of a review first published in 2015 focusing on the use of glutamate receptor modulators in unipolar depression.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects - and review the acceptability and tolerability - of ketamine and other glutamate receptor modulators in alleviating the acute symptoms of depression in people with unipolar major depressive disorder.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO all years to July 2020. We did not apply any restrictions to date, language or publication status.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Double- or single-blinded randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing ketamine, memantine, esketamine or other glutamate receptor modulators with placebo (pill or saline infusion), other active psychotropic drugs, or electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in adults with unipolar major depression.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently identified studies, assessed trial quality and extracted data. The primary outcomes were response rate (50% reduction on a standardised rating scale) and adverse events. We decided a priori to measure the efficacy outcomes at different time points and run sensitivity/subgroup analyses. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool, and certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
Thirty-one new studies were identified for inclusion in this updated review. Overall, we included 64 studies (5299 participants) on ketamine (31 trials), esketamine (9), memantine (5), lanicemine (4), D-cycloserine (2), Org26576 (2), riluzole (2), atomoxetine (1), basimglurant (1), citicoline (1), CP-101,606 (1), decoglurant (1), MK-0657 (1), N-acetylcysteine (1), rapastinel (1), and sarcosine (1). Forty-eight studies were placebo-controlled, and 48 were two-arm studies. The majority of trials defined an inclusion criterion for the severity of depressive symptoms at baseline: 29 at least moderate depression; 17 severe depression; and five mild-to-moderate depression. Nineteen studies recruited only patients with treatment-resistant depression, defined as inadequate response to at least two antidepressants. The majority of studies investigating ketamine administered as a single dose, whilst all of the included esketamine studies used a multiple dose regimen (most frequently twice a week for four weeks). Most studies looking at ketamine used intravenous administration, whilst the majority of esketamine trials used intranasal routes. The evidence suggests that ketamine may result in an increase in response and remission compared with placebo at 24 hours odds ratio (OR) 3.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.54 to 10.10; n = 185, studies = 7, very low-certainty evidence). Ketamine may reduce depression rating scale scores over placebo at 24 hours, but the evidence is very uncertain (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.87, 95% CI -1.26 to -0.48; n = 231, studies = 8, very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in the number of participants assigned to ketamine or placebo who dropped out for any reason (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.19 to 8.28; n = 201, studies = 6, very low-certainty evidence). When compared with midazolam, the evidence showed that ketamine increases remission rates at 24 hours (OR 2.21, 95% CI 0.67 to 7.32; n = 122,studies = 2, low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the response efficacy of ketamine at 24 hours in comparison with midazolam, and its ability to reduce depression rating scale scores at the same time point (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.00 to 6.18; n = 296, studies = 4,very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in the number of participants who dropped out of studies for any reason between ketamine and placebo (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.05 to 2.09; n = 72, studies = 1, low-certainty evidence). Esketamine treatment likely results in a large increase in participants achieving remission at 24 hours compared with placebo (OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.71 to 4.40; n = 894, studies = 5, moderate-certainty evidence). Esketamine probably results in decreases in depression rating scale scores at 24 hours compared with placebo (SMD -0.31, 95% CI -0.45 to -0.17; n = 824, studies = 4, moderate-certainty evidence). Our findings show that esketamine increased response rates, although this evidence is uncertain (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.20 to 3.68; n = 1071, studies = 5, low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence that participants assigned to esketamine treatment dropped out of trials more frequently than those assigned to placebo for any reason (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.73; n = 773, studies = 4,moderate-certainty evidence). We found very little evidence for the remaining glutamate receptor modulators. We rated the risk of bias as low or unclear for most domains, though lack of detail regarding masking of treatment in the studies reduced our certainty in the effect for all outcomes.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Our findings show that ketamine and esketamine may be more efficacious than placebo at 24 hours. How these findings translate into clinical practice, however, is not entirely clear. The evidence for use of the remaining glutamate receptor modulators is limited as very few trials were included in the meta-analyses for each comparison and the majority of comparisons included only one study. Long term non-inferiority RCTs comparing repeated ketamine and esketamine, and rigorous real-world monitoring are needed to establish comprehensive data on safety and efficacy.
Topics: Adult; Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Ketamine; Receptors, Glutamate
PubMed: 34510411
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011612.pub3 -
Annals of Internal Medicine Feb 2023Primary care patients and clinicians may prefer alternative options to second-generation antidepressants for major depressive disorder (MDD). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Nonpharmacologic and Pharmacologic Treatments of Adult Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis for a Clinical Guideline by the American College of Physicians.
BACKGROUND
Primary care patients and clinicians may prefer alternative options to second-generation antidepressants for major depressive disorder (MDD).
PURPOSE
To compare the benefits and harms of nonpharmacologic treatments with second-generation antidepressants as first-step interventions for acute MDD, and to compare second-step treatment strategies for patients who did not achieve remission after an initial attempt with antidepressants.
DATA SOURCES
English-language studies from several electronic databases from 1 January 1990 to 8 August 2022, trial registries, gray literature databases, and reference lists to identify unpublished research.
STUDY SELECTION
2 investigators independently selected randomized trials of at least 6 weeks' duration.
DATA EXTRACTION
Reviewers abstracted data about study design and conduct, participants, interventions, and outcomes. They dually rated the risk of bias of studies and the certainty of evidence for outcomes of interest.
DATA SYNTHESIS
65 randomized trials met the inclusion criteria; eligible data from nonrandomized studies were not found. Meta-analyses and network meta-analyses indicated similar benefits of most nonpharmacologic treatments and antidepressants as first-step treatments. Antidepressants had higher risks for discontinuation because of adverse events than most other treatments. For second-step therapies, different switching and augmentation strategies provided similar symptomatic relief. The certainty of evidence for most comparisons is low; findings should be interpreted cautiously.
LIMITATIONS
Many studies had methodological limitations or dosing inequalities; publication bias might have affected some comparisons. In some cases, conclusions could not be drawn because of insufficient evidence.
CONCLUSION
Although benefits seem to be similar among first- and second-step MDD treatments, the certainty of evidence is low for most comparisons. Clinicians and patients should focus on options with the most reliable evidence and take adverse event profiles and patient preferences into consideration.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE
American College of Physicians. (PROSPERO: CRD42020204703).
Topics: Humans; Adult; Depressive Disorder, Major; Network Meta-Analysis; Antidepressive Agents; Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation; Physicians
PubMed: 36689750
DOI: 10.7326/M22-1845 -
Nutrients Dec 2021A growing number of studies in rodents indicate a connection between the intestinal microbiota and the brain, but comprehensive human data is scarce. Here, we...
A growing number of studies in rodents indicate a connection between the intestinal microbiota and the brain, but comprehensive human data is scarce. Here, we systematically reviewed human studies examining the connection between the intestinal microbiota and major depressive and bipolar disorder. In this review we discuss various changes in bacterial abundance, particularly on low taxonomic levels, in terms of a connection with the pathophysiology of major depressive and bipolar disorder, their use as a diagnostic and treatment response parameter, their health-promoting potential, as well as novel adjunctive treatment options. The diversity of the intestinal microbiota is mostly decreased in depressed subjects. A consistent elevation of phylum Actinobacteria, family Bifidobacteriaceae, and genus , and a reduction of family Ruminococcaceae, genus , and genus was reported. Probiotics containing and/or spp. seemed to improve depressive symptoms, and novel approaches with different probiotics and synbiotics showed promising results. Comparing twin studies, we report here that already with an elevated risk of developing depression, microbial changes towards a "depression-like" microbiota were found. Overall, these findings highlight the importance of the microbiota and the necessity for a better understanding of its changes contributing to depressive symptoms, potentially leading to new approaches to alleviate depressive symptoms via alterations of the gut microbiota.
Topics: Adult; Animals; Bacteroides; Bifidobacterium; Bipolar Disorder; Brain-Gut Axis; Depressive Disorder, Major; Faecalibacterium; Female; Gastrointestinal Microbiome; Humans; Lactobacillus; Male; Middle Aged; Probiotics; Synbiotics; Young Adult
PubMed: 35010912
DOI: 10.3390/nu14010037 -
BMC Public Health Nov 2019The use of computers/TV has become increasingly common worldwide after entering the twenty-first century and depression represents a growing public health burden.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The use of computers/TV has become increasingly common worldwide after entering the twenty-first century and depression represents a growing public health burden. Understanding the association between screen time-based sedentary behavior (ST-SB) and the risk of depression is important to the development of prevention and intervention strategies.
METHODS
We searched the electronic databases of Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The odds ratio (OR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was adopted as the pooled measurement. Subgroup analyses were investigated by stratified meta-analyses based on age, gender and reference group (reference category of screen time, e.g. 2 h/day, 4 h/day).
RESULTS
There were 12 cross-sectional studies and 7 longitudinal studies met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the pooled OR was 1.28 with high heterogeneity (I = 89%). Compared to those who reported less SB, persons reporting more SB had a significantly higher risk of depression. When the gender was stratified, the pooled OR was 1.18 in female groups while no significant association was observed in males. Among the 19 studies, 5 studies used a reference group with ST = 2 h/days (pooled OR = 1.46), 9 studies used ≥4 h as a reference group (pooled OR = 1.38), 2 studies used 1 h as a reference group (pooled OR = 1.07) and for the remaining 3 studies, hours of ST were calculated as a continuous variable (pooled OR = 1.04).
CONCLUSIONS
ST-SB is associated with depression risk and the effects vary in different populations. In addition, valid objective measures of SB should be developed in future studies.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Computers; Cross-Sectional Studies; Depression; Depressive Disorder; Exercise; Female; Humans; Male; Mental Health; Middle Aged; Screen Time; Sedentary Behavior; Television; Young Adult
PubMed: 31727052
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-019-7904-9 -
Journal of Affective Disorders Sep 2023Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) is used for treating depression but the efficacy and safety have not been well assessed. This study was... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The efficacy and safety of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation in the treatment of depressive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
BACKGROUND
Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) is used for treating depression but the efficacy and safety have not been well assessed. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of taVNS in depression.
METHODS
The retrieval databases included English databases of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Library and PsycINFO, and Chinese databases of CNKI, Wanfang, VIP and Sino Med, and the retrieval period was from their inception to November 10, 2022. The clinical trial registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and Chinese Clinical Trial Registry) were also searched. Standardized mean difference and the risk ratio were used as the effect indicator and the effect size was represented by the 95 % confidence interval. Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials and the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system were used to assess the risk of bias and quality of evidence respectively.
RESULTS
Totally, 12 studies of 838 participants were included. taVNS could significantly improve depression and reduce Hamilton Depression Scale scores. Low to very low evidence showed that taVNS had higher response rates than sham-taVMS and comparable response rates compared to antidepressants (ATD) and that taVNS combined with ATD had comparable efficacy to ATD with fewer side effects.
LIMITATIONS
The number of studies in subgroups was small and the evidence quality was low to very low.
CONCLUSIONS
taVNS is an effective and safe method for alleviating depression scores and had a comparable response rate to ATD.
Topics: Humans; Vagus Nerve Stimulation; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation; Antidepressive Agents; Vagus Nerve; Depressive Disorder
PubMed: 37230264
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2023.05.048 -
PloS One 2021The COVID-19 pandemic has placed health care workers under psychological stress. Previous reviews show a high prevalence of mental disorders among health care workers,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The COVID-19 pandemic has placed health care workers under psychological stress. Previous reviews show a high prevalence of mental disorders among health care workers, but these need updating and inclusion of studies written in Chinese. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide updated prevalence estimates for depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, benefitting from the inclusion of studies published in Chinese.
METHODS
Systematic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Global Health, Web of Science, CINAHL, Google Scholar and the Chinese databases SinoMed, WanfangMed, CNKI and CQVIP, for studies conducted between December 2019 and August 2020 on the prevalence of depression, anxiety and PTSD in health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Studies published in both English and Chinese were included.
RESULTS
Data on the prevalence of moderate depression, anxiety and PTSD was pooled across 65 studies involving 97,333 health care workers across 21 countries. The pooled prevalence of depression was 21.7% (95% CI, 18.3%-25.2%), of anxiety 22.1% (95% CI, 18.2%-26.3%), and of PTSD 21.5% (95% CI, 10.5%-34.9%). Prevalence estimates are also provided for a mild classification of each disorder. Pooled prevalence estimates of depression and anxiety were highest in studies conducted in the Middle-East (34.6%; 28.9%). Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were conducted across covariates, including sampling method and outcome measure.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis has identified a high prevalence of moderate depression, anxiety and PTSD among health care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Appropriate support is urgently needed. The response would benefit from additional research on which interventions are effective at mitigating these risks.
Topics: Anxiety; Anxiety Disorders; COVID-19; Depression; Depressive Disorder; Health Personnel; Humans; Mental Health; Pandemics; Prevalence; SARS-CoV-2; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic; Stress, Psychological
PubMed: 33690641
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246454 -
Laeknabladid Sep 2022The hallucinogen psilocybin is a potential novel treatment for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Our goal is to review current knowledge on psilocybin and its...
The hallucinogen psilocybin is a potential novel treatment for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Our goal is to review current knowledge on psilocybin and its efficacy in TRD. Literature searches were done on PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar, references reviewed in identified articles and other articles found on the website of COMPASS Pathways. Psilocybin treatment consists usually of a single oral administration of 25 mg of psilocybin along with psychological support for 5-8 hours during the ensuing hallucinogenic trip. Common side-effects include headache, nausea, fatigue and insomnia. A systematic review has demonstrated significant antidepressant efficacy in certain groups and a double-blind randomized study found antidepressant efficacy of psilocybin comparable to the SSRI escitalopram. In the phase 2 study of COMPASS Pathways, the psilocybin-COMP360 treatment led to a rapid response and remission as early as three weeks following the treatment for around one third of participants. Recent studies have shown that psilocybin significantly decreases the severity of depressive symptoms and is generally well tolerated. Further research will reveal whether it will be granted a license to treat treatment-resistant depression in the near future. There remains an urgent need for novel treatments for those who do not respond to current antidepressant therapies.
Topics: Antidepressive Agents; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Treatment-Resistant; Hallucinogens; Humans; Psilocybin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36040772
DOI: 10.17992/lbl.2022.09.706 -
PloS One 2021There is increasing evidence that subjective caregiver burden is an important determinant of clinically significant anxiety in family carers. This meta-analysis aims to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
There is increasing evidence that subjective caregiver burden is an important determinant of clinically significant anxiety in family carers. This meta-analysis aims to synthesise this evidence and investigate the relationship between subjective caregiver burden and anxiety symptoms in informal caregivers. We searched PubMed, CINAHL and PsycINFO up to January 2020. Combined estimates were obtained using a random-effects model. After screening of 4,312 articles, 74 studies (with 75 independent samples) were included. There was a large, positive association between subjective caregiver burden and anxiety symptoms (r = 0.51; 95% CI = 0.47, 0.54; I2 = 0.0%). No differences were found in subgroup analyses by type of study design (cross-sectional vs. longitudinal), sampling, control of confounders or care-recipient characteristics. Subjective caregiver burden is an important risk factor for anxiety in informal caregivers. Targeting subjective caregiver burden could be beneficial in preventing clinically significant anxiety for the increasing number of family carers worldwide.
Topics: Adaptation, Psychological; Anxiety; Anxiety Disorders; Caregiver Burden; Caregivers; Depression; Depressive Disorder; Humans; Quality of Life; Risk Factors
PubMed: 33647035
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247143