-
The British Journal of Clinical... Sep 2022We reviewed the evidence regarding the effectiveness of schema therapy for anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and posttraumatic stress disorder...
OBJECTIVES
We reviewed the evidence regarding the effectiveness of schema therapy for anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
METHODS
This systematic review followed the recommendation of the PRISMA guidelines. A database search (PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, WEB OF SCIENCE, and Academic Search Ultimate) was conducted to identify eligible studies up until 2 April 2021. The search included the keywords ('schema therap*' or 'schema group therap*' or 'schema mode therap*' or 'schema focused' or 'young's model') and ('anxiety disorder*' or 'anxiety-related disorder*' or 'agoraphobia' or 'health anxiety' or 'phobi*' or 'panic disorder' or 'obsessive compulsive disorder' or 'OCD' or 'posttraumatic stress' or 'post traumatic stress' or 'PTSD' or 'hypochondria' or 'axis 1'). Included studies were appraised on methodological quality according to the Psychotherapy Outcome study Methodology Rating Form.
RESULTS
We identified 41 studies that were eligible based on the topic. However, only six (comprising 316 anxiety, OCD, and PTSD patients) could be included despite lenient methodological inclusion/exclusion criteria. Results showed that schema therapy can lead to beneficial effects in disorder-specific symptoms and early maladaptive schemas. Yet, we also uncovered substantial methodological limitations in most studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Schema therapy is a promising treatment for anxiety, OCD, and PTSD. Yet, there is a systematic problem in the quality of research despite growing clinical interest and application. We therefore concluded with a research agenda presenting recommendations for future research that will be crucial for building a solid evidence-base for schema therapy in chronic anxiety, OCD, and PTSD.
PRACTITIONER POINTS
A systematic review on the effectiveness of schema therapy for anxiety disorders, OCD, and PTSD. Preliminary but limited evidence that schema therapy leads to beneficial effects in disorder-specific symptoms. Preliminary but limited evidence that schema therapy leads to beneficial effects in early maladaptive schemas in anxiety, OCD, and PTSD. More research of higher methodological quality is needed to provide more conclusive empirical support for the use of schema therapy for anxiety, OCD, and PTSD.
Topics: Anxiety Disorders; Humans; Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder; Psychotherapy; Schema Therapy; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic
PubMed: 34296767
DOI: 10.1111/bjc.12324 -
Psychological Medicine Jan 2023Digital interventions for anxiety disorders are a promising solution to address barriers to evidence-based treatment access. Precise and powerful estimates of digital... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Digital interventions for anxiety disorders are a promising solution to address barriers to evidence-based treatment access. Precise and powerful estimates of digital intervention effectiveness for anxiety disorders are necessary for further adoption in practice. The present systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of digital interventions across all anxiety disorders and specific to each disorder wait-list and care-as-usual controls.
METHODS
A systematic search of bibliographic databases identified 15 030 abstracts from inception to 1 January 2020. Forty-seven randomized controlled trials (53 comparisons; 4958 participants) contributed to the meta-analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted by an anxiety disorder, risk of bias, treatment support, recruitment, location and treatment adherence.
RESULTS
A large, pooled effect size of = 0.80 [95% Confidence Interval: 0.68-0.93] was found in favor of digital interventions. Moderate to large pooled effect sizes favoring digital interventions were found for generalized anxiety disorder ( = 0.62), mixed anxiety samples ( = 0.68), panic disorder with or without agoraphobia ( = 1.08) and social anxiety disorder ( = 0.76) subgroups. No subgroups were significantly different or related to the pooled effect size. Notably, the effects of guided interventions ( = 0.84) and unguided interventions ( = 0.64) were not significantly different. Supplemental analysis comparing digital and face-to-face interventions (9 comparisons; 683 participants) found no significant difference in effect [ = 0.14 favoring digital interventions; Confidence Interval: -0.01 to 0.30].
CONCLUSION
The precise and powerful estimates found further justify the application of digital interventions for anxiety disorders in place of wait-list or usual care.
Topics: Humans; Anxiety Disorders; Panic Disorder; Phobia, Social; Treatment Outcome; Anxiety
PubMed: 34047264
DOI: 10.1017/S0033291721001999 -
Depression and Anxiety Mar 2021There is consistent evidence that mood disorders often co-occur with anxiety disorders, however, the strength of the association of these two broad groups of disorders... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
There is consistent evidence that mood disorders often co-occur with anxiety disorders, however, the strength of the association of these two broad groups of disorders has been challenging to summarize across different studies. The aim was to conduct a meta-analysis of publications reporting on the pairwise comorbidity between mood and anxiety disorders after sorting into comparable study types. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the grey literature for publications between 1980 and 2017 regardless of geographical locations and languages. We meta-analyzed estimates from original articles after sorting by: (a) broad or narrow diagnostic criteria, (b) study time-frame, and (c) estimates with or without covariate adjustments. Over 43 000 unique studies were identified through electronic searches, of which 391 were selected for full-text review. Finally, 171 studies were eligible for inclusion, including 53 articles from additional snowball searching. In general, regardless of variations in diagnosis type, study time-frame, temporal order, or use of adjustments, there was substantial comorbidity between mood and anxiety disorders. Based on the entire 90 separate meta-analyses, the median OR was 6.1 (range 1.5-18.7). Of these estimates, all 90 were above 1, and 87 were significantly greater than 1 (i.e., the 95% confidence intervals did not include 1). Fourteen of the 90 pooled estimates had ORs that were greater than 10. This systematic review found robust and consistent evidence of comorbidity between broadly defined mood and anxiety disorders. Clinicians should be vigilant for the prompt identification and treatment of this common type of comorbidity.
Topics: Affect; Anxiety Disorders; Comorbidity; Humans; Mood Disorders; Morbidity
PubMed: 33225514
DOI: 10.1002/da.23113 -
JAMA Psychiatry Mar 2020Cognitive behavioral therapy is recommended for anxiety-related disorders, but evidence for its long-term outcome is limited. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Cognitive behavioral therapy is recommended for anxiety-related disorders, but evidence for its long-term outcome is limited.
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the long-term outcomes after cognitive behavioral therapy (compared with care as usual, relaxation, psychoeducation, pill placebo, supportive therapy, or waiting list) for anxiety disorders, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD).
DATA SOURCES
English-language publications were identified from PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, Cochrane, OpenGrey (1980 to January 2019), and recent reviews. The search strategy included a combination of terms associated with anxiety disorders (eg, panic or phobi*) and study design (eg, clinical trial or randomized controlled trial).
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized clinical trials on posttreatment and at least 1-month follow-up effects of cognitive behavioral therapy compared with control conditions among adults with generalized anxiety disorder, panic disorder with or without agoraphobia, social anxiety disorder, specific phobia, PTSD, or OCD.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Researchers independently screened records, extracted statistics, and assessed study quality. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Hedges g was calculated for anxiety symptoms immediately after treatment and at 1 to 6 months, 6 to 12 months, and 12 months or more after treatment completion.
RESULTS
Of 69 randomized clinical trials (4118 outpatients) that were mainly of low quality, cognitive behavioral therapy compared with control conditions was associated with improved outcomes after treatment completion and at 1 to 6 months and at 6 to 12 months of follow-up for a generalized anxiety disorder (Hedges g, 0.07-0.40), panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (Hedges g, 0.22-0.35), social anxiety disorder (Hedges g, 0.34-0.60), specific phobia (Hedges g, 0.49-0.72), PTSD (Hedges g, 0.59-0.72), and OCD (Hedges g, 0.70-0.85). At a follow-up of 12 months or more, these associations were still significant for generalized anxiety disorder (Hedges g, 0.22; number of studies [k] = 10), social anxiety disorder (Hedges g, 0.42; k = 3), and PTSD (Hedges g, 0.84; k = 5), but not for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (k = 5) and could not be calculated for specific phobia (k = 1) and OCD (k = 0). Relapse rates after 3 to 12 months were 0% to 14% but were reported in only 6 randomized clinical trials (predominantly for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that cognitive behavioral therapy for anxiety-related disorders is associated with improved outcomes compared with control conditions until 12 months after treatment completion. At a follow-up of 12 months or more, effects were small to medium for generalized anxiety disorder and social anxiety disorder, large for PTSD, and not significant or not available for other disorders. High-quality randomized clinical trials with 12 months or more of follow-up and reported relapse rates are needed.
Topics: Anxiety Disorders; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Humans; Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31758858
DOI: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.3986 -
Frontiers in Psychology 2019Convincing evidence on Virtual Reality (VR) exposure for phobic anxiety disorders has been reported, however, the benchmark and golden standard for phobia treatment is...
Inferiority or Even Superiority of Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy in Phobias?-A Systematic Review and Quantitative Meta-Analysis on Randomized Controlled Trials Specifically Comparing the Efficacy of Virtual Reality Exposure to Gold Standard Exposure in Agoraphobia, Specific Phobia, and Social...
Convincing evidence on Virtual Reality (VR) exposure for phobic anxiety disorders has been reported, however, the benchmark and golden standard for phobia treatment is exposure. For direct treatment comparisons, the control of confounding variables is essential. Therefore, the comparison of VR and exposure in studies applying an equivalent amount of exposure in both treatments is necessary. We conducted a systematic search of reports published until June 2019. Inclusion criteria covered the diagnosis of Specific Phobia, Social Phobia, or Agoraphobia, and a randomized-controlled design with an equivalent amount of exposure in VR and . We qualitatively reviewed participants' characteristics, materials, and the treatment procedures of all included studies. For quantitative synthesis, we calculated Hedges' effect sizes for the treatment effects of VR exposure, exposure, and the comparison of VR to exposure in all studies and separately for studies on each diagnosis. Nine studies ( = 371) were included, four on Specific Phobia, three on Social Phobia, and two on Agoraphobia. VR and exposure both showed large, significant effect sizes. The comparison of VR to exposure revealed a small, but non-significant effect size favoring ( = -0.20). Specifically, effect sizes for Specific Phobia ( = -0.15) and Agoraphobia ( = -0.01) were non-significant, only for Social Phobia we found a significant effect size favoring ( -). Except for Agoraphobia, effect sizes varied across studies from favoring VR to favoring exposure. We found no evidence that VR exposure is significantly less efficacious than exposure in Specific Phobia and Agoraphobia. The wide range of study specific effect sizes, especially in Social Phobia, indicates a high potential of VR, but also points to the need for a deeper investigation and empirical examination of relevant working mechanisms. In Social Phobia, a combination of VR exposure with cognitive interventions and the realization of virtual social interactions targeting central fears might be advantageous. Considering the advantages of VR exposure, its dissemination should be emphasized. Improvements in technology and procedures might even yield superior effects in the future.
PubMed: 31551840
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01758 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2019Panic disorder is characterised by recurrent unexpected panic attacks consisting of a wave of intense fear that reaches a peak within a few minutes. Panic disorder is a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Panic disorder is characterised by recurrent unexpected panic attacks consisting of a wave of intense fear that reaches a peak within a few minutes. Panic disorder is a common disorder, with an estimated lifetime prevalence of 1% to 5% in the general population and a 7% to 10% prevalence in primary care settings. Its aetiology is not fully understood and is probably heterogeneous.Panic disorder is treated with psychological and pharmacological interventions, often used in combination. Although benzodiazepines are frequently used in the treatment of panic disorder, guidelines recommend antidepressants, mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as first-line treatment for panic disorder, particularly due to their lower incidence of dependence and withdrawal reaction when compared to benzodiazepines. Despite these recommendations, benzodiazepines are widely used in the treatment of panic disorder, probably because of their rapid onset of action.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and acceptability of benzodiazepines versus placebo in the treatment of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR Studies and References), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1950-), Embase (1974-), and PsycINFO (1967-) up to 29 May 2018. We handsearched reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews. We contacted experts in the field for supplemental data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All double-blind (blinding of patients and personnel) controlled trials randomising adults with panic disorder with or without agoraphobia to benzodiazepine or placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently checked the eligibility of studies and extracted data using a standardised form. Data were then entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-check procedure. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details, settings, and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 24 studies in the review with a total of 4233 participants, of which 2124 were randomised to benzodiazepines and 1475 to placebo. The remaining 634 participants were randomised to other active treatments in three-arm trials. We assessed the overall methodological quality of the included studies as poor. We rated all studies as at unclear risk of bias in at least three domains. In addition, we judged 20 of the 24 included studies as having a high risk of bias in at least one domain.Two primary outcomes of efficacy and acceptability showed a possible advantage of benzodiazepines over placebo. The estimated risk ratio (RR) for a response to treatment was 1.65 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39 to 1.96) in favour of benzodiazepines, which corresponds to an estimated number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 4 (95% CI 3 to 7). The dropout rate was lower among participants treated with benzodiazepines (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.64); the estimated NNTB was 6 (95% CI 5 to 9). We rated the quality of the evidence as low for both primary outcomes. The possible advantage of benzodiazepine was also seen for remission (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.38 to 1.88) and the endpoint data for social functioning (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.53, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.42), both with low-quality evidence. We assessed the evidence for the other secondary outcomes as of very low quality. With the exception of the analyses of the change score data for depression (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.04) and social functioning (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.88 to 0.24), all secondary outcome analyses showed an effect in favour of benzodiazepines compared to placebo. However, the number of dropouts due to adverse effects was higher with benzodiazepines than with placebo (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.15; low-quality evidence). Furthermore, our analyses of adverse events showed that a higher proportion of participants experienced at least one adverse effect when treated with benzodiazepines (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.37; low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low-quality evidence shows a possible superiority of benzodiazepine over placebo in the short-term treatment of panic disorders. The validity of the included studies is questionable due to possible unmasking of allocated treatments, high dropout rates, and probable publication bias. Moreover, the included studies were only short-term studies and did not examine the long-term efficacy nor the risks of dependency and withdrawal symptoms. Due to these limitations, our results regarding the efficacy of benzodiazepines versus placebo provide only limited guidance for clinical practice. Furthermore, the clinician's choice is not between benzodiazepines and placebo, but between benzodiazepines and other agents, notably SSRIs, both in terms of efficacy and adverse effects. The choice of treatment should therefore be guided by the patient's preference and should balance benefits and harms from treatment in a long-term perspective.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Agoraphobia; Benzodiazepines; Buspirone; Humans; Imipramine; Middle Aged; Numbers Needed To Treat; Panic Disorder; Paroxetine; Patient Dropouts; Placebos; Propranolol; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Remission Induction; Young Adult
PubMed: 30921478
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010677.pub2 -
PloS One 2018The advantages of transdiagnostic protocols for emotional disorders (ED) (anxiety and depression) include the ability to treat multiple psychological disorders using the...
The advantages of transdiagnostic protocols for emotional disorders (ED) (anxiety and depression) include the ability to treat multiple psychological disorders using the same treatment protocol, and the capacity to better address comorbidity. Comorbidity in ED has been associated with higher rates of severity, functional impairment, and chronicity. However, no attempts have been made in the literature to systematically review whether these studies include assessments to evaluate the treatment response in comorbid diagnoses, in addition to the principal diagnosis. Moreover, transdiagnostic treatments have been developed for a range of ED, but to date no study has analyzed the real distribution of diagnoses in these studies. The current study aimed to analyze: a) whether treatment response in comorbidity is evaluated in transdiagnostic treatments for ED; b) what diagnoses are targeted in transdiagnostic treatments for ED; and c) the real distribution of the diagnoses at baseline in these studies. A systematic search of the literature was conducted in PsycINFO, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Fifty-two randomized controlled trials were identified, with a total of 7007 adult participants. The results showed that, although most of the studies reported data on comorbidity at baseline, only 40% of them examined the effects of the intervention on the comorbid disorders. The most commonly targeted diagnoses in transdiagnostic protocols were panic/agoraphobia, generalized anxiety, social anxiety, and depression. Other disorders, such as obsessive-compulsive disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, and anxiety/depression not otherwise specified, were marginally included in these studies. Regarding the distribution of diagnoses at baseline, generalized anxiety, panic/agoraphobia, social anxiety, and depression were the most frequently observed, whereas depression not otherwise specified was the least represented. The results highlight the importance of assessing comorbidity in addition to the principal diagnoses in transdiagnostic treatments, in order to draw conclusions about the true potential of these interventions to improve comorbid symptoms. Implications of the current study and directions for future research are discussed.
Topics: Anxiety; Comorbidity; Databases, Bibliographic; Depression; Female; Humans; Male; Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Severity of Illness Index; Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic
PubMed: 30440020
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207396 -
Europe's Journal of Psychology Mar 2018Panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (PD/A) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are characterized by major behavioral dysruptions that may affect patients'... (Review)
Review
Panic disorder with or without agoraphobia (PD/A) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are characterized by major behavioral dysruptions that may affect patients' social and marital functioning. The disorders' impact on interpersonal relationships may also affect the quality of support patients receive from their social network. The main goal of this systematic review is to determine the association between social or marital support and symptom severity among adults with PD/A or OCD. A systematic search of databases was executed and provided 35 eligible articles. Results from OCD studies indicated a negative association between marital adjustment and symptom severity, and a positive association between accommodation from relatives and symptom severity. However, results were inconclusive for negative forms of social support (e.g. criticism, hostility). Results from PD/A studies indicated a negative association between perceived social support and symptom severity. Also, results from studies using an observational measure of marital adjustment indicated a negative association between quality of support from the spouse and PD/A severity. However, results were inconclusive for perceived marital adjustment and symptom severity. In conclusion, this systematic review generally suggests a major role of social and marital support in PD/A and OCD symptomatology. However, given diversity of results and methods used in studies, more are needed to clarify the links between support and symptom severity among patients with PD/A and OCD.
PubMed: 29899808
DOI: 10.5964/ejop.v14i1.1252 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2018Panic disorder is characterised by repeated, unexpected panic attacks, which represent a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset, reaches a peak within... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Panic disorder is characterised by repeated, unexpected panic attacks, which represent a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset, reaches a peak within 10 minutes, and in which at least four of 13 characteristic symptoms are experienced, including racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, stomach churning, faintness and breathlessness. It is common in the general population with a lifetime prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions. Amongst pharmacological agents, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the British Association for Psychopharmacology consider antidepressants, mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as the first-line treatment for panic disorder, due to their more favourable adverse effect profile over monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). Several classes of antidepressants have been studied and compared, but it is still unclear which antidepressants have a more or less favourable profile in terms of effectiveness and acceptability in the treatment of this condition.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of antidepressants for panic disorder in adults, specifically:1. to determine the efficacy of antidepressants in alleviating symptoms of panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in comparison to placebo;2. to review the acceptability of antidepressants in panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in comparison with placebo; and3. to investigate the adverse effects of antidepressants in panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, including the general prevalence of adverse effects, compared to placebo.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders' (CCMD) Specialised Register, and CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO up to May 2017. We handsearched reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All double-blind, randomised, controlled trials (RCTs) allocating adults with panic disorder to antidepressants or placebo.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a standard form. We entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-check procedure. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and settings. Primary outcomes included failure to respond, measured by a range of response scales, and treatment acceptability, measured by total number of dropouts for any reason. Secondary outcomes included failure to remit, panic symptom scales, frequency of panic attacks, agoraphobia, general anxiety, depression, social functioning, quality of life and patient satisfaction, measured by various scales as defined in individual studies. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome MAIN RESULTS: Forty-one unique RCTs including 9377 participants overall, of whom we included 8252 in the 49 placebo-controlled arms of interest (antidepressant as monotherapy and placebo alone) in this review. The majority of studies were of moderate to low quality due to inconsistency, imprecision and unclear risk of selection and performance bias.We found low-quality evidence that revealed a benefit for antidepressants as a group in comparison with placebo in terms of efficacy measured as failure to respond (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.79; participants = 6500; studies = 30). The magnitude of effect corresponds to a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 7 (95% CI 6 to 9): that means seven people would need to be treated with antidepressants in order for one to benefit. We observed the same finding when classes of antidepressants were compared with placebo.Moderate-quality evidence suggested a benefit for antidepressants compared to placebo when looking at number of dropouts due to any cause (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.97; participants = 7850; studies = 30). The magnitude of effect corresponds to a NNTB of 27 (95% CI 17 to 105); treating 27 people will result in one person fewer dropping out. Considering antidepressant classes, TCAs showed a benefit over placebo, while for SSRIs and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRIs) we observed no difference.When looking at dropouts due to adverse effects, which can be considered as a measure of tolerability, we found moderate-quality evidence showing that antidepressants as a whole are less well tolerated than placebo. In particular, TCAs and SSRIs produced more dropouts due to adverse effects in comparison with placebo, while the confidence interval for SNRI, noradrenergic reuptake inhibitors (NRI) and other antidepressants were wide and included the possibility of no difference.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The identified studies comprehensively address the objectives of the present review.Based on these results, antidepressants may be more effective than placebo in treating panic disorder. Efficacy can be quantified as a NNTB of 7, implying that seven people need to be treated with antidepressants in order for one to benefit. Antidepressants may also have benefit in comparison with placebo in terms of number of dropouts, but a less favourable profile in terms of dropout due to adverse effects. However, the tolerability profile varied between different classes of antidepressants.The choice of whether antidepressants should be prescribed in clinical practice cannot be made on the basis of this review.Limitations in results include funding of some studies by pharmaceutical companies, and only assessing short-term outcomes.Data from the present review will be included in a network meta-analysis of psychopharmacological treatment in panic disorder, which will hopefully provide further useful information on this issue.
Topics: Adult; Agoraphobia; Antidepressive Agents; Humans; Numbers Needed To Treat; Panic Disorder; Patient Dropouts; Placebos; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Failure
PubMed: 29620793
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010676.pub2 -
PloS One 2018The catastrophic misinterpretation model of panic disorder (PD) predicts that the catastrophic misinterpretation of bodily sensations is a distinctive characteristic of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Catastrophic misinterpretation of bodily sensations and external events in panic disorder, other anxiety disorders, and healthy subjects: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
The catastrophic misinterpretation model of panic disorder (PD) predicts that the catastrophic misinterpretation of bodily sensations is a distinctive characteristic of PD. Existing research on this prediction has produced mixed findings. This paper presents a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the strength of catastrophic misinterpretation of bodily sensations and external events in patients with PD, patients with other anxiety disorders, and healthy controls. Following a systematic screening, seven studies were included in the meta-analysis. For the catastrophic misinterpretation of bodily sensations, analyses showed medium to large effects between patients with PD and healthy controls and between patients with PD and patients with other anxiety disorders. For the catastrophic misinterpretation of external events, analyses showed medium to large effects between patients with PD and healthy controls and a small negative effect between patients with PD and patients with other anxiety disorders. The findings support the assumption that the catastrophic misinterpretation of bodily sensations is a distinctive characteristic of panic disorder and thus lend support to the catastrophic misinterpretation model of PD.
Topics: Agoraphobia; Anxiety Disorders; Arousal; Healthy Volunteers; Humans; Models, Psychological; Panic Disorder; Sensation
PubMed: 29558505
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194493