Meeks Thomas W, Wetherell Julie L, Irwin Michael R, Redwine Laura S, Jeste Dilip V
Division of Geriatric Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, University of California, San Diego, USA.
J Clin Psychiatry. 2007 Oct;68(10):1461-71. doi: 10.4088/jcp.v68n1001.
We reviewed randomized controlled trials of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) treatments for depression, anxiety, and sleep disturbance in nondemented older adults.
We searched PubMed (1966-September 2006) and PsycINFO (1984-September 2006) databases using combinations of terms including depression, anxiety, and sleep; older adult/elderly; randomized controlled trial; and a list of 56 terms related to CAM.
Of the 855 studies identified by database searches, 29 met our inclusion criteria: sample size >or= 30, treatment duration >or= 2 weeks, and publication in English. Four additional articles from manual bibliography searches met inclusion criteria, totaling 33 studies.
We reviewed identified articles for methodological quality using a modified Scale for Assessing Scientific Quality of Investigations (SASQI). We categorized a study as positive if the CAM therapy proved significantly more effective than an inactive control (or as effective as active control) on at least 1 primary psychological outcome. Positive and negative studies were compared on the following characteristics: CAM treatment category, symptom(s) assessed, country where the study was conducted, sample size, treatment duration, and mean sample age.
67% of the 33 studies reviewed were positive. Positive studies had lower SASQI scores for methodology than negative studies. Mind-body and body-based therapies had somewhat higher rates of positive results than energy- or biologically-based therapies.
Most studies had substantial methodological limitations. A few well-conducted studies suggested therapeutic potential for certain CAM interventions in older adults (e.g., mind-body interventions for sleep disturbances and acupressure for sleep and anxiety). More rigorous research is needed, and suggestions for future research are summarized.
我们回顾了关于非痴呆老年人抑郁症、焦虑症和睡眠障碍的补充和替代医学(CAM)治疗的随机对照试验。
我们使用包括抑郁症、焦虑症和睡眠;老年人;随机对照试验;以及与补充和替代医学相关的56个术语列表等术语组合,检索了PubMed(1966年至2006年9月)和PsycINFO(1984年至2006年9月)数据库。
在数据库检索中确定的855项研究中,29项符合我们的纳入标准:样本量≥30,治疗持续时间≥2周,且以英文发表。通过手工文献检索获得的另外4篇文章符合纳入标准,总计33项研究。
我们使用改良的调查科学质量评估量表(SASQI)评估已识别文章的方法学质量。如果补充和替代医学疗法在至少1项主要心理结果上被证明比无活性对照显著更有效(或与活性对照一样有效),我们将该研究分类为阳性。对阳性和阴性研究在以下特征上进行比较:补充和替代医学治疗类别、评估的症状、进行研究的国家、样本量、治疗持续时间和平均样本年龄。
在审查的33项研究中,67%为阳性。阳性研究的方法学SASQI得分低于阴性研究。身心疗法和基于身体的疗法的阳性结果率略高于基于能量或生物的疗法。
大多数研究存在重大方法学局限性。一些开展良好的研究表明,某些补充和替代医学干预措施对老年人具有治疗潜力(例如,针对睡眠障碍的身心干预以及针对睡眠和焦虑的指压疗法)。需要更严格的研究,并总结了对未来研究的建议。