Riper Heleen, Andersson Gerhard, Hunter Sarah B, de Wit Jessica, Berking Matthias, Cuijpers Pim
Department of Clinical Psychology, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University and VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Division of Online Health Training, Innovation Incubator, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany.
Addiction. 2014 Mar;109(3):394-406. doi: 10.1111/add.12441. Epub 2014 Jan 16.
To review published studies on the effectiveness of combining cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) and motivational interviewing (MI) to treat comorbid clinical and subclinical alcohol use disorder (AUD) and major depression (MDD) and estimate the effect of this compared with usual care.
We conducted systematic literature searches in PubMed, PsycINFO and Embase up to June 2013 and identified additional studies through cross-references in included studies and systematic reviews. Twelve studies comprising 1721 patients met our inclusion criteria. The studies had sufficient statistical power to detect small effect sizes.
CBT/MI proved effective for treating subclinical and clinical AUD and MDD compared with controls, with small overall effect sizes at post-treatment [g=0.17, confidence interval (CI)=0.07-0.28, P<0.001 for decrease of alcohol consumption and g=0.27, CI: 0.13-0.41, P<0.001 for decrease of symptoms of depression, respectively]. Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences for both AUD and MDD. However, digital interventions showed a higher effect size for depression than face-to-face interventions (g= 0.73 and g=0.23, respectively, P=0.030).
Combined cognitive-behavioural therapy and motivational interviewing for clinical or subclinical depressive and alcohol use disorders has a small but clinically significant effect in treatment outcomes compared with treatment as usual.
回顾已发表的关于联合认知行为疗法(CBT)和动机性访谈(MI)治疗合并临床和亚临床酒精使用障碍(AUD)及重度抑郁症(MDD)有效性的研究,并评估与常规治疗相比其效果。
我们在截至2013年6月的PubMed、PsycINFO和Embase数据库中进行了系统的文献检索,并通过纳入研究和系统评价中的交叉引用确定了其他研究。12项研究共1721名患者符合我们的纳入标准。这些研究有足够的统计效力来检测小效应量。
与对照组相比,CBT/MI被证明对治疗亚临床和临床AUD及MDD有效,治疗后总体效应量较小[饮酒量减少的g = 0.17,置信区间(CI)= 0.07 - 0.28,P < 0.001;抑郁症状减少的g = 0.27,CI:0.13 - 0.41,P < 0.001]。亚组分析显示AUD和MDD均无显著差异。然而,数字干预对抑郁症的效应量高于面对面干预(分别为g = 0.73和g = 0.23,P = 0.030)。
与常规治疗相比,联合认知行为疗法和动机性访谈治疗临床或亚临床抑郁和酒精使用障碍在治疗结果方面有较小但具有临床意义的效果。