Mårtensson Björn, Pettersson Agneta, Berglund Lars, Ekselius Lisa
Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Psychiatry, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care, Stockholm, Sweden.
J Affect Disord. 2015 Aug 15;182:1-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2015.04.013. Epub 2015 Apr 11.
Light therapy is an accepted treatment option, at least for seasonal affective disorder (SAD). Our aim was to critically evaluate treatment effects of bright white light (BWL) on the depressive symptoms in both SAD and non-seasonal depression.
The systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and PsycINFO were searched (December 1974 through June 2014) for randomized controlled trials published in peer-reviewed journals. Study quality was assessed with a checklist developed by the Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care. Only studies with high or medium quality were used in the meta-analyses.
Eight studies of SAD and two studies of non-seasonal depression met inclusion and quality criteria. Effects on SAD were estimated in two meta-analyses. In the first, week by week, BWL reached statistical significance only at two and three weeks of treatment (Standardized Mean Difference, SMD: -0.50 (-CI 0.94, -0.05); -0.31 (-0.59, -0.03) respectively). The second meta-analysis, of endpoint data only, showed a SMD of -0.54 (CI: -0.95, -0.13), which indicates an advantage for BWL. No meta-analysis was performed for non-seasonal depression due to heterogeneity between studies.
This analysis is restricted to short-term effects of BWL measured as mean changes in scores derived from SIGH-SAD, SIGH-SAD self-report, or HDRS rating scales.
Most studies of BWL have considerable methodological problems, and the results of published meta-analyses are highly dependent on the study selection. Even though quality criteria are introduced in the selection procedures of studies, when the results are carefully scrutinized, the evidence is not unequivocal.
光疗法是一种被认可的治疗选择,至少对于季节性情感障碍(SAD)而言。我们的目的是严格评估亮白光(BWL)对SAD和非季节性抑郁症患者抑郁症状的治疗效果。
根据PRISMA指南进行系统评价。检索了PubMed、Embase和PsycINFO(1974年12月至2014年6月),以查找发表在同行评审期刊上的随机对照试验。使用瑞典卫生保健技术评估委员会制定的清单评估研究质量。荟萃分析仅纳入高质量或中等质量的研究。
八项关于SAD的研究和两项关于非季节性抑郁症的研究符合纳入标准和质量标准。在两项荟萃分析中评估了BWL对SAD的影响。在第一项分析中,逐周来看,BWL仅在治疗的第二周和第三周达到统计学显著性(标准化均数差,SMD:分别为-0.50(-CI 0.94,-0.05);-0.31(-0.59,-0.03))。第二项荟萃分析仅对终点数据进行分析,显示SMD为-0.54(CI:-0.95,-0.13),这表明BWL具有优势。由于各研究之间存在异质性,未对非季节性抑郁症进行荟萃分析。
本分析仅限于BWL的短期效应,以SIGH-SAD、SIGH-SAD自我报告或HDRS评定量表得分的平均变化来衡量。
大多数关于BWL的研究存在相当多的方法学问题,已发表的荟萃分析结果高度依赖于研究选择。尽管在研究选择过程中引入了质量标准,但仔细审查结果时,证据并不明确。