Skapinakis Petros, Caldwell Deborah M, Hollingworth William, Bryden Peter, Fineberg Naomi A, Salkovskis Paul, Welton Nicky J, Baxter Helen, Kessler David, Churchill Rachel, Lewis Glyn
Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, UK; Department of Psychiatry, University of Ioannina School of Medicine, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece.
School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Lancet Psychiatry. 2016 Aug;3(8):730-739. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(16)30069-4. Epub 2016 Jun 16.
Several interventions are available for management of obsessive-compulsive disorder in adults, but few studies have compared their relative efficacy in a single analysis. We aimed to simultaneously compare all available treatments using both direct and indirect data.
In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched the two controlled trials registers maintained by the Cochrane Collaboration Common Mental Disorders group for trials published up to Feb 16, 2016. We selected randomised controlled trials in which an active psychotherapeutic or pharmacological intervention had been used in adults with obsessive-compulsive disorder. We allowed all comorbidities except for schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. We excluded studies that focused exclusively on treatment-resistant patient populations defined within the same study. We extracted data from published reports. The primary outcome was symptom severity as measured by the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. We report mean differences with 95% credible intervals compared with placebo. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42012002441.
We identified 1480 articles in our search and included 53 articles (54 trials; 6652 participants) in the network meta-analysis. Behavioural therapy (mean difference -14·48 [95% credible interval -18·61 to -10·23]; 11 trials and 287 patients), cognitive therapy (-13·36 [-18·40 to -8·21]; six trials and 172 patients), behavioural therapy and clomipramine (-12·97 [-19·18 to -6·74]; one trial and 31 patients), cognitive behavioural therapy and fluvoxamine (-7·50 [-13·89 to -1·17]; one trial and six patients), cognitive behavioural therapy (-5·37 [-9·10 to -1·63]; nine trials and 231 patients), clomipramine (-4·72 [-6·85 to -2·60]; 13 trials and 831 patients), and all SSRIs (class effect -3·49 [95% credible interval -5·12 to -1·81]; 37 trials and 3158 patients) had greater effects than did drug placebo. Clomipramine was not better than were SSRIs (-1·23 [-3·41 to 0·94]). Psychotherapeutic interventions had a greater effect than did medications, but a serious limitation was that most psychotherapeutic trials included patients who were taking stable doses of antidepressants (12 [80%] of the 15 psychotherapy trials explicitly allowed antidepressants).
A range of interventions is effective in the management of obsessive-compulsive disorder, but considerable uncertainty and limitations exist regarding their relative efficacy. Taking all the evidence into account, the combination of psychotherapeutic and psychopharmacological interventions is likely to be more effective than are psychotherapeutic interventions alone, at least in severe obsessive-compulsive disorder.
National Institute for Health Research.
有多种干预措施可用于治疗成人强迫症,但很少有研究在单一分析中比较它们的相对疗效。我们旨在使用直接和间接数据同时比较所有可用的治疗方法。
在这项系统评价和网络荟萃分析中,我们检索了Cochrane协作网常见精神障碍组维护的两个对照试验注册库,以查找截至2016年2月16日发表的试验。我们选择了在患有强迫症的成人中使用积极心理治疗或药物干预的随机对照试验。除精神分裂症或双相情感障碍外,我们允许所有合并症。我们排除了专门针对同一研究中定义的难治性患者群体的研究。我们从已发表的报告中提取数据。主要结局是用耶鲁-布朗强迫症量表测量的症状严重程度。我们报告与安慰剂相比的平均差异及95%可信区间。本研究已在国际前瞻性注册系统(PROSPERO)注册,注册号为CRD42012002441。
我们在检索中识别出1480篇文章,并将53篇文章(54项试验;6652名参与者)纳入网络荟萃分析。行为疗法(平均差异-14.48 [95%可信区间-18.61至-10.23];11项试验和287名患者)、认知疗法(-13.36 [-18.40至-8.21];6项试验和172名患者)、行为疗法与氯米帕明联合使用(-12.97 [-19.18至-6.74];1项试验和31名患者)、认知行为疗法与氟伏沙明联合使用(-7.50 [-13.89至-1.17];1项试验和6名患者)、认知行为疗法(-5.37 [-9.10至-1.63];9项试验和231名患者)、氯米帕明(-4.72 [-6.85至-2.60];13项试验和831名患者)以及所有选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂(类效应-3.49 [95%可信区间-5.12至-1.81];37项试验和3158名患者)比药物安慰剂的效果更好。氯米帕明并不比选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂更好(-1.23 [-3.41至0.94])。心理治疗干预比药物治疗的效果更好,但一个严重的局限性是,大多数心理治疗试验纳入了正在服用稳定剂量抗抑郁药的患者(15项心理治疗试验中有12项[80%]明确允许使用抗抑郁药)。
一系列干预措施对强迫症的治疗有效,但关于它们的相对疗效存在相当大的不确定性和局限性。综合所有证据,心理治疗和心理药物干预相结合可能比单独的心理治疗干预更有效,至少在重度强迫症中如此。
英国国家卫生研究院。