Suppr超能文献

基于正念的物质使用障碍复发预防:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Mindfulness-based Relapse Prevention for Substance Use Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

机构信息

RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA (S.G., B.C., A.M., R.S., M.B., S.H.); and RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, PA (M.S.).

出版信息

J Addict Med. 2017 Sep/Oct;11(5):386-396. doi: 10.1097/ADM.0000000000000338.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Substance use disorder (SUD) is a prevalent health issue with serious personal and societal consequences. This review aims to estimate the effects and safety of Mindfulness-based Relapse Prevention (MBRP) for SUDs.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials evaluating MBRP for adult patients diagnosed with SUDs. Two reviewers independently assessed citations, extracted trial data, and assessed risks of bias. We conducted random-effects meta-analyses and assessed quality of the body of evidence (QoE) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

We identified 9 randomized controlled trials comprising 901 participants. We did not detect statistically significant differences between MBRP and comparators on relapse (odds ratio [OR] 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-1.13, low QoE), frequency of use (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.02, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.44, low QoE), treatment dropout (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.62, very low QoE), depressive symptoms (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.21, low QoE), anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -1.16 to 0.52, very low QoE), and mindfulness (SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.72 to 0.16, very low QoE). We identified significant differences in favor of MBRP on withdrawal/craving symptoms (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.08, I = 0%, low QoE) and negative consequences of substance use (SMD -0.23, 95% CI -0.39 to -0.07, I = 0%, low QoE). We found negligible evidence of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

We have limited confidence in estimates suggesting MBRP yields small effects on withdrawal/craving and negative consequences versus comparator interventions. We did not detect differences for any other outcome. Future trials should aim to minimize participant attrition to improve confidence in effect estimates.

摘要

目的

物质使用障碍(SUD)是一种普遍存在的健康问题,会对个人和社会造成严重后果。本综述旨在评估基于正念的复发预防(MBRP)治疗 SUD 的效果和安全性。

方法

我们检索了评估成人 SUD 患者 MBRP 的随机对照试验的电子数据库。两位审查员独立评估引文、提取试验数据并评估偏倚风险。我们进行了随机效应荟萃分析,并使用推荐评估、制定与评估分级方法评估证据质量(QoE)。

结果

我们确定了 9 项包含 901 名参与者的随机对照试验。我们未发现 MBRP 与对照在复发(比值比 [OR] 0.72,95%置信区间 [CI] 0.46-1.13,低 QoE)、使用频率(标准化均数差 [SMD] 0.02,95%CI -0.40 至 0.44,低 QoE)、治疗脱落(OR 0.81,95%CI 0.40 至 1.62,极低 QoE)、抑郁症状(SMD -0.09,95%CI -0.39 至 0.21,低 QoE)、焦虑症状(SMD -0.32,95%CI -1.16 至 0.52,极低 QoE)和正念(SMD -0.28,95%CI -0.72 至 0.16,极低 QoE)方面存在统计学显著差异。我们发现 MBRP 有利于戒断/渴求症状(SMD -0.13,95%CI -0.19 至 -0.08,I = 0%,低 QoE)和物质使用的不良后果(SMD -0.23,95%CI -0.39 至 -0.07,I = 0%,低 QoE)方面存在显著差异。我们发现不良反应的证据可以忽略不计。

结论

我们对 MBRP 与对照干预相比在戒断/渴求和不良后果方面产生小效果的估计结果的可信度有限。我们未发现其他任何结局的差异。未来的试验应旨在最大限度地减少参与者的流失,以提高对效果估计的信心。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ff8b/5636047/cf5e6e80dc05/adm-11-386-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验