School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney Australia.
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
J Anxiety Disord. 2018 Apr;55:70-78. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2018.01.001. Epub 2018 Feb 1.
A 2010 meta-analysis of internet-delivered CBT (iCBT) RCTs argued 'computer therapy for the anxiety and depressive disorders was effective, acceptable and practical health care' without data on effectiveness or practicality in routine practice.
Databases, reviews and meta-analyses were searched for randomised controlled trials of cCBT or iCBT versus a control group (care as usual, waitlist, information control, psychological placebo, pill placebo, etc.) in people who met diagnostic criteria for major depression, panic disorder, social anxiety disorder or generalised anxiety disorder. Number randomised, superiority of treatment versus control (Hedges'g) on primary outcome measure, length of follow-up, follow up outcome, patient adherence and satisfaction/harm were extracted; risk of bias was assessed. A search for studies on effectiveness of iCBT in clinical practice was conducted.
64 trials were identified. The mean effect size (efficacy) was g = 0.80 (NNT 2.34), and benefit was evident across all four disorders. Improvement was maintained at follow-with good acceptability. Research probity was good, and bias risk low. In addition, nine studies comparing iCBT with traditional face-to-face CBT and three comparing iCBT with bibliotherapy were identified. All three modes of treatment delivery appeared equally beneficial. The results of effectiveness studies were congruent with the results of the efficacy trials.
Studies variably measured changes in quality of life and disability, and the lack of comparisons with medications weakens the field.
The conclusions drawn in the original meta-analysis are now supported: iCBT for the anxiety and depressive disorders is effective, acceptable and practical health care.
2010 年的一项关于互联网提供的认知行为疗法(iCBT)随机对照试验的荟萃分析认为,“针对焦虑和抑郁障碍的计算机疗法是有效的、可接受的和实用的医疗保健”,但没有关于常规实践中有效性或实用性的数据。
数据库、综述和荟萃分析都搜索了针对符合重度抑郁症、恐慌症、社交焦虑症或广泛性焦虑症诊断标准的人群的 cCBT 或 iCBT 与对照组(常规护理、等待名单、信息对照、心理安慰剂、药丸安慰剂等)的随机对照试验。提取了随机分组的数量、主要结局指标的治疗优越性(Hedges'g)、随访时间、随访结局、患者依从性和满意度/危害;评估了偏倚风险。还对 iCBT 在临床实践中的有效性研究进行了搜索。
确定了 64 项试验。平均效应大小(疗效)为 g=0.80(NNT 2.34),且在所有四种疾病中都有效。在随访中仍有改善,且可接受性良好。研究的真实性良好,偏差风险低。此外,还确定了九项比较 iCBT 与传统面对面 CBT 的研究和三项比较 iCBT 与自助疗法的研究。三种治疗方式均同样有效。有效性研究的结果与疗效试验的结果一致。
研究在不同程度上衡量了生活质量和残疾的变化,并且缺乏与药物治疗的比较,这削弱了该领域的可信度。
原始荟萃分析中得出的结论现在得到了支持:针对焦虑和抑郁障碍的 iCBT 是有效的、可接受的和实用的医疗保健。