Liu Zheng, Sun Yu-Ying, Zhong Bao-Liang
Department of Maternal and Child Health, School of Public Health, Peking University, 38 Xueyuan Road, Beijing, China, 100191.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Aug 14;8(8):CD012791. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012791.pub2.
Caring for people with dementia is highly challenging, and family carers are recognised as being at increased risk of physical and mental ill-health. Most current interventions have limited success in reducing stress among carers of people with dementia. Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) draws on a range of practices and may be a promising approach to helping carers of people with dementia.
To assess the effectiveness of MBSR in reducing the stress of family carers of people with dementia.
We searched ALOIS - the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (all years to Issue 9 of 12, 2017), MEDLINE (Ovid SP 1950 to September 2017), Embase (Ovid SP 1974 to Sepetmber 2017), Web of Science (ISI Web of Science 1945 to September 2017), PsycINFO (Ovid SP 1806 to September 2017), CINAHL (all dates to September 2017), LILACS (all dates to September 2017), World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and Dissertation Abstracts International (DAI) up to 6 September 2017, with no language restrictions.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of MBSR for family carers of people with dementia.
Two review authors independently screened references for inclusion criteria, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias of trials with the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool, and evaluated the quality of the evidence using the GRADE instrument. We contacted study authors for additional information, then conducted meta-analyses, or reported results narratively in the case of insufficient data. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
We included five RCTs involving 201 carers assessing the effectiveness of MBSR. Controls used in included studies varied in structure and content. Mindfulness-based stress reduction programmes were compared with either active controls (those matched for time and attention with MBSR, i.e. education, social support, or progressive muscle relaxation), or inactive controls (those not matched for time and attention with MBSR, i.e. self help education or respite care). One trial used both active and inactive comparisons with MBSR. All studies were at high risk of bias in terms of blinding of outcome assessment. Most studies provided no information about selective reporting, incomplete outcome data, or allocation concealment.1. Compared with active controls, MBSR may reduce depressive symptoms of carers at the end of the intervention (3 trials, 135 participants; standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.98 to -0.28; P<0.001; low-quality evidence). We could not be certain of any effect on clinically significant depressive symptoms (very low-quality evidence).Mindfulness-based stress reduction compared with active control may decrease carer anxiety at the end of the intervention (1 trial, 78 participants; mean difference (MD) -7.50, 95% CI -13.11 to -1.89; P<0.001; low-quality evidence) and may slightly increase carer burden (3 trials, 135 participants; SMD 0.24, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.58; P=0.18; low-quality evidence), although both results were imprecise, and we could not exclude little or no effect. Due to the very low quality of the evidence, we could not be sure of any effect on carers' coping style, nor could we determine whether carers were more or less likely to drop out of treatment.2. Compared with inactive controls, MBSR showed no clear evidence of any effect on depressive symptoms (2 trials, 50 participants; MD -1.97, 95% CI -6.89 to 2.95; P=0.43; low-quality evidence). We could not be certain of any effect on clinically significant depressive symptoms (very low-quality evidence).In this comparison, MBSR may also reduce carer anxiety at the end of the intervention (1 trial, 33 participants; MD -7.27, 95% CI -14.92 to 0.38; P=0.06; low-quality evidence), although we were unable to exclude little or no effect. Due to the very low quality of the evidence, we could not be certain of any effects of MBSR on carer burden, the use of positive coping strategies, or dropout rates.We found no studies that looked at quality of life of carers or care-recipients, or institutionalisation.Only one included study reported on adverse events, noting a single adverse event related to yoga practices at home AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: After accounting for non-specific effects of the intervention (i.e. comparing it with an active control), low-quality evidence suggests that MBSR may reduce carers' depressive symptoms and anxiety, at least in the short term.There are significant limitations to the evidence base on MBSR in this population. Our GRADE assessment of the evidence was low to very low quality. We downgraded the quality of the evidence primarily because of high risk of detection or performance bias, and imprecision.In conclusion, MBSR has the potential to meet some important needs of the carer, but more high-quality studies in this field are needed to confirm its efficacy.
照顾痴呆症患者极具挑战性,家庭照顾者被认为身心健康问题风险增加。目前大多数干预措施在减轻痴呆症患者照顾者的压力方面成效有限。基于正念的减压疗法(MBSR)采用一系列方法,可能是帮助痴呆症患者照顾者的一种有前景的途径。
评估MBSR在减轻痴呆症患者家庭照顾者压力方面的效果。
我们检索了ALOIS(科克伦痴呆与认知改善小组专业注册库)、科克伦对照试验中央注册库(CENTRAL)(截至2017年第12期第9号的所有年份)、MEDLINE(Ovid SP,1950年至2017年9月)、Embase(Ovid SP,1974年至2017年9月)、科学引文索引(ISI Web of Science,1945年至2017年9月)、PsycINFO(Ovid SP,1806年至2017年9月)、护理学与健康领域数据库(CINAHL)(截至2017年9月的所有日期)、拉丁美洲和加勒比卫生科学数据库(LILACS)(截至2017年9月的所有日期)、世界卫生组织(WHO)国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)、ClinicalTrials.gov以及国际学位论文摘要数据库(DAI),检索截至2017年9月6日,无语言限制。
针对痴呆症患者家庭照顾者的MBSR随机对照试验(RCT)。
两位综述作者独立筛选参考文献以确定纳入标准,提取数据,使用科克伦“偏倚风险”工具评估试验的偏倚风险,并使用GRADE工具评估证据质量。我们联系研究作者获取更多信息,然后进行荟萃分析,或在数据不足时以叙述方式报告结果。我们采用了科克伦预期的标准方法程序。
我们纳入了5项RCT,涉及201名照顾者,评估MBSR的效果。纳入研究中使用的对照在结构和内容上各不相同。基于正念的减压方案与积极对照(在时间和关注度上与MBSR匹配的对照,即教育、社会支持或渐进性肌肉松弛)或消极对照(在时间和关注度上与MBSR不匹配的对照,即自助教育或临时护理)进行比较。一项试验同时使用了与MBSR的积极和消极对照。所有研究在结局评估的盲法方面都存在高偏倚风险。大多数研究未提供关于选择性报告、不完整结局数据或分配隐藏的信息。1. 与积极对照相比,MBSR可能在干预结束时减轻照顾者的抑郁症状(3项试验,135名参与者;标准化均数差(SMD)-0.63,95%置信区间(CI)-0.98至-0.28;P<0.001;低质量证据)。我们无法确定对具有临床意义的抑郁症状有任何影响(极低质量证据)。与积极对照相比,基于正念的减压疗法可能在干预结束时减轻照顾者的焦虑(1项试验,78名参与者;均数差(MD)-7.50,95% CI -13.11至-1.89;P<0.001;低质量证据),并且可能轻微增加照顾者负担(3项试验,135名参与者;SMD 0.24,95% CI -0.11至0.58;P = 0.18;低质量证据),尽管两个结果都不精确,我们也不能排除几乎没有影响的可能性。由于证据质量极低,我们无法确定对照顾者应对方式的任何影响,也无法确定照顾者退出治疗的可能性是更高还是更低。2. 与消极对照相比,MBSR没有明确证据表明对抑郁症状有任何影响(2项试验,50名参与者;MD -1.97,95% CI -6.89至2.95;P = 0.43;低质量证据)。我们无法确定对具有临床意义的抑郁症状有任何影响(极低质量证据)。在这种比较中,MBSR也可能在干预结束时减轻照顾者的焦虑(1项试验,33名参与者;MD -7.27,95% CI -14.92至0.38;P = 0.06;低质量证据),尽管我们无法排除几乎没有影响的可能性。由于证据质量极低,我们无法确定MBSR对照顾者负担、积极应对策略的使用或退出率的任何影响。我们未发现有研究关注照顾者或受照顾者的生活质量或机构化情况。只有一项纳入研究报告了不良事件,指出有一例与在家中进行瑜伽练习相关的不良事件。作者结论:在考虑干预的非特异性效应(即与积极对照进行比较)后,低质量证据表明MBSR可能至少在短期内减轻照顾者的抑郁症状和焦虑。该人群中关于MBSR的证据基础存在重大局限性。我们对证据的GRADE评估为低质量至极低质量。我们降低证据质量主要是因为检测或执行偏倚风险高以及不精确性。总之,MBSR有潜力满足照顾者的一些重要需求,但该领域需要更多高质量研究来证实其疗效。