Ioannou Michael, Wartenberg Constanze, Greenbrook Josephine T V, Larson Tomas, Magnusson Kajsa, Schmitz Linnea, Sjögren Petteri, Stadig Ida, Szabó Zoltán, Steingrimsson Steinn
Region Västra Götaland, Psykiatri Affektiva, Department of Psychiatry, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2021 Jan;143(1):22-35. doi: 10.1111/acps.13253. Epub 2020 Dec 27.
To systematically review evidence on the efficacy and safety of sleep deprivation (SD) as a treatment option for patients with unipolar or bipolar depression.
A systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines was conducted. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Controlled trials were included in efficacy analysis, case series for evaluating complications and qualitative studies for patients' experiences.
Eight controlled studies (368 patients), one qualitative study and seven case series (825 patients) were included. One week after treatment start, SD combined with standard treatment did not reduce depressive symptoms compared with standard treatment (standardized mean difference, SMD = -0.29, [95% confidence interval, CI: -0.84 to 0.25], p = 0.29). When excluding a study in elderly patients in a post hoc analysis, the difference was statistically significant (SMD = -0.54 ([95% CI: -0.86 to -0.22], p < 0.001)) but it diminished two weeks after treatment start. No superiority of SD was found compared with antidepressants, but SD may be superior to exercise in certain settings. It is uncertain whether SD affects quality of sleep, quality of life, everyday functioning or length of stay. Apart from switch to mania (ranging between 2.7% and 10.7%), no other serious complications were reported.
Sleep deprivation has been studied in a wide range of settings resulting in divergent results for the short-term efficacy on depressive symptoms. Post hoc analyses indicated that there may be a significant but transient effect in certain populations. Further studies should focus on identifying subgroups of responders as well as examining feasibility in routine clinical care.
系统评价睡眠剥夺(SD)作为单相或双相抑郁症患者治疗选择的疗效和安全性证据。
按照PRISMA指南进行系统评价。采用GRADE方法评估证据的确定性。疗效分析纳入对照试验,评估并发症纳入病例系列,患者体验纳入定性研究。
纳入8项对照研究(368例患者)、1项定性研究和7个病例系列(825例患者)。治疗开始1周后,与标准治疗相比,SD联合标准治疗并未减轻抑郁症状(标准化均数差,SMD = -0.29,[95%置信区间,CI:-0.84至0.25],p = 0.29)。在事后分析中排除一项老年患者研究后,差异具有统计学意义(SMD = -0.54([95% CI:-0.86至-0.22],p < 0.001)),但在治疗开始2周后差异减小。与抗抑郁药相比,未发现SD具有优势,但在某些情况下,SD可能优于运动。SD是否影响睡眠质量、生活质量、日常功能或住院时间尚不确定。除转为躁狂(发生率在2.7%至10.7%之间)外,未报告其他严重并发症。
在广泛的环境中对睡眠剥夺进行了研究,结果显示其对抑郁症状的短期疗效存在差异。事后分析表明,在某些人群中可能存在显著但短暂的效应。进一步的研究应侧重于确定反应者亚组以及检查在常规临床护理中的可行性。