Department of Psychiatry, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute and GGZ inGeest Specialised Mental Health Care, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
113 Suicide Prevention, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2021 Sep;144(3):246-258. doi: 10.1111/acps.13332. Epub 2021 Jul 5.
The uptake of evidence-based guideline recommendations appears to be challenging. In the midst of the discussion on how to overcome these barriers, the question of whether the use of guidelines leads to improved patient outcomes threatens to be overlooked. This study examined the effectiveness of evidence-based guidelines for all psychiatric disorders on patient health outcomes in specialist mental health care. All types of evidence-based guidelines, such as psychological and medication-focused guidelines, were eligible for inclusion. Provider performance was measured as a secondary outcome. Time to remission when treated with the guidelines was also examined.
Six databases were searched until 10 August 2020. Studies were selected, and data were extracted independently according to the PRISMA guidelines. Random effects meta-analyses were used to pool estimates across studies. Risk of bias was assessed according to the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Review Group criteria.
CRD42020171311.
The meta-analysis included 18 studies (N = 5380). Guidelines showed a positive significant effect size on the severity of psychopathological symptoms at the patient level when compared to treatment-as-usual (TAU) (d = 0.29, 95%-CI = (0.19, 0.40), p < 0.001). Removal of a potential outlier gave globally the same results with Cohen's d = 0.26. Time to remission was shorter in the guideline treatment compared with TAU (HR = 1.54, 95%-CI = (1.29, 1.84), p = 0.001, n = 3).
Patients cared for with guideline-adherent treatments improve to a greater degree and more quickly than patients treated with TAU. Knowledge on the mechanisms of change during guideline-adherent treatment needs to be developed further such that we can provide the best possible treatment to patients in routine care.
循证指南推荐的应用似乎具有挑战性。在讨论如何克服这些障碍的过程中,指南的应用是否能改善患者结局这一问题有被忽视的风险。本研究旨在调查精神科专家治疗中,所有精神障碍的循证指南对患者健康结局的有效性。所有类型的循证指南,如心理和药物为重点的指南,都符合纳入标准。提供方的表现作为次要结局进行测量。同时还研究了根据指南治疗时的缓解时间。
截至 2020 年 8 月 10 日,共检索了 6 个数据库。根据 PRISMA 指南,独立选择研究和提取数据。使用随机效应荟萃分析汇总研究结果。根据 Cochrane 有效实践和组织护理评价组的标准评估偏倚风险。
CRD42020171311。
荟萃分析纳入了 18 项研究(N=5380)。与常规治疗(TAU)相比,指南在患者层面上对精神病理症状的严重程度具有显著的积极效应量(d=0.29,95%置信区间(0.19,0.40),p<0.001)。去除一个潜在的异常值后,Cohen's d 值为 0.26,结果基本一致。与 TAU 相比,指南治疗的缓解时间更短(HR=1.54,95%置信区间(1.29,1.84),p=0.001,n=3)。
接受指南一致治疗的患者改善程度更大,速度更快,而接受 TAU 治疗的患者则不然。需要进一步研究指南一致治疗过程中的变化机制,以便为常规护理中的患者提供最佳治疗。