儿童和青少年哮喘的心理干预。

Psychological interventions for asthma in children and adolescents.

机构信息

Allied Health & Human Performance, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.

Cambridgeshire Community Services NHS Trust, Cambridge, UK.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024 Jan 11;1(1):CD013420. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013420.pub2.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Rates of asthma are high in children and adolescents, and young people with asthma generally report poorer health outcomes than those without asthma. Young people with asthma experience a range of challenges that may contribute to psychological distress. This is compounded by the social, psychological, and developmental challenges experienced by all people during this life stage. Psychological interventions (such as behavioural therapies or cognitive therapies) have the potential to reduce psychological distress and thus improve behavioural outcomes such as self-efficacy and medication adherence. In turn, this may reduce medical contacts and asthma attacks.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the efficacy of psychological interventions for modifying health and behavioural outcomes in children with asthma, compared with usual treatment, treatment with no psychological component, or no treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register (including CENTRAL, CRS, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL EBSCO, AMED EBSCO), proceedings of major respiratory conferences, reference lists of included studies, and online clinical databases. The most recent search was conducted on 22 August 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing psychological interventions of any duration with usual care, active controls, or a waiting-list control in male and female children and adolescents (aged five to 18 years) with asthma.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. symptoms of anxiety and depression, 2. medical contacts, and 3. asthma attacks. Our secondary outcomes were 1. self-reported asthma symptoms, 2. medication use, 3. quality of life, and 4. adverse events/side effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 studies (1639 participants) published between 1978 and 2021. Eleven studies were set in the USA, five in China, two in Sweden, three in Iran, and one each in the Netherlands, UK, and Germany. Participants' asthma severity ranged from mild to severe. Three studies included primary school-aged participants (five to 12 years), two included secondary school-aged participants (13 to 18 years), and 18 included both age groups, while one study was unclear on the age ranges. Durations of interventions ranged from three days to eight months. One intervention was conducted online and the rest were face-to-face. Meta-analysis was not possible due to clinical heterogeneity (interventions, populations, outcome tools and definitions, and length of follow-up). We tabulated and summarised the results narratively with reference to direction, magnitude, and certainty of effects. The certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes. A lack of information about scale metrics and minimal clinically important differences for the scales used to measure anxiety, depression, asthma symptoms, medication use, and quality of life made it difficult to judge clinical significance. Primary outcomes Four studies (327 participants) reported beneficial or mixed effects of psychological interventions versus controls for symptoms of anxiety, and one found little to no difference between groups (104 participants). Two studies (166 participants) that evaluated symptoms of depression both reported benefits of psychological interventions compared to controls. Three small studies (92 participants) reported a reduction in medical contacts, but two larger studies (544 participants) found little or no difference between groups in this outcome. Two studies (107 participants) found that the intervention had an important beneficial effect on number of asthma attacks, and one small study (22 participants) found little or no effect of the intervention for this outcome. Secondary outcomes Eleven studies (720 participants) assessed asthma symptoms; four (322 participants) reported beneficial effects of the intervention compared to control, five (257 participants) reported mixed or unclear findings, and two (131 participants) found little or no difference between groups. Eight studies (822 participants) reported a variety of medication use measures; six of these studies (670 participants) found a positive effect of the intervention versus control, and the other two (152 participants) found little or no difference between the groups. Across six studies (653 participants) reporting measures of quality of life, the largest three (522 participants) found little or no difference between the groups. Where findings were positive or mixed, there was evidence of selective reporting (2 studies, 131 participants). No studies provided data related to adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Most studies that reported symptoms of anxiety, depression, asthma attacks, asthma symptoms, and medication use found a positive effect of psychological interventions versus control on at least one measure. However, some findings were mixed, it was difficult to judge clinical significance, and the evidence for all outcomes is very uncertain due to clinical heterogeneity, small sample sizes, incomplete reporting, and risk of bias. There is limited evidence to suggest that psychological interventions can reduce the need for medical contact or improve quality of life, and no studies reported adverse events. It was not possible to identify components of effective interventions and distinguish these from interventions showing no evidence of an effect due to substantial heterogeneity. Future investigations of evidence-based psychological techniques should consider standardising outcomes to support cross-comparison and better inform patient and policymaker decision-making.

摘要

背景

儿童和青少年哮喘发病率高,一般来说,患有哮喘的年轻人比没有哮喘的同龄人健康状况更差。患有哮喘的年轻人会经历一系列的挑战,这些挑战可能会导致心理困扰。在这个人生阶段,所有的人都要经历社会、心理和发展方面的挑战,这使得情况更加复杂。心理干预(如行为疗法或认知疗法)有可能减轻心理困扰,从而改善自我效能和药物依从性等行为结果。反过来,这可能会减少医疗接触和哮喘发作。

目的

确定心理干预对改善哮喘儿童健康和行为结果的效果,与常规治疗、无心理成分的治疗或不治疗相比。

检索方法

我们检索了 Cochrane 气道组特藏(包括 CENTRAL、CRS、MEDLINE、Embase、PsycINFO、CINAHL EBSCO、AMED EBSCO)、主要呼吸会议的会议记录、纳入研究的参考文献列表以及在线临床数据库。最近的一次检索是在 2022 年 8 月 22 日进行的。

选择标准

我们纳入了比较任何时长的心理干预与常规护理、活性对照或空白对照在哮喘男童和女童(5 至 18 岁)中的效果的随机对照试验(RCT)。

数据收集和分析

我们使用了标准的 Cochrane 方法。我们的主要结局是 1. 焦虑和抑郁症状,2. 医疗接触,3. 哮喘发作。我们的次要结局是 1. 自我报告的哮喘症状,2. 药物使用,3. 生活质量,4. 不良事件/副作用。

主要结果

我们纳入了 24 项研究(1639 名参与者),这些研究发表于 1978 年至 2021 年期间。11 项研究在美国进行,5 项在中国进行,2 项在瑞典进行,3 项在伊朗进行,1 项在荷兰、英国和德国进行。参与者的哮喘严重程度从轻度到重度不等。3 项研究包括小学年龄组(5 至 12 岁),2 项研究包括中学年龄组(13 至 18 岁),18 项研究包括两个年龄组,而 1 项研究在年龄范围上不明确。干预措施的持续时间从三天到八个月不等。一项干预是在线进行的,其余的都是面对面进行的。由于临床异质性(干预措施、人群、结局工具和定义以及随访时间),无法进行荟萃分析。我们以叙述的方式对结果进行制表和总结,参考方向、大小和效果的确定性。所有结局的证据确定性都非常低。关于焦虑、抑郁、哮喘症状、药物使用和生活质量测量的量表的信息不足,以及最小临床重要差异的信息不足,使得很难判断临床意义。主要结局:四项研究(327 名参与者)报告了心理干预与对照组相比对焦虑症状的有益或混合效果,一项研究发现两组之间几乎没有差异(104 名参与者)。两项研究(166 名参与者)评估了抑郁症状,均报告了心理干预与对照组相比的益处。三项小型研究(92 名参与者)报告了医疗接触的减少,但两项较大的研究(544 名参与者)发现两组之间在这一结局上几乎没有差异或差异不大。两项研究(107 名参与者)发现干预对哮喘发作次数有重要的有益影响,一项小型研究(22 名参与者)发现干预对该结局几乎没有或没有影响。次要结局:11 项研究(720 名参与者)评估了哮喘症状;四项研究(322 名参与者)报告了干预与对照组相比的有益效果,五项研究(257 名参与者)报告了混合或不明确的发现,两项研究(131 名参与者)报告了两组之间几乎没有差异。八项研究(822 名参与者)报告了各种药物使用措施;其中六项研究(670 名参与者)发现干预对对照组有积极影响,另外两项研究(152 名参与者)发现两组之间几乎没有差异。在六项报告生活质量测量的研究(653 名参与者)中,最大的三项研究(522 名参与者)发现两组之间几乎没有差异。在发现阳性或混合结果的研究中,存在选择性报告的证据(2 项研究,131 名参与者)。没有研究提供与不良影响相关的数据。

作者结论

大多数报告焦虑、抑郁、哮喘发作、哮喘症状和药物使用的研究发现,与对照组相比,心理干预对至少一项测量结果有积极影响。然而,一些发现是混合的,很难判断临床意义,由于临床异质性、样本量小、不完全报告和偏倚风险,所有结局的证据都非常不确定。有限的证据表明心理干预可以减少医疗接触或改善生活质量,并且没有研究报告不良事件。由于存在实质性的异质性,无法确定有效的干预措施的组成部分,也无法将这些组成部分与没有证据表明干预有效果的干预措施区分开来。未来对基于证据的心理技术的研究应考虑标准化结局,以支持交叉比较,并更好地为患者和决策者的决策提供信息。

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