Suppr超能文献

减少青少年抑郁症状和酒精使用的移动应用程序:一项系统评价和荟萃分析:一项系统评价。

Mobile apps to reduce depressive symptoms and alcohol use in youth: A systematic review and meta-analysis: A systematic review.

作者信息

Magwood Olivia, Saad Ammar, Ranger Dominique, Volpini Kate, Rukikamirera Franklin, Haridas Rinila, Sayfi Shahab, Alexander Jeremie, Tan Yvonne, Pottie Kevin

机构信息

Bruyère Research Institute Ottawa Ontario Canada.

Interdisciplinary School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences University of Ottawa Ottawa Ontario Canada.

出版信息

Campbell Syst Rev. 2024 Apr 26;20(2):e1398. doi: 10.1002/cl2.1398. eCollection 2024 Jun.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Among youth, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and alcohol use are associated with considerable illness and disability. Youth face many personal and health system barriers in accessing mental health care. Mobile applications (apps) offer youth potentially accessible, scalable, and anonymous therapy and other support. Recent systematic reviews on apps to reduce mental health symptoms among youth have reported uncertain effectiveness, but analyses based on the type of app-delivered therapy are limited.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted this systematic review with youth co-researchers to ensure that this review addressed the questions that were most important to them. The objective of this review is to synthesize the best available evidence on the effectiveness of mobile apps for the reduction of depressive symptoms (depression, generalized anxiety, psychological distress) and alcohol use among youth.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted electronic searches of the following bibliographic databases for studies published between January 1, 2008, and July 1, 2022: MEDLINE (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), PsycINFO (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCOHost), and CENTRAL (via the Cochrane Library). The search used a combination of indexed terms, free text words, and MeSH headings. We manually screened the references of relevant systematic reviews and included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for additional eligible studies, and contacted authors for full reports of identified trial registries or protocols.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs conducted among youth aged 15-24 years from any setting. We did not exclude populations on the basis of gender, socioeconomic status, geographic location or other personal characteristics. We included studies which assessed the effectiveness of app-delivered mental health support or therapy interventions that targeted the management of depressive disorders and/or alcohol use disorders. We excluded apps that targeted general wellness, apps which focused on prevention of psychological disorders and apps that targeted bipolar disorder, psychosis, post-traumatic stress disorder, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, substance use disorders (aside from alcohol), and sleep disorders. Eligible comparisons included usual care, no intervention, wait-list control, alternative or controlled mobile applications. We included studies which reported outcomes on depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, alcohol use and psychological distress over any follow-up period.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We standardized the PICO definitions (population, intervention, comparison, and outcome) of each included study and grouped studies by the type of therapy or support offered by the app. Whenever app design and clinical homogeneity allowed, we meta-analyzed outcomes using a random-effects model. Outcome data measured using categorical scales were synthesized using odds ratios. Outcome data measured using continuous scales were synthesized as the standardized mean difference. We assessed the methodological quality of each included study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool and we assessed certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

From 5280 unique citations, we included 36 RCTs published in 37 reports and conducted in 15 different countries (7984 participants). Among the 36 included trials, we assessed two with an overall low risk of bias, 8 trials with some concern regarding risk of bias, and 26 trials with a high risk of bias. Interventions varied in the type of therapy or supports offered. The most common intervention designs employed mindfulness training, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), or a combination of the two (mindfulness + CBT). However, other interventions also included self-monitoring, medication reminders, cognitive bias modification or positive stimulation, dialectical behavioral therapy, gamified health promotion, or social skill building. Mindfulness apps led to short term improvements in depressive symptoms when compared to a withheld control (SMD = -0.36; 95% CI [-0.63, -0.10];  = 0.007,  = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low certainty) and when compared to an active control (SMD = -0.27; 95% CI [-0.53, -0.01];  = 0.04,  = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Apps delivering this type of support also significantly improved symptoms of anxiety when compared to a withheld control (SMD = -0.35; 95% CI [-0.60, -0.09];  = 0.008,  = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low) but not when compared to an active control (SMD = -0.24; 95% CI [-0.50, 0.02];  = 0.07,  = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Mindfulness apps showed improvements in psychological stress that approached statistical significance among participants receiving the mindfulness mobile apps compared to those in the withheld control (SMD = -0.27; 95% CI [-0.56, 0.03];  = .07,  = 4 RCTs, GRADE: very low). CBT apps also led to short-term improvements in depressive symptoms when compared to a withheld control (SMD = -0.40; 95% CI [-0.80, 0.01];  = 0.05,  = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low) and when compared to an active control (SMD = -0.59; 95% CI [-0.98, -0.19];  = 0.003,  = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). CBT-based apps also improved symptoms of anxiety compared to a withheld control (SMD = -0.51; 95% CI [-0.94, -0.09];  = 0.02,  = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low) but not when compared to an active control (SMD = -0.26; 95% CI [-1.11, 0.59];  = 0.55,  = 3 RCTs, GRADE: very low). Apps which combined mindfulness and CBT did not significantly improve symptoms of depression (SMD = -0.20; 95% CI [-0.42, 0.02];  = 0.07,  = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low) or anxiety (SMD = -0.21; 95% CI [-0.49, 0.07];  = 0.14,  = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). However, these apps did improve psychological distress (SMD = -0.43; 95% CI [-0.74, -0.12];  = 0.006,  = 2 RCTs, GRADE: very low). The results of trials on apps to reduce alcohol use were inconsistent. We did not identify any harms associated with the use of apps to manage mental health concerns. All effectiveness results had a very low certainty of evidence rating using the GRADE approach, meaning that apps which deliver therapy or other mental health support may reduce symptoms of depression, anxiety and psychological distress but the evidence is very uncertain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We reviewed evidence from 36 trials conducted among youth. According to our meta-analyses, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of apps on depression, anxiety, psychological distress, and alcohol use. Very few effects were interpreted to be of clinical importance. Most of the RCTs were small studies focusing on efficacy for youth at risk for depressive symptoms. Larger trials are needed to evaluate effectiveness and allow for further analysis of subgroup differences. Longer trials are also needed to better estimate the clinical importance of these apps over the long term.

摘要

背景

在青少年中,抑郁、焦虑和饮酒症状与相当多的疾病和残疾相关。青少年在获得心理健康护理方面面临许多个人和医疗系统障碍。移动应用程序(应用)为青少年提供了潜在的可获取、可扩展且匿名的治疗及其他支持。最近关于应用程序减少青少年心理健康症状的系统评价报告了其有效性不确定,但基于应用程序提供的治疗类型的分析有限。

目的

我们与青少年共同研究者进行了这项系统评价,以确保该评价解决了对他们最重要的问题。本评价的目的是综合现有最佳证据,以评估移动应用程序在减少青少年抑郁症状(抑郁症、广泛性焦虑症、心理困扰)和饮酒方面的有效性。

检索方法

我们对以下书目数据库进行了电子检索,以查找2008年1月1日至2022年7月1日期间发表的研究:MEDLINE(通过Ovid)、Embase(通过Ovid)、PsycINFO(通过Ovid)、CINAHL(通过EBSCOHost)和CENTRAL(通过Cochrane图书馆)。检索使用了索引词、自由文本词和医学主题词的组合。我们手动筛选了相关系统评价的参考文献,并纳入随机对照试验(RCT)以获取其他符合条件的研究,并联系作者获取已识别试验注册或方案的完整报告。

选择标准

我们纳入了在任何环境中对15 - 24岁青少年进行的RCT。我们不基于性别、社会经济地位、地理位置或其他个人特征排除人群。我们纳入了评估应用程序提供的心理健康支持或治疗干预对抑郁症和/或酒精使用障碍管理有效性的研究。我们排除了针对一般健康、专注于心理障碍预防的应用程序以及针对双相情感障碍、精神病、创伤后应激障碍、注意力缺陷多动障碍、物质使用障碍(酒精除外)和睡眠障碍的应用程序。符合条件的对照包括常规护理、无干预、等待列表对照、替代或对照移动应用程序。我们纳入了在任何随访期内报告抑郁症状、焦虑症状、饮酒和心理困扰结果的研究。

数据收集与分析

我们对每项纳入研究的PICO定义(人群、干预、对照和结果)进行了标准化,并根据应用程序提供的治疗或支持类型对研究进行分组。只要应用程序设计和临床同质性允许,我们使用随机效应模型对结果进行荟萃分析。使用分类量表测量的结果数据使用比值比进行综合。使用连续量表测量的结果数据综合为标准化均值差。我们使用Cochrane偏倚风险2.0工具评估每项纳入研究的方法学质量,并使用GRADE方法评估证据的确定性。

主要结果

从5280条独特的引文中,我们纳入了37篇报告中发表的36项RCT,这些研究在15个不同国家进行(7984名参与者)。在纳入的36项试验中,我们评估了2项总体偏倚风险较低的试验,8项对偏倚风险存在一些担忧的试验,以及26项偏倚风险较高的试验。干预措施在提供的治疗或支持类型方面各不相同。最常见的干预设计采用正念训练、认知行为疗法(CBT)或两者结合(正念 + CBT)。然而,其他干预措施还包括自我监测、药物提醒、认知偏差修正或积极刺激、辩证行为疗法、游戏化健康促进或社交技能培养。与未进行干预的对照相比,正念应用程序在短期内改善了抑郁症状(标准化均值差 = -0.36;95%置信区间[-0.63, -0.10];P = 0.007,n = 3项RCT,GRADE:极低确定性),与积极对照相比也是如此(标准化均值差 = -0.27;95%置信区间[-0.53, -0.01];P = 0.04,n = 2项RCT,GRADE:极低)。与未进行干预的对照相比,提供这种类型支持的应用程序在焦虑症状方面也有显著改善(标准化均值差 = -0.35;95%置信区间[-0.60, -0.09];P = 0.008,n = 3项RCT,GRADE:极低),但与积极对照相比则没有(标准化均值差 = -0.24;95%置信区间[-0.50, 0.02];P = 0.07,n = 2项RCT,GRADE:极低)。与未进行干预的对照相比,正念应用程序在接受正念移动应用程序的参与者中,心理压力的改善接近统计学显著性(标准化均值差 = -0.27;95%置信区间[-0.56, 0.03];P = 0.07,n = 4项RCT,GRADE:极低)。与未进行干预的对照相比,CBT应用程序在短期内也改善了抑郁症状(标准化均值差 = -0.40;95%置信区间[-0.80, 0.01];P = 0.05,n = 2项RCT,GRADE:极低),与积极对照相比也是如此(标准化均值差 = -0.59;95%置信区间[-0.98, -0.19];P = 0.003,n = 2项RCT,GRADE:极低)。与未进行干预的对照相比,基于CBT的应用程序在焦虑症状方面也有改善(标准化均值差 = -0.51;95%置信区间[-0.94, -0.09];P = 0.02,n = 3项RCT,GRADE:极低),但与积极对照相比则没有(标准化均值差 = -0.26;95%置信区间[-1.11, 0.59];P = 0.55,n = 3项RCT,GRADE:极低)。结合正念和CBT的应用程序在抑郁症状(标准化均值差 = -0.20;95%置信区间[-0.42, 0.02];P = 0.07,n = 2项RCT,GRADE:极低)或焦虑症状(标准化均值差 = -0.21;95%置信区间[-0.49, 0.07];P = 0.14,n = 2项RCT,GRADE:极低)方面没有显著改善。然而,这些应用程序确实改善了心理困扰(标准化均值差 = -0.43;95%置信区间[-0.74, -0.12];P = 0.006,n = 2项RCT,GRADE:极低)。关于减少饮酒的应用程序试验结果不一致。我们未发现与使用应用程序管理心理健康问题相关的任何危害。使用GRADE方法,所有有效性结果的证据确定性评级都非常低,这意味着提供治疗或其他心理健康支持的应用程序可能会减轻抑郁、焦虑和心理困扰症状,但证据非常不确定。

作者结论

我们回顾了在青少年中进行的36项试验的证据。根据我们的荟萃分析,关于应用程序对抑郁、焦虑、心理困扰和饮酒的影响,证据非常不确定。很少有影响被认为具有临床重要性。大多数RCT是小型研究,侧重于对有抑郁症状风险的青少年的疗效。需要更大规模的试验来评估有效性,并允许进一步分析亚组差异。还需要更长时间的试验来更好地估计这些应用程序在长期的临床重要性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/64da/11047135/7a35f9ae17a2/CL2-20-e1398-g018.jpg

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

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验