Zhang Mi, Fan Chuan, Ma Lijun, Wang Huixue, Zu Zhenyue, Yang Linxi, Chen Fenglan, Wei Wenzhuo, Li Xiaoming
Research Centre for Translational Medicine, the Second Affiliated Hospital, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Department of Medical Psychology, School of Mental Health and Psychological Science, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, Anhui, China.
Gen Psychiatr. 2024 Jul 18;37(4):e101355. doi: 10.1136/gpsych-2023-101355. eCollection 2024.
Internet-based interventions (IBIs) for behavioural health have been prevalent for over two decades, and a growing proportion of individuals with mental health concerns prefer these emerging digital alternatives. However, the effectiveness and acceptability of IBIs for various mental health disorders continue to be subject to scholarly debate. We performed an umbrella review of meta-analyses (MAs), conducting literature searches in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane and Ovid Medline from their inception to 17 January 2023. A total of 87 MAs, reporting on 1683 randomised controlled trials and 295 589 patients, were included. The results indicated that IBIs had a moderate effect on anxiety disorder (standardised mean difference (SMD)=0.53, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.62) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (SMD=0.63, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.89). In contrast, the efficacy on depression (SMD=0.45, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.52), addiction (SMD=0.23, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.31), suicidal ideation (SMD=0.23, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.30), stress (SMD=0.41, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.48) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (SMD=0.47, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.73) was relatively small. However, no significant effects were observed for personality disorders (SMD=0.07, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.26). Our findings suggest a significant association between IBIs and improved mental health outcomes, with particular effectiveness noted in treating anxiety disorders and PTSD. However, it is noteworthy that the effectiveness of IBIs was impacted by high dropout rates during treatment. Furthermore, our results indicated that guided IBIs proved to be more effective than unguided ones, playing a positive role in reducing dropout rates and enhancing patient adherence rates. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023417366.
基于互联网的行为健康干预措施(IBIs)已经流行了二十多年,越来越多有心理健康问题的人更喜欢这些新兴的数字替代方案。然而,IBIs对各种心理健康障碍的有效性和可接受性仍然是学术辩论的主题。我们对荟萃分析(MAs)进行了一项伞状综述,在PubMed、科学网、Embase、Cochrane和Ovid Medline上进行了从其创刊到2023年1月17日的文献检索。共纳入了87项荟萃分析,报告了1683项随机对照试验和295589名患者。结果表明,IBIs对焦虑症(标准化均数差(SMD)=0.53,95%CI 0.44至0.62)和创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)(SMD=0.63,95%CI 0.38至0.89)有中等效果。相比之下,对抑郁症(SMD=0.45,95%CI 0.39至0.52)、成瘾(SMD=0.23,95%CI 0.16至0.31)、自杀意念(SMD=0.23,95%CI 0.16至0.30)、压力(SMD=0.41,95%CI 0.33至0.48)和强迫症(SMD=0.47,95%CI 0.22至0.73)的疗效相对较小。然而,未观察到对人格障碍有显著影响(SMD=0.07,95%CI -0.13至0.26)。我们的研究结果表明,IBIs与改善心理健康结果之间存在显著关联,在治疗焦虑症和PTSD方面特别有效。然而,值得注意的是,IBIs的有效性受到治疗期间高辍学率的影响。此外,我们的结果表明,有指导的IBIs被证明比无指导的更有效,在降低辍学率和提高患者依从率方面发挥了积极作用。PROSPERO注册号:CRD42023417366。