Efficacy of Remote Psychological Interventions for Patients with Anxiety and Depression Symptoms: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Anxiety and depression are common mental disorders that are highly prevalent worldwide. Clinical trials have found that telehealth interventions result in increased accessibility and improved mental treatment effectiveness. However, a few comprehensive syntheses of evidence from randomized clinical trials that have been conducted to evaluate remote psychological vs face-to-face interventions for anxiety and depression are not conclusive. The objective of this work was to evaluate the efficacy of remote psychological interventions for patients with anxiety and depression symptoms. Randomized clinical trials with the following criteria were included: participants aged ≥5 years, of both sexes, and who underwent psychological therapy to treat anxiety and or depression symptoms. They were randomized to receive the same psychological treatment remotely or face-to-face. Review studies, animal studies, pilot studies, and studies with patients diagnosed with chronic diseases were excluded. Searches were performed on March 2024 in the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL, CINAHL, Web of Science, SciELO, APA PsycINFO, and Scopus. The meta-analysis was conducted using the random-effects model, and the standardized mean difference with the 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to estimate the effect. Six studies were included in this systematic review. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference when comparing remote or face-to-face treatment for depression (SMD of -0.10 [95% CI: -0.57 to 0.37; : 77%]) and anxiety (SMD of -0.06 [95% CI: -0.34 to 0.21; : 0%]) symptoms. Our meta-analysis indicates that remote psychotherapy demonstrates comparable efficacy to face-to-face care in mitigating symptoms of depression and anxiety. It allows patients to select the best modality for their daily routines, promoting greater engagement and adherence to treatment.