Tian Jing-Jing, He Xiao-Ya, Guo Zhen
Department of Physical Education, Tsinghua University, Haidian District, Beijing 100190, China.
Sports & Medicine Integrative Innovation Center, Capital University of Physical Education and Sports, No. 11, North Third Ring West Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100190, China.
Behav Sci (Basel). 2025 Jan 20;15(1):98. doi: 10.3390/bs15010098.
The purpose of this network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare the effect of different non-pharmacological interventions (NPIs) on Problematic Internet Use (PIU). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from their inception to 22 December 2023 were searched in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science and Technology Journal Database, Chinese BioMedical Literature Database, and WanFang Data. We carried out a data analysis to compare the efficacy of various NPIs using Bayesian NMA. A battery of analyses and assessments, such as conventional meta-analysis and risk of bias, were performed concurrently. Two reviewers extracted data and evaluated bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool independently. We identified 90 RCTs including 15 different NPIs (5986 participants), namely sports intervention (SI), electroencephalogram biological feedback (EBF), reality therapy (RT), positive psychology therapy (PPT), sandplay therapy (ST), educational intervention (EI), compound psychotherapy (CPT), electroacupuncture therapy (AT), group counseling (GC), family therapy (FT), electrotherapy (ELT), craving behavior intervention (CBI), virtual reality therapy (VRT), cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), and mindfulness therapy (MT). Our NMA results showed that SI, EBF, RT, PPT, ST, EI, CPT, AT, GC, FT, ELT, CBT, CBI, VRT, and MT were effective in reducing PIU levels. The most effective NPI was SI (SMD = -4.66, CrI: -5.51, -3.82, SUCRA = 95.43%), followed by EBF (SMD = -4.51, CrI: -6.62, -2.39, SUCRA = 90.89%) and RT (SMD = -3.83, CrI: -6.01, -1.62, SUCRA = 81.90%). Our study showed that SI was the best NPI to relieve PIU levels in youth. Medical staff should be aware of the application of SI to the treatment of PIU in youth in future clinical care.
本网络荟萃分析（NMA）的目的是比较不同非药物干预措施（NPI）对网络使用问题（PIU）的影响。在Cochrane对照试验中央注册库、Embase、Medline、Web of Science、中国知网、中国科技期刊数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库和万方数据中检索了从创刊至2023年12月22日发表的随机对照试验（RCT）。我们使用贝叶斯NMA进行数据分析，以比较各种NPI的疗效。同时进行了一系列分析和评估，如传统荟萃分析和偏倚风险评估。两名评价员独立提取数据并使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估偏倚。我们确定了90项RCT，包括15种不同的NPI（5986名参与者），即体育干预（SI）、脑电图生物反馈（EBF）、现实疗法（RT）、积极心理疗法（PPT）、沙盘疗法（ST）、教育干预（EI）、综合心理治疗（CPT）、电针疗法（AT）、团体咨询（GC）、家庭治疗（FT）、电疗法（ELT）、渴望行为干预（CBI）、虚拟现实疗法（VRT）、认知行为疗法（CBT）和正念疗法（MT）。我们的NMA结果表明，SI、EBF、RT、PPT、ST、EI、CPT、AT、GC、FT、ELT、CBT、CBI、VRT和MT在降低PIU水平方面有效。最有效的NPI是SI（标准化均数差[SMD]=-4.66，可信区间[CrI]：-5.51，-3.82，累积排序曲线下面积[SUCRA]=95.43%），其次是EBF（SMD=-4.51，CrI：-6.62，-2.39，SUCRA=90.89%）和RT（SMD=-3.83，CrI：-6.01，-1.62，SUCRA=81.90%）。我们的研究表明，SI是缓解青少年PIU水平的最佳NPI。医务人员在未来的临床护理中应注意SI在青少年PIU治疗中的应用。
