Suppr超能文献

癌症患者的数字干预与心理健康结果:一项系统评价与荟萃分析

Digital Interventions and Mental Health Outcomes in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Wu Zixuan, Luo Feifei, Wang Siyuan, Hu Xinyu, Chen Meifang

机构信息

Johns Hopkins University, Suzhou, CN.

Duke Kunshan University, Suzhou, CN.

出版信息

JMIR Cancer. 2025 Jun 3;11. doi: 10.2196/64754.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Rising cancer rates have amplified psychiatric and psychosocial burdens, with 35-40% of patients exhibiting diagnosable psychiatric disorders. While Digital Mental Health Interventions (DMHIs) present potential solutions for improving emotional well-being in this population, evidence remains fragmented and lacks clarity regarding optimal implementation strategies. This study evaluates the efficacy of digital interventions on mental health outcomes in cancer patients, with particular focus on intervention duration and stakeholder involvement as moderating factors.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to (1) characterize digital interventions targeting mental health outcomes in cancer patients; (2) quantify their effectiveness in reducing anxiety and depression; and (3) examine whether intervention duration and stakeholder involvement moderate treatment outcomes.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement guidelines and was retrospectively registered in PROSPERO on May 25th (no. CRD420251058005). Eight databases (Cochrane Central Trials Registry, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, PsycINFO, Global Health, Embase and Medline) were searched from inception to 2024. Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated digital interventions for mental health in cancer patients. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0. Random-effects meta-analyses calculated standardized mean differences (SMDs). Pooled results were reported as the odds ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI). The heterogeneity was assessed with the I² test (%). Subgroup analyses explored the potential effects of intervention duration and stakeholder involvement. Sensitivity analyses and publication bias assessments were performed to ensure robustness of findings.

RESULTS

Twenty-two RCTs were included in the review. The geolocation involves four continents worldwide: Asia (n=9), Europe (n=5), North America (n=6), and Oceania (n=2). Interventions comprised meditation/mindfulness (n=3), education (n=8), self-management (n=11), physical exercise (n=4), and patient community communication (n=8). Twelve studies were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, digital interventions showed non-significant effects on depression (SMD -0.48, 95% CI [-1.00, 0.03], p=0.07; 9 studies) or anxiety (SMD -0.61, 95% CI [-1.29, 0.06], p=0.08; 8 studies) with substantial heterogeneity (I2>90%). Subgroup analyses revealed interventions (<1 month) significantly reduced anxiety (SMD -0.73, 95% CI [-1.42, -0.04], p=0.04), while interventions (1-2 months) reduced depression (SMD -0.18, 95% CI [-0.35, -0.01], p=0.04). Interventions showed no statistically significant differences when stratified by stakeholder involvement. Sensitivity analyses excluding one outlier yielded significantly lower heterogeneity but preserved unchanged overall and subgroup patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

While DMHIs overall showed no effect on anxiety or depression interventions, exploratory analyses suggest potential benefits of duration-tailored approaches. High heterogeneity and methodological limitations indicate that DMHIs may be most effective when integrated into personalized care models rather than standalone treatments. Future research should employ standardized outcomes and investigate mechanisms underlying potential duration-dependent efficacy.

CLINICALTRIAL

PROSPERO 2025 CRD420251058005; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251058005.

摘要

背景

癌症发病率的上升加剧了精神和心理社会负担,35%-40%的患者表现出可诊断的精神障碍。虽然数字心理健康干预措施(DMHIs)为改善这一人群的情绪健康提供了潜在的解决方案,但证据仍然零散,缺乏关于最佳实施策略的明确信息。本研究评估数字干预对癌症患者心理健康结果的疗效,特别关注干预持续时间和利益相关者参与作为调节因素。

目的

本研究旨在(1)描述针对癌症患者心理健康结果的数字干预措施;(2)量化其在减轻焦虑和抑郁方面的有效性;(3)研究干预持续时间和利益相关者参与是否会调节治疗结果。

方法

本系统评价和荟萃分析遵循PRISMA(系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目)声明指南,并于5月25日在PROSPERO上进行了回顾性注册(编号CRD420251058005)。从数据库建立到2024年,检索了八个数据库(Cochrane中央试验注册库、科学网、Scopus、PubMed、PsycINFO、全球健康、Embase和Medline)。符合条件的随机对照试验(RCT)评估了针对癌症患者心理健康的数字干预措施。两名评审员独立筛选研究、提取数据,并使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具2.0评估偏倚风险。随机效应荟萃分析计算标准化平均差(SMD)。汇总结果报告为优势比和95%置信区间(CI)。使用I²检验(%)评估异质性。亚组分析探讨了干预持续时间和利益相关者参与的潜在影响。进行了敏感性分析和发表偏倚评估,以确保结果的稳健性。

结果

本评价纳入了22项RCT。地理位置涉及全球四大洲:亚洲(n=9)、欧洲(n=5)、北美洲(n=6)和大洋洲(n=2)。干预措施包括冥想/正念(n=3)、教育(n=8)、自我管理(n=11)、体育锻炼(n=4)和患者社区交流(n=8)。荟萃分析纳入了12项研究。总体而言,数字干预对抑郁(SMD -0.48, 95% CI [-1.00, 0.03], p=0.07;9项研究)或焦虑(SMD -[0.61, 95% CI [-1.29, 0.06], p=0.08;8项研究)的影响不显著,异质性较大(I²>90%)。亚组分析显示,干预时间<1个月可显著减轻焦虑(SMD -0.73, 95% CI [-1.42, -0.0], p=0.04),而干预时间为1-2个月可减轻抑郁(SMD -0.18, 95% CI [-0.35, -0.01], p=0.04)。按利益相关者参与分层时,干预措施无统计学显著差异。排除一个异常值的敏感性分析产生了显著较低的异质性,但总体和亚组模式保持不变。

结论

虽然DMHIs总体上对焦虑或抑郁干预没有效果,但探索性分析表明了根据持续时间量身定制方法的潜在益处。高度的异质性和方法学局限性表明,DMHIs在整合到个性化护理模式而非单独治疗中时可能最有效。未来的研究应采用标准化结果,并研究潜在的持续时间依赖性疗效的机制。

临床试验

PROSPERO 2025 CRD420251058005;https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251058005

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/8c05/12352589/cebd830b82f5/cancer-v11-e64754-g001.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