4.7 Review

CBT for pharmacotherapy non-remitters-a systematic review of a next-step strategy

期刊

JOURNAL OF AFFECTIVE DISORDERS
卷 129, 期 1-3, 页码 219-228

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2010.08.025

关键词

Anxiety disorder; Cognitive-behavioral therapy; Resistant; Next-step; Systematic review

资金

  1. CNPq (Nacional Research Council) Federal Government of Brazil
  2. FAPERJ [E-6/110.324/2007]
  3. Confederacao Nacional do Comercio
  4. CNPq

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Non-remission rates to pharmacotherapy for anxiety disorders are related to higher relapse rates, decreased quality of life and greater functional impairment. Here we sought to investigate the efficacy of cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT) as a next-step strategy in the treatment of patients with anxiety disorders who did not remit after a pharmacological intervention. Method: We carried out a systematic review in the ISI, Pubmed and PsycINFO/PsychLit databases. Studies that did not use CBT and that did not focus on resistance to drug therapy were excluded. We considered resistant patients who failed to respond (did not fully remit) to an adequate trial of pharmacotherapy and still exhibited residual symptoms of anxiety disorder. Results: We identified 603 references in our survey, of which 17 were included: eight were on OCD, five on panic disorder, and four on PTSD. No studies were found on social anxiety disorder and generalized anxiety disorder. We observed a lack of standardization of terminology and of definitions of resistance, which makes comparison of results difficult. Finally, all of the identified studies showed benefits from the addition of CBT as a next-step strategy. Limitations: A limited number of randomized controlled studies were found. Conclusions: CBT seems to be a promising next-step strategy for patients with anxiety disorders who did not remit with drug-based therapies. However, further clinical trials with strong methodological designs are needed to definitely establish its efficacy in this population. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据