4.5 Review

Ketamine for suicidality: An umbrella review

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 88, 期 9, 页码 3990-4018

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bcp.15360

关键词

ketamine; self-injury; suicidal ideation; suicide; systematic review

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aims to systematically identify and evaluate systematic reviews on the efficacy of ketamine in suicidal ideation and behaviors, with a focus on short-term effectiveness. While preliminary evidence suggests positive effects, the quality of many studies is low and long-term effects remain unknown. Common adverse effects of ketamine include transient elevation of pulse rate, blood pressure, dissociation, confusion, blurred vision, nausea, and vertigo.
The urgent need for appropriate treatment for suicide, the tenth leading cause of death, has led to numerous studies. This study aims to systematically identify and appraise systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses investigating ketamine in suicidal ideation and behaviours. Scopus, ISI, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar and two registries were searched without any restrictions for systematic reviews investigating the efficacy of ketamine on suicidal ideation and behaviours. The primary outcome was the final inference of ketamine effectiveness. A formal narrative synthesis was conducted, and the AMSTAR-2 tool was used to evaluate the quality of the studies. Of 27 studies that addressed ketamine for suicidal ideation, only four reported mixed or negative results, and out of nine reviews, esketamine was significantly beneficial only in five. A transient rise in pulse rate and blood pressure, dissociation, confusion, blurred vision, nausea and vertigo were the most common adverse effects; however, most were mild. More than two-thirds of the included studies qualified as of low or critically low quality. Preliminary evidence for the short-term efficacy of ketamine in suicidality was noted by the majority of reviews; however, long-term effects remained unknown. Due to the low quality of many studies and the limitations of core studies, further research is required.

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

4.5
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