4.4 Review

Can non-pharmacological interventions prevent relapse in adults who have recovered from depression? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

期刊

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW
卷 39, 期 -, 页码 58-70

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cpr.2015.04.002

关键词

Depression; Relapse; Prevent; Psychological therapy; Long-term

资金

  1. British Psychological Society [509517]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To identify studies of non-pharmacological interventions provided following recovery from depression, and to evaluate their efficacy in preventing further episodes. Method: We identified relevant randomised controlled trials from searching MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, and ProQuest, searching reference and citation lists, and contacting study authors. We conducted a meta-analysis of relapse outcomes. Results: There were 29 eligible trials. 27 two-way comparisons including 2742 participants were included in the primary analysis. At 12 months cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT), and interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) were associated with a 22% reduction in relapse compared with controls (95% Cl 15% to 29%). The effect was maintained at 24 months for CBT, but not for IPT despite ongoing sessions. There were no 24-month MBCT data. A key area of heterogeneity differentiating these groups was prior acute treatment. Other psychological therapies and service-level programmes varied in efficacy. Conclusion and implications: Psychological interventions may prolong the recovery a person has achieved through use of medication or acute psychological therapy. Although there was evidence that MBCT is effective, it was largely tested following medication, so its efficacy following psychological interventions is less clear. IPT was only tested following acute IPT. Further exploration of sequencing of interventions is needed. Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO 2011 :CRD42011001646 (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.4
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