Affiliation:
1. Department of Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy University of Giessen Giessen Germany
2. Department of Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy University of Rostock Rostock Germany
3. Dalhousie University Halifax NS Canada
4. International Psychoanalytic University Berlin Germany
5. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Albert Einstein College of Medicine Bronx New York NY USA
6. School of Medicine University of Queensland Brisbane QLD Australia
7. Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences University of Leuven Leuven Belgium
8. Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology University College London London UK
9. Department of Psychology University of Klagenfurt Klagenfurt Austria
Abstract
To assess the current status of psychodynamic therapy (PDT) as an empirically supported treatment (EST), we carried out a pre‐registered systematic umbrella review addressing the evidence for PDT in common mental disorders in adults, based on an updated model for ESTs. Following this model, we focused on meta‐analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in the past two years to assess efficacy. In addition, we reviewed the evidence on effectiveness, cost‐effectiveness and mechanisms of change. Meta‐analyses were evaluated by at least two raters using the proposed updated criteria, i.e. effect sizes, risk of bias, inconsistency, indirectness, imprecision, publication bias, treatment fidelity, and their quality as well as that of primary studies. To assess the quality of evidence we applied the GRADE system. A systematic search identified recent meta‐analyses on the efficacy of PDT in depressive, anxiety, personality and somatic symptom disorders. High quality evidence in depressive and somatic symptom disorders and moderate quality evidence in anxiety and personality disorders showed that PDT is superior to (inactive and active) control conditions in reducing target symptoms with clinically meaningful effect sizes. Moderate quality evidence suggests that PDT is as efficacious as other active therapies in these disorders. The benefits of PDT outweigh its costs and harms. Furthermore, evidence was found for long‐term effects, improving functioning, effectiveness, cost‐effectiveness and mechanisms of change in the aforementioned disorders. Some limitations in specific research areas exist, such as risk of bias and imprecision, which are, however, comparable to those of other evidence‐based psychotherapies. Thus, according to the updated EST model, PDT proved to be an empirically‐supported treatment for common mental disorders. Of the three options for recommendation provided by the updated model (i.e., “very strong”, “strong” or “weak”), the new EST criteria suggest that a strong recommendation for treating the aforementioned mental disorders with PDT is the most appropriate option. In conclusion, PDT represents an evidence‐based psychotherapy. This is clinically important since no single therapeutic approach fits all psychiatric patients, as shown by the limited success rates across all evidence‐based treatments.
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health,Pshychiatric Mental Health
Cited by
33 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献