Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Author:

Xiang Yajie,Cipriani AndreaORCID,Teng Teng,Del Giovane Cinzia,Zhang Yuqing,Weisz John R.,Li Xuemei,Cuijpers PimORCID,Liu Xueer,Barth Jürgen,Jiang Yuanliang,Cohen David,Fan Li,Gillies Donna,Du Kang,Ravindran Arun V.,Zhou Xinyu,Xie PengORCID

Abstract

BackgroundAvailable evidence on the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children and adolescents remains uncertain.ObjectiveWe aimed to compare and rank the different types and formats of psychotherapies for PTSD in children and adolescents.MethodsWe searched eight databases and other international registers up to 31 December 2020. The pairwise meta-analyses and frequentist network meta-analyses estimated pooled standardised mean differences (SMDs) and ORs with random-effects model. Efficacy at post-treatment and follow-up, acceptability, depressive and anxiety symptoms were measured.FindingsWe included 56 randomised controlled trials with 5327 patients comparing 14 different types of psychotherapies and 3 control conditions. For efficacy, cognitive processing therapy (CPT), behavioural therapy (BT), individual trauma-focused cognitive–behavioural therapy (TF-CBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing, and group TF-CBT were significantly superior to all control conditions at post-treatment and follow-up (SMDs between −2.42 and −0.25). Moreover, CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT were more effective than supportive therapy (SMDs between −1.92 and −0.49). Results for depressive and anxiety symptoms were similar to the findings for the primary outcome. Most of the results were rated as ‘moderate’ to ‘very low’ in terms of confidence of evidence.ConclusionsCPT, BT and individual TF-CBT appear to be the best choices of psychotherapy for PTSD in young patients. Other types and different ways of delivering psychological treatment can be alternative options. Clinicians should consider the importance of each outcome and the patients’ preferences in real clinical practice.

Funder

Chongqing Science and Technology Commission

Non-profit Central Research Institute Fund of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences

National Key Research and Development Program of China

High-level Talents Special Support Plan of Chongqing

National Natural Science Foundation of China

Publisher

BMJ

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health

Cited by 23 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

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3