首页> 外文期刊>Health technology assessment: HTA >Group cognitive behavioural therapy for postnatal depression: a systematic review of clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and value of information analyses.
【24h】

Group cognitive behavioural therapy for postnatal depression: a systematic review of clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and value of information analyses.

机译:产后抑郁症的集体认知行为疗法:对临床有效性,成本效益和信息分析价值的系统评价。

获取原文
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Postnatal depression (PND) describes a wide range of distressing symptoms that can occur in women following childbirth. There is substantial evidence to support the use of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) in the treatment of depression, and psychological therapies are recommended by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence as a first-line treatment for PND. However, access is limited owing to expense, waiting lists and availability of therapists. Group CBT may, therefore, offer a solution to these problems by reducing therapist time and increasing the number of available places for treatment. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of group CBT compared with currently used packages of care for women with PND. DATA SOURCES: Seventeen electronic bibliographic databases were searched (for example MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, PsycINFO, etc.), covering biomedical, health-related, science, social science and grey literature (including current research). Databases were searched from 1950 to January 2008. In addition, the reference lists of relevant articles were checked and various health services' related resources were consulted via the internet. REVIEW METHODS: The study population included women in the postpartum period (up to 1 year), meeting the criteria of a standardised PND diagnosis using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition, or scoring above cut-off on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). No exclusion was made on the basis of the standardised depression screening/case finding instrument of standardised clinical assessment tool used to define PND. All full papers were read by two reviewers (AS and DS) who made independent decisions regarding inclusion or exclusion, and consensus, where possible, was obtained by meeting to compare decisions. In the event of disagreement, a third reviewer (EK) read the paper and made the decision. All data from included quantitative studies were extracted by one reviewer (AS) using a standardised data extraction form. All data from included qualitative studies were extracted by two reviewers (AS and AB) using a standardised data extraction form with disagreements resolved by discussion. Two different data extraction forms were used, one for the quantitative papers and a second for the qualitative papers. RESULTS: Six studies met the inclusion criteria for the quantitative review. Three were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and three were non-randomised trials. Two studies met the inclusion criteria for the qualitative review. These were both treatment evaluations incorporating qualitative methods. Only one study was deemed appropriate for the decision problem; therefore a meta-analysis was not performed. This study indicated that the reduction in the EPDS score through group CBT compared with routine primary care (RPC) was 3.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23 to 6.73] at the end of the treatment period. At 6-month follow-up the relative reduction in EPDS score was 4.48 (95% CI 1.01 to 7.95). Three studies showed the treatment to be effective in reducing depression when compared to RPC, usual care or waiting list groups. There was no adequate evidence on which to assess group CBT compared with other treatments for PND. Two studies of group CBT for PND were included in the qualitative review. Both studies demonstrated patient acceptability of group CBT for PND, although negative feelings towards group CBT were also identified. A de novo economic model was constructed to assess the cost-effectiveness of group CBT. The base-case results indicated a cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of 46,462 pounds for group CBT compared with RPC. The 95% CI for this ratio ranged from 37,008 to 60,728 pounds. There was considerable uncertainty in the cost per woman of running a CBT course, of the appropriateness of efficacy data to the decision problem
机译:背景:产后抑郁症(PND)描述了分娩后女性可能发生的多种令人困扰的症状。有大量证据支持在抑郁症的治疗中使用认知行为疗法(CBT),而美国国立卫生与临床研究院(National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence)建议采用心理疗法作为PND的一线治疗。然而,由于费用,等待名单和治疗师的可用性,访问受到限制。因此,CBT组可以通过减少治疗师的时间并增加可用治疗位点的数量来解决这些问题。目的:与目前使用的PND妇女护理方案相比,评估CBT组的临床疗效和成本效益。数据来源:检索了17个电子书目数据库(例如MEDLINE,MEDLINE进行中和其他未索引引文,EMBASE,PsycINFO等),涵盖了生物医学,健康相关,科学,社会科学和灰色文献(包括最新文献)研究)。从1950年至2008年1月搜索数据库。此外,还检查了相关文章的参考清单,并通过Internet查阅了各种卫生服务的相关资源。审查方法:研究人群包括产后(不超过1年)的妇女,符合《精神障碍诊断和统计手册》(第四版)的标准PND诊断标准,或在爱丁堡产后的评分高于临界值抑郁量表(EPDS)。根据用于定义PND的标准化临床评估工具的标准化抑郁症筛查/病例发现工具,未进行任何排除。两位审稿人(AS和DS)阅读了所有全文,他们对收录或收录做出了独立的决定,并在可能的情况下通过开会比较决定获得了共识。如果出现分歧,请第三位审阅者(EK)阅读该论文并做出决定。来自一位定量研究的所有数据均由一位审阅者(AS)使用标准化的数据提取表提取。来自两名定性研究的所有数据均由两名审核员(AS和AB)使用标准化数据提取表进行提取,并通过讨论解决了分歧。使用了两种不同的数据提取形式,一种用于定量论文,另一种用于定性论文。结果:六项研究符合定量审查的纳入标准。三项为随机对照试验(RCT),三项为非随机试验。两项研究符合定性审查的纳入标准。这些都是结合定性方法的治疗评估。只有一项研究被认为适合决策问题;因此未进行荟萃分析。这项研究表明,在治疗期结束时,CBT组与常规初级护理(RPC)相比,EPDS评分降低了3.48 [95%置信区间(CI)0.23至6.73]。在6个月的随访中,EPDS评分的相对降低为4.48(95%CI为1.01至7.95)。三项研究表明,与RPC,常规护理或等候组相比,该疗法可有效降低抑郁症。与其他PND治疗相比,没有足够的证据可以评估CBT组。定性评价包括两项针对CPN的CBT组研究。两项研究均表明,CBT组对于PND的患者可接受性,尽管也发现了对CBT组的负面感觉。建立了从头开始的经济模型来评估集体CBT的成本效益。基本案例结果表明,与RPC相比,CBT组的每质量调整生命年(QALY)成本为46462磅。该比率的95%CI从37,008磅到60,728磅不等。每个妇女参加CBT课程的费用,有效性数据是否适合决策问题都存在很大的不确定性

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号