Pharmacological, psychological and non-invasive brain stimulation interventions for preventing depression after stroke.


Journal

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
11 05 2020
Historique:
entrez: 12 5 2020
pubmed: 12 5 2020
medline: 5 9 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Depression is an important consequence of stroke that influences recovery yet often is not detected, or is inadequately treated. This is an update and expansion of a Cochrane Review first published in 2004 and previously updated in 2008. The primary objective is to test the hypothesis that pharmacological, psychological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation, or combinations of these interventions reduce the incidence of diagnosable depression after stroke. Secondary objectives are to test the hypothesis that pharmacological, psychological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation or combinations of these interventions reduce levels of depressive symptoms and dependency, and improve physical functioning after stroke. We also aim to determine the safety of, and adherence to, the interventions. We searched the Specialised Register of Cochrane Stroke and the Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis (last searched August 2018). In addition, we searched the following databases; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library, 2018, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2018), Embase (1980 to August 2018), PsycINFO (1967 to August 2018), CINAHL (1982 to August 2018) and three Web of Science indexes (2002 to August 2018). We also searched reference lists, clinical trial registers (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP); to August 2018 and ClinicalTrials.gov; to August 2018), conference proceedings; we also contacted study authors. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing: 1) pharmacological interventions with placebo; 2) one of various forms of psychological therapy with usual care and/or attention control; 3) one of various forms of non-invasive brain stimulation with sham stimulation or usual care; 4) a pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with a pharmacological intervention and usual care and/or attention control; 5) non-invasive brain stimulation and pharmacological intervention with a pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care; 6) pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy; 7) pharmacological intervention and non-invasive brain stimulation with placebo plus non-invasive brain stimulation; 8) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus non-invasive brain stimulation plus usual care and/or attention control; and 9) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus sham brain stimulation or usual care plus psychological therapy, with the intention of preventing depression after stroke. Review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data from all included studies. We calculated mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed heterogeneity using the I We included 19 RCTs (21 interventions), with 1771 participants in the review. Data were available for 12 pharmacological trials (14 interventions) and seven psychological trials. There were no trials of non-invasive brain stimulation compared with sham stimulation or usual care, a combination of pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy, or a combination of non-invasive brain stimulation and a pharmacological intervention with a pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care to prevent depression after stroke. Treatment effects were observed on the primary outcome of meeting the study criteria for depression at the end of treatment: there is very low-certainty evidence from eight trials (nine interventions) that pharmacological interventions decrease the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.68; 734 participants) compared to placebo. There is very low-certainty evidence from two trials that psychological interventions reduce the proportion of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.94, 607 participants) compared to usual care and/or attention control. Eight trials (nine interventions) found no difference in death and other adverse events between pharmacological intervention and placebo groups (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.91; 496 participants) based on very low-certainty evidence. Five trials found no difference in psychological intervention and usual care and/or attention control groups for death and other adverse events (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.91; 975 participants) based on very low-certainty evidence. The available evidence suggests that pharmacological interventions and psychological therapy may prevent depression and improve mood after stroke. However, there is very low certainty in these conclusions because of the very low-certainty evidence. More trials are required before reliable recommendations can be made about the routine use of such treatments after stroke.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Depression is an important consequence of stroke that influences recovery yet often is not detected, or is inadequately treated. This is an update and expansion of a Cochrane Review first published in 2004 and previously updated in 2008.
OBJECTIVES
The primary objective is to test the hypothesis that pharmacological, psychological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation, or combinations of these interventions reduce the incidence of diagnosable depression after stroke. Secondary objectives are to test the hypothesis that pharmacological, psychological therapy, non-invasive brain stimulation or combinations of these interventions reduce levels of depressive symptoms and dependency, and improve physical functioning after stroke. We also aim to determine the safety of, and adherence to, the interventions.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Specialised Register of Cochrane Stroke and the Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis (last searched August 2018). In addition, we searched the following databases; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library, 2018, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2018), Embase (1980 to August 2018), PsycINFO (1967 to August 2018), CINAHL (1982 to August 2018) and three Web of Science indexes (2002 to August 2018). We also searched reference lists, clinical trial registers (World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP); to August 2018 and ClinicalTrials.gov; to August 2018), conference proceedings; we also contacted study authors.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing: 1) pharmacological interventions with placebo; 2) one of various forms of psychological therapy with usual care and/or attention control; 3) one of various forms of non-invasive brain stimulation with sham stimulation or usual care; 4) a pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with a pharmacological intervention and usual care and/or attention control; 5) non-invasive brain stimulation and pharmacological intervention with a pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care; 6) pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy; 7) pharmacological intervention and non-invasive brain stimulation with placebo plus non-invasive brain stimulation; 8) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus non-invasive brain stimulation plus usual care and/or attention control; and 9) non-invasive brain stimulation and one of various forms of psychological therapy versus sham brain stimulation or usual care plus psychological therapy, with the intention of preventing depression after stroke.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data from all included studies. We calculated mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed heterogeneity using the I
MAIN RESULTS
We included 19 RCTs (21 interventions), with 1771 participants in the review. Data were available for 12 pharmacological trials (14 interventions) and seven psychological trials. There were no trials of non-invasive brain stimulation compared with sham stimulation or usual care, a combination of pharmacological intervention and one of various forms of psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy, or a combination of non-invasive brain stimulation and a pharmacological intervention with a pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care to prevent depression after stroke. Treatment effects were observed on the primary outcome of meeting the study criteria for depression at the end of treatment: there is very low-certainty evidence from eight trials (nine interventions) that pharmacological interventions decrease the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.68; 734 participants) compared to placebo. There is very low-certainty evidence from two trials that psychological interventions reduce the proportion of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.94, 607 participants) compared to usual care and/or attention control. Eight trials (nine interventions) found no difference in death and other adverse events between pharmacological intervention and placebo groups (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.91; 496 participants) based on very low-certainty evidence. Five trials found no difference in psychological intervention and usual care and/or attention control groups for death and other adverse events (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.91; 975 participants) based on very low-certainty evidence.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The available evidence suggests that pharmacological interventions and psychological therapy may prevent depression and improve mood after stroke. However, there is very low certainty in these conclusions because of the very low-certainty evidence. More trials are required before reliable recommendations can be made about the routine use of such treatments after stroke.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32390167
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003689.pub4
pmc: PMC7211517
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antidepressive Agents 0

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

CD003689

Subventions

Organisme : Chief Scientist Office
ID : ETM/417
Pays : United Kingdom

Commentaires et corrections

Type : UpdateOf

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Références

CNS Spectr. 2000 Mar;5(3):43-50
pubmed: 18277328
Int J Nurs Pract. 2018 Aug;24(4):e12657
pubmed: 29582517
Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 1996;22 Suppl 1:217-20
pubmed: 18653034
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1961 Jun;4:561-71
pubmed: 13688369
Clin Rehabil. 2000 Apr;14(2):160-71
pubmed: 10763793
J Clin Epidemiol. 2001 Jul;54(7):651-4
pubmed: 11438404
Am J Psychiatry. 2000 Mar;157(3):351-9
pubmed: 10698809
J Psychiatr Res. 1975 Nov;12(3):189-98
pubmed: 1202204
Eur Neurol. 2017;78(1-2):28-32
pubmed: 28578330
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2003 May-Jun;11(3):320-7
pubmed: 12724111
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2014 Mar-Apr;28(3):199-206
pubmed: 24300949
Md State Med J. 1965 Feb;14:61-5
pubmed: 14258950
Am J Psychiatry. 2002 Mar;159(3):469-73
pubmed: 11870014
Arch Neurol. 1986 Aug;43(8):763-5
pubmed: 3729755
Int J Stroke. 2014 Dec;9(8):1017-25
pubmed: 25117911
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2015 Apr;22(2):116-26
pubmed: 25936543
Disabil Rehabil. 2014;36(1):55-62
pubmed: 23594060
Stroke. 1995 Dec;26(12):2254-9
pubmed: 7491646
BMC Neurol. 2019 Jun 14;19(1):128
pubmed: 31200668
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006 Jun;87(6):793-8
pubmed: 16731214
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2013 Nov;22(8):1243-51
pubmed: 22554569
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2002 May;190(5):296-303
pubmed: 12011609
Am J Psychiatry. 2001 Apr;158(4):658-60
pubmed: 11282720
J Phys Ther Sci. 2017 Jun;29(6):1036-1039
pubmed: 28626318
Am J Psychiatry. 1993 Jan;150(1):124-9
pubmed: 8417554
Stroke. 1987 May-Jun;18(3):665-9
pubmed: 3109080
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2013 Feb;27(2):110-7
pubmed: 22895620
Lancet. 2003 May 24;361(9371):1757-8
pubmed: 12781530
Scott Med J. 1957 May;2(5):200-15
pubmed: 13432835
Stroke. 2000 Jul;31(7):1482-6
pubmed: 10884441
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jul 16;(3):CD003689
pubmed: 18646094
Rehabil Nurs. 2015 Sep-Oct;40(5):327-37
pubmed: 24711062
Stroke. 1996 Jul;27(7):1211-4
pubmed: 8685930
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1999 Apr;66(4):490-4
pubmed: 10201422
Lancet Psychiatry. 2019 Nov;6(11):903-914
pubmed: 31543474
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2003 Oct;191(10):645-52
pubmed: 14555866
Stroke. 1986 Nov-Dec;17(6):1102-7
pubmed: 3810708
J Adv Nurs. 1999 Aug;30(2):401-9
pubmed: 10457242
Lancet. 2019 Jan 19;393(10168):265-274
pubmed: 30528472
Am J Phys Med. 1985 Feb;64(1):24-31
pubmed: 3155916
BMJ. 1998 Apr 18;316(7139):1206
pubmed: 9583928
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2007;24(1):74-9
pubmed: 17519547
Disabil Rehabil. 2018 Aug;40(16):1870-1892
pubmed: 28420284
Br J Psychiatry. 1979 Apr;134:382-9
pubmed: 444788
Stroke. 2009 Nov;40(11):3485-92
pubmed: 19745175
BMJ. 1996 Jun 29;312(7047):1642-6
pubmed: 8664717
Stroke. 2003 Jan;34(1):138-43
pubmed: 12511765
Acta Psychiatr Scand. 1983 Jun;67(6):361-70
pubmed: 6880820
Stat Med. 1999 Feb 15;18(3):321-59
pubmed: 10070677
Brain Inj. 2017;31(11):1507-1512
pubmed: 28696135
J Clin Psychiatry. 2006 Jul;67(7):1104-9
pubmed: 16889454
Br J Psychiatry. 1986 May;148:541-7
pubmed: 3779224
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(2):CD003689
pubmed: 15106212
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1960 Feb;23:56-62
pubmed: 14399272
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2007;23(2-3):103-8
pubmed: 17124389
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Oct 3;10:ED000142
pubmed: 31643080
Rehabil Nurs. 2006 Jan-Feb;31(1):10-4
pubmed: 16422039
Am J Psychiatry. 2003 Oct;160(10):1823-9
pubmed: 14514497
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1960 Sep;41:381-5
pubmed: 13848176
J Clin Nurs. 2000 Jul;9(4):507-15
pubmed: 11261130
Stroke. 2001 Mar;32(3):696-701
pubmed: 11239189
Psychiatry Res. 2018 Apr;262:363-372
pubmed: 28951141
Int Clin Psychopharmacol. 2011 Sep;26(5):263-7
pubmed: 21811172
Am J Psychiatry. 2003 Jun;160(6):1157-62
pubmed: 12777275
Pain. 1989 Jan;36(1):27-36
pubmed: 2465530
Arch Neurol. 1990 Jul;47(7):785-9
pubmed: 2357159
J Neurosci Nurs. 2008 Jun;40(3):173-9, 191
pubmed: 18578276
BMJ. 2004 Jun 19;328(7454):1490
pubmed: 15205295
Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2001;15(3):183-90
pubmed: 11944739
Br J Psychiatry. 2013 Jan;202(1):14-21
pubmed: 23284148
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2001 Aug;12(2):114-20
pubmed: 11490105
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2001 Jul;189(7):421-5
pubmed: 11504318
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2003;15(1-2):56-62
pubmed: 12499712
Br J Psychiatry. 1987 Jul;151:52-6
pubmed: 2960413
Cerebrovasc Dis. 2005;19(2):125-32
pubmed: 15644624
Top Stroke Rehabil. 1997 Spring;4(1):64-79
pubmed: 26368345
Psychosomatics. 2003 May-Jun;44(3):216-21
pubmed: 12724503
Stroke. 1995 May;26(5):843-9
pubmed: 7740578
Stroke. 2005 May;36(5):1098-103
pubmed: 15802637
Stroke. 2005 Jun;36(6):1330-40
pubmed: 15879342
Lancet Psychiatry. 2017 Jan;4(1):33-41
pubmed: 28012485
Int J Clin Pract. 2010 Aug;64(9):1310-7
pubmed: 20653802
Int Rehabil Med. 1985;7(4):176-81
pubmed: 4093249
Stroke. 2007 Mar;38(3):1004-9
pubmed: 17303766
Age Ageing. 1989 Nov;18(6):371-9
pubmed: 2629484
BMC Psychol. 2018 Apr 3;6(1):12
pubmed: 29615136
Am J Psychiatry. 2004 Aug;161(8):1506-7; author reply 1507-8
pubmed: 15285995
JAMA. 2008 May 28;299(20):2391-400
pubmed: 18505948
Clin Rehabil. 1997 Nov;11(4):293-301
pubmed: 9408669
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1992 Jun;73(6):573-81
pubmed: 1622308
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011 Sep-Oct;18(5):525-35
pubmed: 22082702
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Jan 28;1:CD003437
pubmed: 31989584
Stroke. 2006 Jan;37(1):156-61
pubmed: 16306470
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998 Sep;79(9):1047-50
pubmed: 9749682
Control Clin Trials. 1999 Oct;20(5):448-52
pubmed: 10503804

Auteurs

Sabine Allida (S)

Mental Health, The George Institute for Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.

Katherine Laura Cox (KL)

Mental Health, The George Institute for Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.

Cheng-Fang Hsieh (CF)

Division of Geriatrics and Gerontology, Department of Internal Medicine and Department of Neurology, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.

Allan House (A)

Division of Psychological and Social Medicine, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.

Maree L Hackett (ML)

Professor, Program Head, Mental Health, The George Institute for Global Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Faculty of Health and Wellbeing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH