The questionable efficacy of manualized psychological treatments for distressed breast cancer patients: An individual patient data meta-analysis.


Journal

Clinical psychology review
ISSN: 1873-7811
Titre abrégé: Clin Psychol Rev
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8111117

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 2020
Historique:
received: 26 06 2019
revised: 21 05 2020
accepted: 11 06 2020
pubmed: 4 7 2020
medline: 31 8 2021
entrez: 4 7 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Previous meta-analyses conclude that psychological treatments are efficacious for emotional distress in breast cancer (BCa). However, the practical relevance of these meta-analyses is questionable; none focused specifically on clinically distressed patients or whether treatment effects were clinically significant. In a two-stage individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of 17 randomized controlled trials of manualized psychological treatments in BCa, we evaluated treatment efficacy in distressed BCa patients (n = 1591) using clinical significance and effect size analyses. Outcomes were anxiety, depression, and general distress, evaluated at post-treatment and follow-up. Moderators examined were treatment type, treatment format, therapists' profession, control condition, age, outcome measure, and trial quality. Treated patients were more likely than controls to recover from anxiety and general distress at post-treatment (14-15% more treated patients recovered), but not at mean 8-months follow-up. Overall recovery rates were low: across outcomes, at post-treatment, only 30-32% of treated patients and 15-25% of controls recovered; at follow-up, only 21-30% of treated patients and 18-35% of controls recovered. Small between-group effect sizes in favour of treatment were found across outcomes at post-treatment (g = 0.32-0.34) but not at follow-up. Across the different analysis methods, few moderator effects were found. More efficacious psychological treatments are needed for distressed BCa patients.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32619813
pii: S0272-7358(20)30071-4
doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101883
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

101883

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest None.

Auteurs

James Temple (J)

Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Whelan Building, Liverpool, UK; Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK. Electronic address: James.Temple@liv.ac.uk.

Peter Salmon (P)

Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Whelan Building, Liverpool, UK; Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK.

Catrin Tudur Smith (C)

Department of Biostatistics, University of Liverpool, Waterhouse Building, Liverpool, UK.

Christopher D Huntley (CD)

Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Whelan Building, Liverpool, UK.

Angela Byrne (A)

Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, UK.

Peter L Fisher (PL)

Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Whelan Building, Liverpool, UK; Royal Liverpool and Broadgreen University Hospitals NHS Trust, Liverpool, 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