Management of post-traumatic stress disorder: A protocol for a multiple treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Journal
Medicine
ISSN: 1536-5964
Titre abrégé: Medicine (Baltimore)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 2985248R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2019
Sep 2019
Historique:
entrez:
3
10
2019
pubmed:
3
10
2019
medline:
9
10
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Most systematic reviews have explored the efficacy of treatments on symptoms associated with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which is a chronic and often disabling condition. Previous network meta-analysis (NMA) had limitations such as focusing on pharmacological or psychotherapies. Our review is aims to explore the relative effectiveness of both pharmacological and psychotherapies and we will establish the differential efficacy of interventions for PTSD in consideration of both symptom reduction and functional recovery. We will conduct a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating treatment interventions for PTSD. We will systematically search Medline, PILOT, Embase, CINHAL, AMED, Psychinfo, Health Star, DARE and CENTRAL to identify trials that: (1) enroll adult patients with PTSD, and (2) randomize them to alternative interventions or an intervention and a placebo/sham arm. Independent reviewers will screen trials for eligibility, assess risk of bias using a modified Cochrane instrument, and extract data. Our outcomes of interest include PTSD symptom reduction, quality of life, functional recovery, social and occupational impairment, return to work and all-cause drop outs. We will conduct frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis to assess relative effects of competing interventions. We will use a priori hypotheses to explore heterogeneity between studies, and assess the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. This network meta-analysis will determine the comparative effectiveness of therapeutic options for PTSD on both symptom reduction and functional recovery. Our results will be helpful to clinicians and patients with PTSD, by providing a high-quality evidence synthesis to guide shared-care decision making.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Most systematic reviews have explored the efficacy of treatments on symptoms associated with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), which is a chronic and often disabling condition. Previous network meta-analysis (NMA) had limitations such as focusing on pharmacological or psychotherapies. Our review is aims to explore the relative effectiveness of both pharmacological and psychotherapies and we will establish the differential efficacy of interventions for PTSD in consideration of both symptom reduction and functional recovery.
METHODS
METHODS
We will conduct a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating treatment interventions for PTSD. We will systematically search Medline, PILOT, Embase, CINHAL, AMED, Psychinfo, Health Star, DARE and CENTRAL to identify trials that: (1) enroll adult patients with PTSD, and (2) randomize them to alternative interventions or an intervention and a placebo/sham arm. Independent reviewers will screen trials for eligibility, assess risk of bias using a modified Cochrane instrument, and extract data. Our outcomes of interest include PTSD symptom reduction, quality of life, functional recovery, social and occupational impairment, return to work and all-cause drop outs.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We will conduct frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis to assess relative effects of competing interventions. We will use a priori hypotheses to explore heterogeneity between studies, and assess the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This network meta-analysis will determine the comparative effectiveness of therapeutic options for PTSD on both symptom reduction and functional recovery. Our results will be helpful to clinicians and patients with PTSD, by providing a high-quality evidence synthesis to guide shared-care decision making.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31574805
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000017064
pii: 00005792-201909270-00014
pmc: PMC6775348
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e17064Références
Stein DJ, McLaughlin KA, Koenen KC, et al. DSM-5 and ICD-11 definitions of posttraumatic stress disorder: investigating “narrow” and “broad” approaches. Depress Anxiety 2014;31:494–505.
Pai A, Suris AM, North CS. Posttraumatic stress disorder in the DSM-5: controversy, change, and conceptual considerations. Behav Sci (Basel) 2017;7:7.
American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed.Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013.
Ehlers A, Clark DM. A cognitive model of posttraumatic stress disorder. Behav Res Ther 2000;38:319–45.
Armour C, Karstoft KI, Richardson JD. The co-occurrence of PTSD and dissociation: differentiating severe PTSD from dissociative-PTSD. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 2014;49:1297–306.
Blevins CA, Weathers FW, Witte TK. Dissociation and posttraumatic stress disorder: a latent profile analysis. J Trauma Stress 2014;27:388–96.
Frewen PA, Brown MFD, Steuwe C, et al. Latent profile analysis and principal axis factoring of the DSM-5 dissociative subtype. Eur J Psychotraumatol 2015;6:26406.
Lanius RA, Brand B, Vermetten E, et al. The dissociative subtype of posttraumatic stress disorder: rationale, clinical and neurobiological evidence, and implications. Depress Anxiety 2012;29:701–8.
Lanius RA, Vermetten E, Loewenstein RJ, et al. Emotion modulation in PTSD: clinical and neurobiological evidence for a dissociative subtype. Am J Psychiatry 2010;167:640–7.
Putnam FW, Carlson EB, Ross CA, et al. Patterns of dissociation in clinical and nonclinical samples. J Nerv Ment Dis 1996;184:673–9.
Spiegel D, Lewis-Fernández R, Lanius R, et al. Dissociative disorders in DSM-5. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 2013;9:299–326.
Steuwe C, Lanius RA, Frewen PA. Evidence for a dissociative subtype of PTSD by latent profile and confirmatory factor analyses in a civilian sample. Depress Anxiety 2012;29:689–700.
Tsai J, Armour C, Southwick SM, et al. Dissociative subtype of DSM-5 posttraumatic stress disorder in U.S. veterans. J Psychiatr Res 2015;66-67:67–74.
Wolf EJ, Lunney CA, Miller MW, et al. The dissociative subtype of PTSD: a replication and extension. Depress Anxiety 2012;29:679–88.
Wolf EJ, Miller MW, Reardon AF, et al. A latent class analysis of dissociation and posttraumatic stress disorder: evidence for a dissociative subtype. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2012;69:698–705.
Ameringen M, Mancini C, Patterson B, et al. Post-traumatic stress disorder in Canada. CNS Neurosci Ther 2008;14:171–81.
Brunellos N, Davidson JRT, Deahl M, et al. Posttraumatic stress disorder: diagnosis and epidemiology, comorbidity, and social consequences, biology and treatment. Neuropsychobiology 2001;43:150–62.
Corneil W, Beaton R, Murphy S, et al. Exposure to traumatic incidents and prevalence of posttraumatic stress symptomatology in urban firefighters in two countries. J Occup Health Psychol 1999;4:131–41.
Bryant RA, Harvey AG. Posttraumatic stress reactions in volunteer firefighters. J Trauma Stress 1996;9:51–62.
Vedantham K, Brunet A, Boyer R, et al. Posttraumatic stress disorder, trauma exposure, and the current health of Canadian bus drivers. Can J Psychiatry 2001;46:149–55.
Hull AM, Alexander DA, Klein S. Survivors of the Piper Alpha oil platform disaster: long-term follow-up study. Br J Psychiatry 2002;181:433–8.
Kunst MJ. Employment status and posttraumatic stress disorder following compensation seeking in victims of violence. J Interpers Violence 2011;26:377–93.
Matthews LR. Work potential of road accident survivors with post-traumatic stress disorder. Behav Res Ther 2005;43:475–83.
Wald J. Work limitations in employed persons seeking treatment for chronic posttraumatic stress disorder. J Trauma Stress 2009;18:312–5.
Dewa C, Keefe V, Small K. Choosing to work when sick: workplace presenteeism. Soc Sci Med 2005;60:2273–82.
Amaya-Jackson L, Davidson JR, Hughes DS, et al. Functional impairment and utilization of services associated with post traumatic stress in the community. J Trauma Stress 1999;12:709–24.
Breslau N. Outcomes of posttraumatic stress disorder. J Clin Psychiatr 2001;62(Suppl 17):55–9.
Wilson S, Guliani H, Boichev G. On the economics of post-traumatic stress disorder among first responders in Canada. J Commun Safety Well-Being 2016;1:26–31.
MacDonald HA, Colotla V, Flamer S, et al. Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in the workplace: a descriptive study of workers experiencing PTSD resulting from work injury. J Occup Rehabil 2003;13:63–77.
Friedland JF, Dawson DR. Function after motor vehicle accidents: a prospective study of mild head injury and posttraumatic stress. J Nerv Ment Dis 2001;189:426–34.
Amoroso T, Workman M. Treating posttraumatic stress disorder with MDMA-assisted psychotherapy: a preliminary meta-analysis and comparison to prolonged exposure therapy. J Psychopharmacol 2016;30:595–600.
Cusack K, Jonas DE, Forneris CA, et al. Psychological treatments for adults with posttraumatic stress disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev 2016;43:128–41.
George KC, Kebejian L, Ruth LJ, et al. Meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of prazosin versus placebo for the treatment of nightmares and sleep disturbances in adults with post-traumatic stress disorder. J Trauma Dissociation 2016;17:494–510.
Gu W, Wang C, Li Z, et al. Pharmacotherapies for posttraumatic stress disorder: a meta-analysis. J Nerv Ment Dis 2016;204:331–8.
Kuester A, Niemeyer H, Knaevelsrud C. Internet-based interventions for posttraumatic stress: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Psychol Rev 2016;43:1–6.
O’Toole SK, Solomon SL, Bergdahl SA. A meta-analysis of hypnotherapeutic techniques in the treatment of PTSD symptoms. J Trauma Stress 2016;29:97–100.
Trevizol AP, Barros MD, Silva PO, et al. Transcranial magnetic stimulation for posttraumatic stress disorder: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Trends Psychiatry Psychother 2016;38:50–5.
Cipriani A, Williams T, Nikolakopoulou A, et al. Comparative efficacy and acceptability of pharmacological treatments for post-traumatic stress disorder in adults: a network meta-analysis. Psychol Med 2018;48:1975–84.
Gerger H, Munder T, Gemperli A, et al. Integrating fragmented evidence by network meta-analysis: relative effectiveness of psychological interventions for adults with post-traumatic stress disorder. Psychol Med 2014;44:3151–64.
Hutton B, Salanti G, Caldwell DM, et al. The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med 2015;162:777–84.
Weathers FW, Bovin MJ, Lee DJ, et al. The clinician-administered PTSD scale for DSM-5 (CAPS-5): development and initial psychometric evaluation in military veterans. Psychol Assess 2018;30:383–95.
Weathers FW, Keane TM, Davidson JR. Clinician administered PTSD scale: a review of the first ten years of research. Depress Anxiety 2001;13:132–56.
Blake DD, Weathers FW, Nagy LM, et al. A clinician rating scale for assessing current and lifetime PTSD: the CAPS-1. Behavior Therapist 1990;13:187–8.
Blanchard EB, Jones-Alexander J, Buckley TC, et al. Psychometric properties of the PTSD Checklist (PCL). Behav Res Ther 1996;34:669–73.
Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-item short-form health survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care 1996;34:220–3.
WHOQoL Group. WHOQoL-Brief: Introduction, Administration, Scoring, and Generic Version of the Assessment. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1996.
Stevanovic D. Quality of life enjoyment and satisfaction questionnaire – short form for quality of life assessments in clinical practice: a psychometric study. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 2011;18:744–50.
Sheehan DV, Lecrubier Y, Sheehan KH, et al. The mini-international neuropsychiatric interview (M.I.N. I. ): the development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. J Clin Psychiatry 1998;59(Suppl 20):22–33.
Akl EA, Sun X, Busse JW, et al. Specific instructions for estimating unclearly reported blinding status in randomized trials were reliable and valid. J Clin Epidemiol 2012;65:262–7.
The Cochrane Collaboration, Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version [5.1.0] (updated March 2011). 2011.
Dechartres A, Altman DG, Trinquart L, et al. Association between analytic strategy and estimates of treatment outcomes in meta-analyses. JAMA 2014;312:623–30.
Thorlund K, Walter SD, Johnston BC, et al. Pooling health-related quality of life outcomes in meta-analysis-a tutorial and review of methods for enhancing interpretability. Res Synth Methods 2011;2:188–203.
Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from: www.handbook.cochrane.org. Accessed July 31, 2019.
Hozo SP, Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol 2005;5:13doi:10.1186/1471-2288-5-13.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-5-13
Jackson D, Bowden J, Baker R. How does the DerSimonian and Laird procedure for random effects meta-analysis compare with its more efficient but harder to compute counterparts? J Stat Plan Infer 2010;140:961–70.
Chaimani A, Salanti G. Visualizing assumptions and results in network meta-analysis: the network graphs package. Stata J 2015;15:905–50.
White IR. Network meta-analysis. Stata J 2015;15:951–85.
Chaimani A, Higgins JP, Mavridis D, et al. Graphical tools for network meta-analysis in STATA. PLoS One 2013;8:e76654.
White IR, Barrett JK, Jackson D, et al. Consistency and inconsistency in network-meta analysis: model estimation using multivariate meta-regression. Res Syn Meth 2012;3:111–25.
Donegan S, Williamson P, D’Alessandro U, et al. Assessing key assumptions of network meta-analysis: a review of methods. Res Synth Methods 2013;4:291–323.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008;336:924–6.
Puhan MA, Schunemann HJ, Murad MH, et al. A GRADE Working Group approach for rating the quality of treatment effect estimates from network meta-analysis. BMJ 2014;349:g5630.
Brignardello-Petersen R, Bonner A, Alexander PE, et al. Advances in the GRADE approach to rate the certainty in estimates from a network meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2018;93:36–44.
Harbord RM, Harris RJ, Sterne JAC, et al. Updated tests for small-study effects in meta-analyses. Stata J 2009;9:197–210.