Effects of psychosocial support interventions on survival in inpatient and outpatient healthcare settings: A meta-analysis of 106 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Hospitals, clinics, and health organizations have provided psychosocial support interventions for medical patients to supplement curative care. Prior reviews of interventions augmenting psychosocial support in medical settings have reported mixed outcomes. This meta-analysis addresses the questions of how effective are psychosocial support interventions in improving patient survival and which potential moderating features are associated with greater effectiveness. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of psychosocial support interventions in inpatient and outpatient healthcare settings reporting survival data, including studies reporting disease-related or all-cause mortality. Literature searches included studies reported January 1980 through October 2020 accessed from Embase, Medline, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Alt HealthWatch, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, and Google Scholar databases. At least 2 reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and assessed study quality, with at least 2 independent reviewers also extracting data and assessing study quality. Odds ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) data were analyzed separately using random effects weighted models. Of 42,054 studies searched, 106 RCTs including 40,280 patients met inclusion criteria. Patient average age was 57.2 years, with 52% females and 48% males; 42% had cardiovascular disease (CVD), 36% had cancer, and 22% had other conditions. Across 87 RCTs reporting data for discrete time periods, the average was OR = 1.20 (95% CI = 1.09 to 1.31, p < 0.001), indicating a 20% increased likelihood of survival among patients receiving psychosocial support compared to control groups receiving standard medical care. Among those studies, psychosocial interventions explicitly promoting health behaviors yielded improved likelihood of survival, whereas interventions without that primary focus did not. Across 22 RCTs reporting survival time, the average was HR = 1.29 (95% CI = 1.12 to 1.49, p < 0.001), indicating a 29% increased probability of survival over time among intervention recipients compared to controls. Among those studies, meta-regressions identified 3 moderating variables: control group type, patient disease severity, and risk of research bias. Studies in which control groups received health information/classes in addition to treatment as usual (TAU) averaged weaker effects than those in which control groups received only TAU. Studies with patients having relatively greater disease severity tended to yield smaller gains in survival time relative to control groups. In one of 3 analyses, studies with higher risk of research bias tended to report better outcomes. The main limitation of the data is that interventions very rarely blinded personnel and participants to study arm, such that expectations for improvement were not controlled. CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis, OR data indicated that psychosocial behavioral support interventions promoting patient motivation/coping to engage in health behaviors improved patient survival, but interventions focusing primarily on patients' social or emotional outcomes did not prolong life. HR data indicated that psychosocial interventions, predominantly focused on social or emotional outcomes, improved survival but yielded similar effects to health information/classes and were less effective among patients with apparently greater disease severity. Risk of research bias remains a plausible threat to data interpretation.

Cognitive and attentional vulnerability to depression in youth: A review.

Although depressive disorders are among the most common disorders in youth, highly efficacious treatments for childhood affective disorders are lacking. There is significant need to better understand the factors that contribute to the development and maintenance of depression in youth so that treatments can be targeted at optimal mechanisms. The aim of the current paper was to synthesize research on cognitive and neurobiological factors associated with youth depression, guided by De Raedt and Koster's model (2010) for vulnerability to depression in adults. Consistent with model predictions, there is evidence that attentional impairments are greatest in the context of negative information, relative to positive or neutral information, and some evidence that attentional deficits are associated with rumination in depressed youth. However, we found little evidence for the model's assumption that attentional bias is an etiological and maintenance factor for depression. There are several other model predictions that require additional study as current data are lacking. Overall, De Raedt and Koster's (2010) integrative cognitive and biological framework has tremendous potential to move the field forward in understanding the development of depression in youth. Additional longitudinal studies incorporating measures across biological and cognitive levels of analysis are needed.

Sticking with it: Psychotherapy outcomes for adults with autism spectrum disorder in a university counseling center setting.

Young adults with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) experience high rates of comorbid mental health concerns in addition to distress arising from the core symptoms of autism. Many adults with ASD seek psychological treatment in outpatient facilities in their communities that are not specifically geared toward individuals with ASD. However, few studies have looked at the effectiveness of standard psychotherapeutic care in adults with ASD. This study aimed to discover how individuals with ASD fare in psychotherapy within a college counseling setting, compared to their neurotypical peers. Clients with ASD (n = 76) or possible ASD (n = 91) were retrospectively identified from counseling center case notes. Data from the Outcome Questionnaire-45 (OQ) were retrieved for each therapy session as a measure of client distress. Clients with ASD showed no difference in level of distress at intake compared to their neurotypical peers (n = 21,546), and improved about the same amount from pre- to post-treatment. However, students with ASD stayed in treatment for significantly more sessions than neurotypical clients, and took significantly longer to achieve maximum improvement on OQ reports. Results are discussed with implications for university and other community based treatment settings. Autism Res 2017, 10: 2048-2055. © 2017 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. LAY SUMMARY: This study aimed to discover how individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) fare in psychotherapy within a university counseling setting, compared to their neurotypical peers. Clients with ASD showed no difference in level of distress at intake compared to their neurotypical peers, and improved about the same amount from pre- to post-treatment. However, students with ASD stayed in treatment for significantly more sessions than neurotypical clients, and took significantly longer to achieve maximum improvement on Outcome Questionnaire-45 reports.