17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Effects of cognitive behavioural therapy for depression in heart failure patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) on depression, quality of life, hospitalisations and mortality in heart failure patients. The search strategy was developed for Ovid MEDLINE and modified accordingly to search the following bibliographic databases: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CENTRAL and CINAHL. Databases were searched from inception to 6 March 2016 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies that used CBT in heart failure patients with depression or depressive symptoms. Six studies were identified: 5 RCTs and 1 observational study, comprising 320 participants with predominantly NYHA classes II-III, who were mostly male, with mean age ranging from 55 to 66 years. Compared to usual care, CBT was associated with a greater improvement in depression scores both initially after CBT sessions (standardised mean difference −0.34, 95% CI −0.60 to −0.08, p = 0.01) and at 3 months follow-up (standardised mean difference −0.32, 95% CI −0.59 to −0.04, p = 0.03). Greater improvement in quality of life scores was evident for the CBT group initially after CBT sessions, but with no difference at 3 months. Hospital admissions and mortality were similar, regardless of treatment group. CBT may be more effective than usual care at improving depression scores and quality of life for heart failure patients initially following CBT and for depression at 3 months. Larger and more robust RCTs are needed to evaluate the long-term clinical effects of CBT in heart failure patients.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s10741-017-9640-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Testing a tool for assessing the risk of bias for nonrandomized studies showed moderate reliability and promising validity.

          To develop and validate a new risk-of-bias tool for nonrandomized studies (NRSs). We developed the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized Studies (RoBANS). A validation process with 39 NRSs examined the reliability (interrater agreement), validity (the degree of correlation between the overall assessments of RoBANS and Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies [MINORS], obtained by plotting the overall risk of bias relative to effect size and funding source), face validity with eight experts, and completion time for the RoBANS approach. RoBANS contains six domains: the selection of participants, confounding variables, the measurement of exposure, the blinding of the outcome assessments, incomplete outcome data, and selective outcome reporting. The interrater agreement of the RoBANS tool except the measurement of exposure and selective outcome reporting domains ranged from fair to substantial. There was a moderate correlation between the overall risks of bias determined using RoBANS and MINORS. The observed differences in effect sizes and funding sources among the assessed studies were not correlated with the overall risk of bias in these studies. The mean time required to complete RoBANS was approximately 10 min. The external experts who were interviewed evaluated RoBANS as a "fair" assessment tool. RoBANS shows moderate reliability, promising feasibility, and validity. The further refinement of this tool and larger validation studies are required. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Depression in heart failure a meta-analytic review of prevalence, intervention effects, and associations with clinical outcomes.

            This article describes a meta-analysis of published associations between depression and heart failure (HF) in regard to 3 questions: 1) What is the prevalence of depression among patients with HF? 2) What is the magnitude of the relationship between depression and clinical outcomes in the HF population? 3) What is the evidence for treatment effectiveness in reducing depression in HF patients? Key word searches of the Medline and PsycInfo databases, as well as reference searches in published HF and depression articles, identified 36 publications meeting our criteria. Clinically significant depression was present in 21.5% of HF patients, and varied by the use of questionnaires versus diagnostic interview (33.6% and 19.3%, respectively) and New York Heart Association-defined HF severity (11% in class I vs. 42% in class IV), among other factors. Combined results suggested higher rates of death and secondary events (risk ratio = 2.1, 95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.6), trends toward increased health care use, and higher rates of hospitalization and emergency room visits among depressed patients. Treatment studies generally relied on small samples, but also suggested depression symptom reductions from a variety of interventions. In sum, clinically significant depression is present in at least 1 in 5 patients with HF; however, depression rates can be much higher among patients screened with questionnaires or with more advanced HF. The relationship between depression and poorer HF outcomes is consistent and strong across multiple end points. These findings reinforce the importance of psychosocial research in HF populations and identify a number of areas for future study.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Effects of treating depression and low perceived social support on clinical events after myocardial infarction: the Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease Patients (ENRICHD) Randomized Trial.

              Depression and low perceived social support (LPSS) after myocardial infarction (MI) are associated with higher morbidity and mortality, but little is known about whether this excess risk can be reduced through treatment. To determine whether mortality and recurrent infarction are reduced by treatment of depression and LPSS with cognitive behavior therapy (CBT), supplemented with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant when indicated, in patients enrolled within 28 days after MI. Randomized clinical trial conducted from October 1996 to April 2001 in 2481 MI patients (1084 women, 1397 men) enrolled from 8 clinical centers. Major or minor depression was diagnosed by modified Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria and severity by the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD); LPSS was determined by the Enhancing Recovery in Coronary Heart Disease Patients (ENRICHD) Social Support Instrument (ESSI). Random allocation was to usual medical care or CBT-based psychosocial intervention. Cognitive behavior therapy was initiated at a median of 17 days after the index MI for a median of 11 individual sessions throughout 6 months, plus group therapy when feasible, with SSRIs for patients scoring higher than 24 on the HRSD or having a less than 50% reduction in Beck Depression Inventory scores after 5 weeks. Composite primary end point of death or recurrent MI; secondary outcomes included change in HRSD (for depression) or ESSI scores (for LPSS) at 6 months. Improvement in psychosocial outcomes at 6 months favored treatment: mean (SD) change in HRSD score, -10.1 (7.8) in the depression and psychosocial intervention group vs -8.4 (7.7) in the depression and usual care group (P<.001); mean (SD) change in ESSI score, 5.1 (5.9) in the LPSS and psychosocial intervention group vs 3.4 (6.0) in the LPSS and usual care group (P<.001). After an average follow-up of 29 months, there was no significant difference in event-free survival between usual care (75.9%) and psychosocial intervention (75.8%). There were also no differences in survival between the psychosocial intervention and usual care arms in any of the 3 psychosocial risk groups (depression, LPSS, and depression and LPSS patients). The intervention did not increase event-free survival. The intervention improved depression and social isolation, although the relative improvement in the psychosocial intervention group compared with the usual care group was less than expected due to substantial improvement in usual care patients.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +44 121-507-5080 , deirdrelane@nhs.net
                Journal
                Heart Fail Rev
                Heart Fail Rev
                Heart Failure Reviews
                Springer US (New York )
                1382-4147
                1573-7322
                22 July 2017
                22 July 2017
                2017
                : 22
                : 6
                : 731-741
                Affiliations
                [1 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7486, GRID grid.6572.6, The Medical School, , University of Birmingham, ; Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT UK
                [2 ]ISNI 0000 0004 0399 8742, GRID grid.412918.7, University of Birmingham Institute of Cardiovascular Sciences, , City Hospital, Sandwell and West Birmingham Hospitals NHS Trust, ; Dudley Road, Birmingham, B18 7QH UK
                [3 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 7857, GRID grid.1002.3, Monash University Centre of Cardiovascular Research and Education in Therapeutics, ; Melbourne, Australia
                [4 ]ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8438, GRID grid.266539.d, University of Kentucky, ; Lexington, KY USA
                [5 ]ISNI 0000 0001 0742 471X, GRID grid.5117.2, Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit, Department of Clinical Medicine, , Aalborg University, ; Aalborg, Denmark
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5604-9378
                Article
                9640
                10.1007/s10741-017-9640-5
                5635071
                28733911
                8a3a441e-c930-40e9-b68f-9b59324b7a0c
                © The Author(s) 2017

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                Funding
                Funded by: University of Birmingham
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

                Cardiovascular Medicine
                cognitive behavioural therapy,depression,heart failure,meta-analysis,quality of life,systematic review

                Comments

                Comment on this article