Mindfulness-based interventions for people diagnosed with a current episode of an anxiety or depressive disorder: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
TL;DR: Effects of MBIs on primary symptom severity were found for people with a current depressive disorder and it is recommended that MBI’s might be considered as an intervention for this population.
Abstract: Objective
Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) can reduce risk of depressive relapse for people with a history of recurrent depression who are currently well. However, the cognitive, affective and motivational features of depression and anxiety might render MBIs ineffective for people experiencing current symptoms. This paper presents a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of MBIs where participants met diagnostic criteria for a current episode of an anxiety or depressive disorder.
Method
Post-intervention between-group Hedges g effect sizes were calculated using a random effects model. Moderator analyses of primary diagnosis, intervention type and control condition were conducted and publication bias was assessed.
Results
Twelve studies met inclusion criteria (n = 578). There were significant post-intervention between-group benefits of MBIs relative to control conditions on primary symptom severity (Hedges g = −0.59, 95% CI = −0.12 to −1.06). Effects were demonstrated for depressive symptom severity (Hedges g = −0.73, 95% CI = −0.09 to −1.36), but not for anxiety symptom severity (Hedges g = −0.55, 95% CI = 0.09 to −1.18), for RCTs with an inactive control (Hedges g = −1.03, 95% CI = −0.40 to −1.66), but not where there was an active control (Hedges g = 0.03, 95% CI = 0.54 to −0.48) and effects were found for MBCT (Hedges g = −0.39, 95% CI = −0.15 to −0.63) but not for MBSR (Hedges g = −0.75, 95% CI = 0.31 to −1.81).
Conclusions
This is the first meta-analysis of RCTs of MBIs where all studies included only participants who were diagnosed with a current episode of a depressive or anxiety disorder. Effects of MBIs on primary symptom severity were found for people with a current depressive disorder and it is recommended that MBIs might be considered as an intervention for this population.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: This review identified strong, consistentevidence for cognitive and emotional reactivity, moderate and consistent evidence for mindfulness, rumination, and worry, and preliminary but insufficient evidence for self-compassion and psychological flexibility as mechanisms underlying MBIs.
1,158 citations
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai1, Vanderbilt University Medical Center2, Southern California University of Health Sciences3, University of California, Davis4, University of Massachusetts Medical School5, Harvard University6, Brown University7, New York University8, Stanford University9, Princeton University10, West Virginia University11, University of Michigan12
TL;DR: The difficulties of defining mindfulness are discussed, the proper scope of research into mindfulness practices is delineated, and crucial methodological issues for interpreting results from investigations of mindfulness are explained.
Abstract: During the past two decades, mindfulness meditation has gone from being a fringe topic of scientific investigation to being an occasional replacement for psychotherapy, tool of corporate well-being, widely implemented educational practice, and "key to building more resilient soldiers." Yet the mindfulness movement and empirical evidence supporting it have not gone without criticism. Misinformation and poor methodology associated with past studies of mindfulness may lead public consumers to be harmed, misled, and disappointed. Addressing such concerns, the present article discusses the difficulties of defining mindfulness, delineates the proper scope of research into mindfulness practices, and explicates crucial methodological issues for interpreting results from investigations of mindfulness. For doing so, the authors draw on their diverse areas of expertise to review the present state of mindfulness research, comprehensively summarizing what we do and do not know, while providing a prescriptive agenda for contemplative science, with a particular focus on assessment, mindfulness training, possible adverse effects, and intersection with brain imaging. Our goals are to inform interested scientists, the news media, and the public, to minimize harm, curb poor research practices, and staunch the flow of misinformation about the benefits, costs, and future prospects of mindfulness meditation.
847 citations
TL;DR: It is shown that online MBIs have potential to contribute to improving mental health outcomes, particularly stress, and that effect sizes for stress were significantly moderated by the number of intervention sessions.
605 citations
Cites result from "Mindfulness-based interventions for..."
...While this finding is in line with previous meta-analyses investigating the effects of MBIs (Bohlmeijer et al., 2010; Hofmann et al., 2010; Klainin-Yobas et al., 2012; Powers, Zum Vörde Sive Vörding, & Emmelkamp, 2009; Strauss et al., 2014; Veehof et al., 2011), there are also meta-analyses which indicate that higher quality studies yield smaller effect sizes (A-Tjak et al....
[...]
...…et al., 2010; Cavanagh, Strauss, Forder, & Jones, 2014; Cramer et al., 2012; Hofmann, Sawyer, Witt, & Oh, 2010; Khoury et al., 2015; Klainin-Yobas et al., 2012; McCarney et al., 2012; Piet et al., 2012; Strauss et al., 2014; Veehof et al., 2011; Vøllestad et al., 2012; Zainal et al., 2013)....
[...]
...…the effects of MBIs (Bohlmeijer et al., 2010; Hofmann et al., 2010; Klainin-Yobas et al., 2012; Powers, Zum Vörde Sive Vörding, & Emmelkamp, 2009; Strauss et al., 2014; Veehof et al., 2011), there are also meta-analyses which indicate that higher quality studies yield smaller effect sizes…...
[...]
TL;DR: The evidence supports the use of MBSR and MBCT to alleviate symptoms, both mental and physical, in the adjunct treatment of cancer, cardiovascular disease, chronic pain, depression, anxiety disorders and in prevention in healthy adults and children.
Abstract: Background Mindfulness-based therapies are being used in a wide range of common chronic conditions in both treatment and prevention despite lack of consensus about their effectiveness in different patient categories. Objective To systematically review the evidence of effectiveness MBSR and MBCT in different patient categories. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of systematic reviews of RCTs, using the standardized MBSR or MBCT programs. We used PRISMA guidelines to assess the quality of the included reviews and performed a random effects meta-analysis with main outcome measure Cohen's d. All types of participants were considered. Results The search produced 187 reviews: 23 were included, covering 115 unique RCTs and 8,683 unique individuals with various conditions. Compared to wait list control and compared to treatment as usual, MBSR and MBCT significantly improved depressive symptoms (d=0.37; 95%CI 0.28 to 0.45, based on 5 reviews, N=2814), anxiety (d=0.49; 95%CI 0.37 to 0.61, based on 4 reviews, N=2525), stress (d=0.51; 95%CI 0.36 to 0.67, based on 2 reviews, N=1570), quality of life (d=0.39; 95%CI 0.08 to 0.70, based on 2 reviews, N=511) and physical functioning (d=0.27; 95%CI 0.12 to 0.42, based on 3 reviews, N=1015). Limitations include heterogeneity within patient categories, risk of publication bias and limited long-term follow-up in several studies. Conclusion The evidence supports the use of MBSR and MBCT to alleviate symptoms, both mental and physical, in the adjunct treatment of cancer, cardiovascular disease, chronic pain, depression, anxiety disorders and in prevention in healthy adults and children.
480 citations
Cites methods from "Mindfulness-based interventions for..."
...Compared with WL and TAU there was a very large effect on symptom severity, however compared with active treatment this effect almost disappeared[34]....
[...]
TL;DR: The treatment principles of MBIs for anxiety and depression are compatible with standard CBT and consistently outperform non-evidence-based treatments and active control conditions, such as health education, relaxation training, and supportive psychotherapy.
283 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: An issue concerning the criteria for tic disorders is highlighted, and how this might affect classification of dyskinesias in psychotic spectrum disorders.
Abstract: Given the recent attention to movement abnormalities in psychosis spectrum disorders (e.g., prodromal/high-risk syndromes, schizophrenia) (Mittal et al., 2008; Pappa and Dazzan, 2009), and an ongoing discussion pertaining to revisions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel of Mental Disorders (DSM) for the upcoming 5th edition, we would like to take this opportunity to highlight an issue concerning the criteria for tic disorders, and how this might affect classification of dyskinesias in psychotic spectrum disorders.
Rapid, non-rhythmic, abnormal movements can appear in psychosis spectrum disorders, as well as in a host of commonly co-occurring conditions, including Tourette’s Syndrome and Transient Tic Disorder (Kerbeshian et al., 2009). Confusion can arise when it becomes necessary to determine whether an observed movement (e.g., a sudden head jerk) represents a spontaneous dyskinesia (i.e., spontaneous transient chorea, athetosis, dystonia, ballismus involving muscle groups of the arms, legs, trunk, face, and/or neck) or a tic (i.e., stereotypic or patterned movements defined by the relationship to voluntary movement, acute and chronic time course, and sensory urges). Indeed, dyskinetic movements such as dystonia (i.e., sustained muscle contractions, usually producing twisting and repetitive movements or abnormal postures or positions) closely resemble tics in a patterned appearance, and may only be visually discernable by attending to timing differences (Gilbert, 2006).
When turning to the current DSM-IV TR for clarification, the description reads: “Tic Disorders must be distinguished from other types of abnormal movements that may accompany general medical conditions (e.g., Huntington’s disease, stroke, Lesch-Nyhan syndrome, Wilson’s disease, Sydenham’s chorea, multiple sclerosis, postviral encephalitis, head injury) and from abnormal movements that are due to the direct effects of a substance (e.g., a neuroleptic medication)”. However, as it is written, it is unclear if psychosis falls under one such exclusionary medical disorder. The “direct effects of a substance” criteria, referencing neuroleptic medications, further contributes to the uncertainty around this issue. As a result, ruling-out or differentiating tics in psychosis spectrum disorders is at best, a murky endeavor.
Historically, the advent of antipsychotic medication in the 1950s has contributed to the confusion about movement signs in psychiatric populations. Because neuroleptic medications produce characteristic movement disorder in some patients (i.e. extrapyramidal side effects), drug-induced movement disturbances have been the focus of research attention in psychotic disorders. However, accumulating data have documented that spontaneous dyskinesias, including choreoathetodic movements, can occur in medication naive adults with schizophrenia spectrum disorders (Pappa and Dazzan, 2009), as well as healthy first-degree relatives of chronically ill schizophrenia patients (McCreadie et al., 2003). Taken together, this suggests that movement abnormalities may reflect pathogenic processes underlying some psychotic disorders (Mittal et al., 2008; Pappa and Dazzan, 2009).
More specifically, because spontaneous hyperkinetic movements are believed to reflect abnormal striatal dopamine activity (DeLong and Wichmann, 2007), and dysfunction in this same circuit is also proposed to contribute to psychosis, it is possible that spontaneous dyskinesias serve as an outward manifestation of circuit dysfunction underlying some schizophrenia-spectrum symptoms (Walker, 1994). Further, because these movements precede the clinical onset of psychotic symptoms, sometimes occurring in early childhood (Walker, 1994), and may steadily increase during adolescence among populations at high-risk for schizophrenia (Mittal et al., 2008), observable dyskinesias could reflect a susceptibility that later interacts with environmental and neurodevelopmental factors, in the genesis of psychosis.
In adolescents who meet criteria for a prodromal syndrome (i.e., the period preceding formal onset of psychotic disorders characterized by subtle attenuated positive symptoms coupled with a decline in functioning), there is sometimes a history of childhood conditions which are also characterized by suppressible tics or tic like movements (Niendam et al., 2009). On the other hand, differentiating between tics and dyskinesias has also complicated research on childhood disorders such as Tourette syndrome (Kompoliti and Goetz, 1998; Gilbert, 2006).
We propose consideration of more explicit and operationalized criteria for differentiating tics and dyskinesias, based on empirically derived understanding of neural mechanisms. Further, revisions of the DSM should allow for the possibility that movement abnormalities might reflect neuropathologic processes underlying the etiology of psychosis for a subgroup of patients. Psychotic disorders might also be included among the medical disorders that are considered a rule-out for tics.
Related to this, the reliability of movement assessment needs to be improved, and this may require more training for mental health professionals in movement symptoms. Although standardized assessment of movement and neurological abnormalities is common in research settings, it has been proposed that an examination of neuromotor signs should figure in the assessment of any patient, and be as much a part of the patient assessment as the mental state examination (Picchioni and Dazzan, 2009).
To this end it is important for researchers and clinicians to be aware of differentiating characteristics for these two classes of abnormal movement. For example, tics tend to be more complex than myoclonic twitches, and less flowing than choreoathetodic movements (Kompoliti and Goetz, 1998). Patients with tics often describe a sensory premonition or urge to perform a tic, and the ability to postpone tics at the cost of rising inner tension (Gilbert, 2006). For example, one study showed that patients with tic disorders could accurately distinguish tics from other movement abnormalities based on the subjective experience of some voluntary control of tics (Lang, 1991). Another differentiating factor derives from the relationship of the movement in question to other voluntary movements. Tics in one body area rarely occur during purposeful and voluntary movements in that same body area whereas dyskinesia are often exacerbated by voluntary movement (Gilbert, 2006). Finally, it is noteworthy that tics wax and wane in frequency and intensity and migrate in location over time, often becoming more complex and peaking between the ages of 9 and 14 years (Gilbert, 2006). In the case of dyskinesias among youth at-risk for psychosis, there is evidence that the movements tend to increase in severity and frequency as the individual approaches the mean age of conversion to schizophrenia spectrum disorders (Mittal et al., 2008).
As revisions to the DSM are currently underway in preparation for the new edition (DSM V), we encourage greater attention to the important, though often subtle, distinctions among subtypes of movement abnormalities and their association with psychiatric syndromes.
67,017 citations
TL;DR: Moher et al. as mentioned in this paper introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, which is used in this paper.
Abstract: David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
62,157 citations
Journal Article•
TL;DR: The QUOROM Statement (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) as mentioned in this paper was developed to address the suboptimal reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Abstract: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become increasingly important in health care. Clinicians read them to keep up to date with their field,1,2 and they are often used as a starting point for developing clinical practice guidelines. Granting agencies may require a systematic review to ensure there is justification for further research,3 and some health care journals are moving in this direction.4 As with all research, the value of a systematic review depends on what was done, what was found, and the clarity of reporting. As with other publications, the reporting quality of systematic reviews varies, limiting readers' ability to assess the strengths and weaknesses of those reviews.
Several early studies evaluated the quality of review reports. In 1987, Mulrow examined 50 review articles published in 4 leading medical journals in 1985 and 1986 and found that none met all 8 explicit scientific criteria, such as a quality assessment of included studies.5 In 1987, Sacks and colleagues6 evaluated the adequacy of reporting of 83 meta-analyses on 23 characteristics in 6 domains. Reporting was generally poor; between 1 and 14 characteristics were adequately reported (mean = 7.7; standard deviation = 2.7). A 1996 update of this study found little improvement.7
In 1996, to address the suboptimal reporting of meta-analyses, an international group developed a guidance called the QUOROM Statement (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses), which focused on the reporting of meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials.8 In this article, we summarize a revision of these guidelines, renamed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses), which have been updated to address several conceptual and practical advances in the science of systematic reviews (Box 1).
Box 1
Conceptual issues in the evolution from QUOROM to PRISMA
46,935 citations
TL;DR: A structured summary is provided including, as applicable, background, objectives, data sources, study eligibility criteria, participants, interventions, study appraisal and synthesis methods, results, limitations, conclusions and implications of key findings.
31,379 citations
TL;DR: An instrument to assess the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in pain research is described and its use to determine the effect of rater blinding on the assessments of quality is described.
15,740 citations
"Mindfulness-based interventions for..." refers methods in this paper
...The Jadad rating scale [38] was used to establish the quality of each study using the following criteria: (a) the study was described as randomized; (b) the method of randomization was appropriate; (c) the study was described as double-blind, (d) the method of double blinding was appropriate; and, (e) the study includes information about all drop-outs and withdrawals....
[...]