Scholarlink

Background <p>Cancer caregivers often face substantial psychosocial burdens, which can lead to significant anxiety and depression. This network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy of various psychosocial interventions in alleviating these symptoms.</p> Methods <p>Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated psychosocial interventions for cancer caregivers. Data were synthesized using a network meta-analysis to compare the effects of different interventions on anxiety and depression.</p> Results <p>A total of 35 trials involving 7 types of psychosocial interventions were included. Three interventions—meaning-centered psychotherapy (anxiety: MD =  − 5.48, 95% CI: − 8.46 to − 2.49; depression: MD =  − 5.13, 95% CI: − 8.27 to − 1.96), psychoeducation (anxiety: MD =  − 9.38, 95% CI: − 13.76 to − 4.94), and supportive therapy (anxiety: MD =  − 7.05, 95% CI: − 11.12 to − 3.05; depression: MD =  − 5.59, 95% CI: − 9.83 to − 1.36), showed significant efficacy in reducing anxiety and depression. Network meta-analysis indicated that these interventions were superior to control conditions in alleviating symptoms.</p> Conclusion <p>Meaning-centered psychotherapy, psychoeducation, and supportive therapy are particularly effective in reducing anxiety and depression among cancer caregivers. Our findings support the implementation of these psychosocial interventions as part of routine care.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The efficacy of psychosocial interventions on anxiety and depression in cancer caregivers: a network meta-analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年5月29日

查看全文
  • Chunyu Kao,
  • Di Wang,
  • Weihua Pan,
  • Lijuan Hou,
  • Peng Zhou,
  • Ziyu Zhang,
  • Lixiang Yu,
  • Fei Wang,
  • Liyuan Liu

摘要

Background

Cancer caregivers often face substantial psychosocial burdens, which can lead to significant anxiety and depression. This network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the relative efficacy of various psychosocial interventions in alleviating these symptoms.

Methods

Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated psychosocial interventions for cancer caregivers. Data were synthesized using a network meta-analysis to compare the effects of different interventions on anxiety and depression.

Results

A total of 35 trials involving 7 types of psychosocial interventions were included. Three interventions—meaning-centered psychotherapy (anxiety: MD =  − 5.48, 95% CI: − 8.46 to − 2.49; depression: MD =  − 5.13, 95% CI: − 8.27 to − 1.96), psychoeducation (anxiety: MD =  − 9.38, 95% CI: − 13.76 to − 4.94), and supportive therapy (anxiety: MD =  − 7.05, 95% CI: − 11.12 to − 3.05; depression: MD =  − 5.59, 95% CI: − 9.83 to − 1.36), showed significant efficacy in reducing anxiety and depression. Network meta-analysis indicated that these interventions were superior to control conditions in alleviating symptoms.

Conclusion

Meaning-centered psychotherapy, psychoeducation, and supportive therapy are particularly effective in reducing anxiety and depression among cancer caregivers. Our findings support the implementation of these psychosocial interventions as part of routine care.