Search

Background Evidence on the long-term comparative effectiveness of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) psychotherapies in adults remains unknown. Therefore, we performed an extensive network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the comparative effectiveness of psychotherapies for people diagnosed with PTSD. Methods A comprehensive search was conducted in Cochrane library, Embase, Medline-OVID, PubMed, Scopus, and Psych-Info until March 2021. Studies on the effectiveness of cognitive processing therapy (CPT), cognitive therapy (CT), eye movement desensitisation reprocessing (EMDR), narrative exposure therapy (NET), prolonged exposure (PE), cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), present-centred therapy (PCT), brief eclectic psychotherapies (BEP), psychodynamic therapy (PDT) or combination therapies compared to no treatment (NT) or treatment as usual (TAU) in adults with PTSD were included. Frequentist and Bayesian approaches were used for analysis in R-software. Results We included 98 RCTs with 5567 participants from 18 897 studies. CPT, EMDR, CT, NET, PE, CBT, and PCT were significant to reduce PTSD symptoms (SMD range: −1.53 to −0.75; Certainty: very low to high) at immediate post-treatment and ranked accordingly. Longitudinal analysis found EMDR (1.02) and CPT (0.85) as the significant therapies with large effect size in short-term and long-term follow-up, respectively. NET and CPT showed higher proportion of loss of PTSD diagnosis (RR range: 5.51–3.45) while there were no significant psychotherapies for retention rate compared to NT. Conclusions: Our findings provide evidence for improving current guidelines and informing clinical decision-making for PTSD management. However, the best PTSD treatment plan should be tailored to patients' needs, characteristics, and clinician expertise. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020162143

The COVID-19 pandemic has been shown to cause enormous psychological burden among health care workers, including first responders. However, psychological well-being of first responders, essential in the fight against COVID-19 pandemic, has often been ignored. We performed the first meta-analysis to explore the prevalence of 1) depression, 2) anxiety, and 3) stress among first responders for medical emergencies during the COVID-19 pandemic.A comprehensive search was conducted in Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, PsychInfo, PubMed, and the WHO COVID-19 database from 2020. The Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation model in R-software determined the pooled prevalence and Comprehensive Meta-Analysis for associated factors of depression, anxiety, and stress with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The Cochrane Q, τWe identified 765 records, from which 17 studies were included with 8096 first responders. The pooled prevalence was 31% (95% CI = 21%-41%) for depression; 67% (95% CI = 64%-70%) for mild depression, 24% (95% CI = 17%-31%) for moderate depression, and 16% (95% CI = 4%-34%) for severe depression. The pooled prevalence for anxiety was 32% (95% CI = 20%-44%); 60% (95% CI = 46%-73%) for mild anxiety, 27% (95% CI = 14%-42%) for moderate anxiety, and 14% (95% CI = 7%-22%) for severe anxiety. The pooled prevalence for stress was 17% (95% CI = 4%-34%); 58% (95% CI = 38%-77%) for mild stress, 22% (95% CI = 5%-44%) for moderate stress, and 19% (95% CI = 5%-37%) for severe stress. The prevalence of depression was 37% (95% CI = 25%-52%) for paramedics, 28% (95% CI = 12%-54%) for EMS personnel and 22% (95% CI = 13%-33%) for police. Similarly, the prevalence of anxiety was 38% (95% CI = 20%-60%) for paramedics, 28% (95% CI = 11%-53%) for EMS personnel, and 19% (95% CI = 10%-32%) for police. Married responders were likely at risk for depression (1.50, 95% CI = 1.26-1.78) and anxiety (1.94, 95% CI = 1.62-2.33), while unmarried responders were less likely at risk for depression (0.67, 95% CI = 0.56-0.79) and anxiety (0.50, 95% CI = 0.43-0.63).High prevalence of depression, anxiety, and stress during the COVID-19 pandemic among first responders for medical emergencies emphasizes the need for monitoring their psychological well-being. Early assessment and management of mild depression, anxiety, and stress among first responders are crucial in preventing progression into moderate and severe types.

Severe pneumonia with novel pathogens, also called COVID-19, caused a pandemic in Taiwan as well as in the rest of the world in May 2021. Nurses are under great stress when caring for critically ill patients with COVID-19. This study aimed to explore the perceived stress and coping behaviors of nurses caring for critically ill patients with COVID-19 using a mixed-methods approach. We recruited 85 nurses from a special intensive care unit (ICU) of a medical center in Taiwan between May and June 2021. To gather data, we used a questionnaire on basic characteristics, the perceived stress scale (PSS-14), and the brief coping orientation to problems experienced inventory (B-COPE), then conducted a qualitative interview. The results showed that the average perceived stress level among nurses was 25.4 points, and most of them perceived moderate stress. The top three coping behaviors practiced by the nurses were active coping, planning, and acceptance. Nurses who received less perceived support from their friends or families and who had shorter working experience in nursing had significantly higher stress levels. The qualitative results revealed that the nurses’ perceived stress came from fear, worry, and the increased burden caused by caring for critical patients with COVID-19. Coping behaviors included rest, seeking support, and affirmative fighting. Based on these findings, it is suggested that the support nurses receive from their families is an important predictor of perceived stress. Therefore, it is suggested that nurses be provided with more support in dealing with stress caused by caring for critical patients with COVID-19 in special ICUs.