Literature DB >> 30328582

[Meta-analysis of evaluation results of psychiatric-psychosomatic rehabilitation in Austria].

Manuel Sprung1, Hannah M Münch2, Elmar Kaiser3, Lore Streibl3, Friedrich Riffer3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Since previous meta-analyses of psychiatric-psychosomatic rehabilitation only rarely included studies from Austrian rehabilitation clinics a systematic review with meta-analysis of previously available evaluation results from Austrian rehabilitation clinics should be conducted.
METHODS: A systematic literature search in several data bases (Psyndex, PsycInfo, MEDLINE, Pubmed) and additional manual search was conducted. Evaluation results from the most commonly used assessment instruments (SCL-90/BSI, BDI, WHOQOL-BREF, GAF) were extracted from the studies included and subsequently a meta-analysis was calculated with the extracted data (pre-post comparison).
RESULTS: 12 publications with 9 studies from 6 different Austrian rehabilitation clinics could be included in the meta-analysis, with a total of 9329 patients. Results show a significant improvement from pre- to post assessment in the medium effect size range, with a Hedges' g of 0.53 (95%-confidence interval [0.45;0.60]) for improvement in global symptom severity, a Hedges' g of 0.59 (95%-confidence interval [0.54;0.63]) for improvement in subjective quality of life and a Hedges' g of 1.00 (95%-confidence interval [0.83;1.18]) for improvement in global functioning. The effects are robust and there is no evidence for distortion or publication bias.
CONCLUSIONS: On average medium effect sizes have been previously achieved with psychiatric-psychosomatic rehabilitation in Austrian rehabilitation clinics. This is comparable with the previous results of rehabilitation clinics in Germany. However, since only one controlled study is available thus far it can not be ruled out that the effects in comparison to no rehabilitation might turn out smaller. Thus, in the future increasingly controlled studies should be conducted and the quality of conducted studies should be improved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Effectiveness; Evaluation; Mental disorders; Psychiatric Rehabilitation; Psychosomatic Rehabilitation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30328582     DOI: 10.1007/s40211-018-0290-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychiatr        ISSN: 0948-6259


  20 in total

1.  Measuring psychotherapeutic change with the symptom checklist SCL 90 R.

Authors:  H Schauenburg; M Strack
Journal:  Psychother Psychosom       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 17.659

2.  Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot-based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis.

Authors:  S Duval; R Tweedie
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.571

3.  Comparing results of large clinical trials to those of meta-analyses.

Authors:  Lincoln E Moses; Frederick Mosteller; John H Buehler
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2002-03-30       Impact factor: 2.373

Review 4.  Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Simon G Thompson; Jonathan J Deeks; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-09-06

5.  Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND statement.

Authors:  Don C Des Jarlais; Cynthia Lyles; Nicole Crepaz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 9.308

6.  A process for systematically reviewing the literature: providing the research evidence for public health nursing interventions.

Authors:  B H Thomas; D Ciliska; M Dobbins; S Micucci
Journal:  Worldviews Evid Based Nurs       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.931

7.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

Authors:  David Moher; Alessandro Liberati; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2009-07-20       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  [Analyzing the effectiveness of inpatient psychosomatic rehabilitation using the mini-ICF-APP].

Authors:  S Baron; M Linden
Journal:  Rehabilitation (Stuttg)       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 1.113

Review 9.  [Psychosomatic rehabilitation: quo vadis?].

Authors:  F Petermann; U Koch
Journal:  Rehabilitation (Stuttg)       Date:  2009-10-21       Impact factor: 1.113

10.  [Medical rehabilitation of patients with mental or psychosomatic disorders in austria--findings of a catamnestic study].

Authors:  E M Haberfellner; J Jungmayr; R Grausgruber-Berner; A Grausgruber
Journal:  Rehabilitation (Stuttg)       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 1.113

View more
  2 in total

1.  Gender effects on outcomes of psychosomatic rehabilitation are reduced.

Authors:  Juliane Burghardt; Friedrich Riffer; Manuel Sprung
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-08-27       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  [What is the meaning of significance - healed or only slightly improved? A comparison of different evaluation methods to assess depressive symptoms in ambulant rehabilitants].

Authors:  Birgit Senft; Daniela Fischer-Hansal; Alexandra Schosser
Journal:  Neuropsychiatr       Date:  2020-03-11
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.