Camilla Funch Uhre1, Valdemar Funch Uhre2, Nicole Nadine Lønfeldt3, Linea Pretzmann3, Signe Vangkilde4, Kerstin Jessica Plessen5, Christian Gluud6, Janus Christian Jakobsen7, Anne Katrine Pagsberg8. 1. Child and Adolescent Mental Health Centre, Mental Health Services, Capital Region, Denmark; Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark. Electronic address: Camilla.funch.staugaard@regionh.dk. 2. Child and Adolescent Mental Health Centre, Mental Health Services, Capital Region, Denmark; Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark; Danish Research Centre for Magnetic Resonance, Hvidovre Hospital, Denmark. 3. Child and Adolescent Mental Health Centre, Mental Health Services, Capital Region, Denmark. 4. Child and Adolescent Mental Health Centre, Mental Health Services, Capital Region, Denmark; University of Copenhagen, Denmark. 5. Lausanne University Hospital, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, Lausanne, Switzerland. 6. Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group, Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. 7. Copenhagen Trial Unit, Centre for Clinical Intervention Research, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark; Holbæk Hospital, Denmark. 8. Child and Adolescent Mental Health Centre, Mental Health Services, Capital Region, Denmark; Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess benefits and harms of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) versus no intervention or versus other interventions for pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). METHOD: We searched for randomized clinical trials of CBT for pediatric OCD. Primary outcomes were OCD severity, serious adverse events, and level of functioning. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and adverse events. Remission from OCD was included as an exploratory outcome. We assessed risk of bias and evaluated the certainty of the evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: Nine trials (N = 645) were included comparing CBT with no intervention and 3 trials (N = 146) comparing CBT with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Compared with no intervention, CBT decreased OCD severity (mean difference [MD] = -8.51, 95% CI = -10.84 to -6.18, p < .00001, low certainty), improved level of functioning (patient-rated: standardized MD [SMD] = -0.90, 95% CI = -1.19 to -0.62, p < .00001, very low certainty; parent-rated: SMD = -0.68, 95% CI = -1.12 to -0.23, p = .003, very low certainty), had similar proportions of participants with adverse events (risk ratio = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.93-1.22, p = .39, GRADE: low certainty), and was associated with reduced risk of still having OCD (risk ratio = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.37-0.67, p < .00001, very low certainty). We had insufficient data to assess the effect of CBT versus no intervention on serious adverse events and quality of life. Compared with SSRIs, CBT led to similar decreases in OCD severity (MD = -0.75, 95% CI = -3.79 to 2.29, p = .63, GRADE: very low certainty), and was associated with similar risk of still having OCD (risk ratio = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.66-1.09, p = .20, very low certainty). We had insufficient data to assess the effect of CBT versus SSRIs on serious adverse events, level of functioning, quality of life, and adverse events. CONCLUSION: CBT may be more effective than no intervention and comparable to SSRIs for pediatric OCD, but we are very uncertain about the effect estimates.
OBJECTIVE: To assess benefits and harms of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) versus no intervention or versus other interventions for pediatric obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). METHOD: We searched for randomized clinical trials of CBT for pediatric OCD. Primary outcomes were OCD severity, serious adverse events, and level of functioning. Secondary outcomes were quality of life and adverse events. Remission from OCD was included as an exploratory outcome. We assessed risk of bias and evaluated the certainty of the evidence with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: Nine trials (N = 645) were included comparing CBT with no intervention and 3 trials (N = 146) comparing CBT with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Compared with no intervention, CBT decreased OCD severity (mean difference [MD] = -8.51, 95% CI = -10.84 to -6.18, p < .00001, low certainty), improved level of functioning (patient-rated: standardized MD [SMD] = -0.90, 95% CI = -1.19 to -0.62, p < .00001, very low certainty; parent-rated: SMD = -0.68, 95% CI = -1.12 to -0.23, p = .003, very low certainty), had similar proportions of participants with adverse events (risk ratio = 1.06, 95% CI = 0.93-1.22, p = .39, GRADE: low certainty), and was associated with reduced risk of still having OCD (risk ratio = 0.50, 95% CI = 0.37-0.67, p < .00001, very low certainty). We had insufficient data to assess the effect of CBT versus no intervention on serious adverse events and quality of life. Compared with SSRIs, CBT led to similar decreases in OCD severity (MD = -0.75, 95% CI = -3.79 to 2.29, p = .63, GRADE: very low certainty), and was associated with similar risk of still having OCD (risk ratio = 0.85, 95% CI = 0.66-1.09, p = .20, very low certainty). We had insufficient data to assess the effect of CBT versus SSRIs on serious adverse events, level of functioning, quality of life, and adverse events. CONCLUSION: CBT may be more effective than no intervention and comparable to SSRIs for pediatric OCD, but we are very uncertain about the effect estimates.
Authors: Francesco Demaria; Maria Pontillo; Cristina Di Vincenzo; Michelangelo Di Luzio; Stefano Vicari Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-06-02 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Kristina Aspvall; Filipa Sampaio; Fabian Lenhard; Karin Melin; Lisa Norlin; Eva Serlachius; David Mataix-Cols; Erik Andersson Journal: JAMA Netw Open Date: 2021-07-01
Authors: Natalia Rodriguez; Albert Martinez-Pinteño; Ana Blázquez; Ana Encarnación Ortiz; Elena Moreno; Patricia Gassó; Amalia Lafuente; Luisa Lazaro; Sergi Mas Journal: Pharmgenomics Pers Med Date: 2021-06-29