| Literature DB >> 35677712 |
André Luiz Monezi Andrade1, Gabriella Di Girolamo Martins1, Adriana Scatena2, Fernanda Machado Lopes3, Wanderlei Abadio de Oliveira4, Hyoun S Kim5, Denise De Micheli6.
Abstract
The objective of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of psychosocial interventions in reducing problematic Internet use (PIU), anxiety, and depression symptoms in a sample of people. This review was registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42020181912) and a total of 15 studies were included. Analyses of the effect of the interventions were conducted based on the standardized mean difference of the studied outcomes (PIU, anxiety, and depression). Most studies reported a positive effect of psychosocial interventions on reducing symptoms of PIU, depression, and anxiety among people with PIU. However, only one detected a robust effect in reducing symptoms of anxiety. For depression, this effect was more modest, and there was no difference between the different modalities of psychosocial interventions. The results suggest that psychosocial interventions are effective in reducing both symptoms of PIU and co-occurring symptoms of depression and anxiety in individuals with PIU. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11469-022-00846-6.Entities:
Keywords: Anxiety; Depression; Interventions; Problematic Internet use
Year: 2022 PMID: 35677712 PMCID: PMC9164571 DOI: 10.1007/s11469-022-00846-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Ment Health Addict ISSN: 1557-1874 Impact factor: 11.555
Search strategy based on algorithms tailored to each database
| Database | Algorithm | |
|---|---|---|
| CINAHL | ("internet addiction" OR "problematic internet use" OR "dysfunctional internet use") AND (treatment OR intervention OR therapy OR psychotherapy) | 339 |
| LILACS | ("internet addiction" OR "problematic internet use" OR "dysfunctional internet use") AND (treatment OR intervention OR therapy OR psychotherapy) | 6 |
| PsycArticles | ("internet addiction" OR "problematic internet use" OR "dysfunctional internet use") AND (treatment OR intervention OR therapy OR psychotherapy) | 39 |
| PubMed | ("internet addiction"[All Fields] OR "problematic internet use"[All Fields] OR (dysfunctional[All Fields] AND ("internet"[MeSH Terms] OR "internet"[All Fields]))) AND (("therapy"[Subheading] OR "therapy"[All Fields] OR "treatment"[All Fields] OR "therapeutics"[MeSH Terms] OR "therapeutics"[All Fields]) OR ("methods"[MeSH Terms] OR "methods"[All Fields] OR "intervention"[All Fields]) OR ("therapy"[Subheading] OR "therapy"[All Fields] OR "therapeutics"[MeSH Terms] OR "therapeutics"[All Fields]) OR ("psychotherapy"[MeSH Terms] OR "psychotherapy"[All Fields])) | 1040 |
| Scopus | TITLE-ABS-KEY (("internet addiction” OR” problematic internet use” OR” dysfunctional internet use”) AND (treatment OR intervention OR therapy OR psychotherapy)) AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE,” ar”)) AND (LIMIT TO (LANGUAGE,” English”) OR LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, “Portuguese")) OR LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, "Spanish")) | 589 |
| Web of Science | (("internet addiction" OR "problematic internet use" OR "dysfunctional internet use") AND (treatment OR intervention OR therapy OR psychotherapy)) | 627 |
Fig. 1Flow diagram of search
Main methodological and intervention characteristics of each study
| No | Authors | Year | Country | Age | Method | Arms ( | Measures | Intervention | No and length of sessions | Profile |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Du et al | 2010 | China | 12–17 | Es | CG = 24 EG = 32 | BDQIA, IOS-S, TMDS, SDQ, SCARED | EG = CBT | CBT = 8 (90–120 min) | G |
| 2 | Gholamian et al | 2019 | Iran | 16–17 | QeS | CG = 60 EG = 60 | BASNEF, NSKQ, YDQ | EG = BASNEF | BASNEF = 2 (NA) | G |
| 3 | Hui et al | 2017 | China | 19–25 | RCT | CG = 37 EG1 = 39 EG2 = 36 | YDQ, SCL-90, P50 | EG1 = EA EG2 = CT EG3 = EA + CT | EA = 10 (30 min) CBT = 5 (30 min) | G + I |
| 4 | Ke et al. (a) | 2018 | Malaysia | 13–18 | QeS | EG = 4 5 | PIUQ, DASS-42, SIAS | EG = CBT | CBT = 8 (90 min) | G |
| 5 | Ke et al. (b) | 2018 | Malaysia | 13–18 | QeS | EG = 157 | PIUQ, DASS -42, SIAS | EG = CBT | CBT = 8 (90 min) | G |
| 6 | Khazaei et al | 2017 | Iran | 20–30 | RCT | CG = 24 EG = 24 | YDQ, Y-BOCS, QRI, SI | EG = PP | PP = 10 (NA) | G |
| 7 | Kim et al | 2018 | South Korea | 12–17 | QeS | EG = 17 | K-scale, YDQ, IAS, CDI, STAI | EG = CBT | CBT = 8 (120 min) | G |
| 8 | Pan | 2020 | China | 13–18 | QeS | CG = 10 EG1 = 10 EG2 = 10 EG3 = 10 | YDQ | EG1 = CBT EG2 = PE EG3 = CBT + PE | NA | G + I |
| 9 | Quinones et al | 2019 | UK | 39–42 | RCT | CG = 148 EG1 = 343 EG2 = 151 | CIU, FFMQ, PHQ-ADS | EG1 = MDF EG2 = GR | Using app = 14 (10 min) | I |
| 10 | Santos et al | 2017 | Brazil | 18–65 | QeS | EG1 = 42 EG2 = 42 | IAT, HAM-A, HDRS, CGI | EG1 = PPE EG2 = CBT + pharmacotherapy | CBT = 8–10 (NA) | G + I |
| 11 | Tas et al | 2018 | Turkey | 15 | QeS | CG = 12 EG = 12 | YDQ, SCL-90 | EG = PPE | PPE = 10 (50 min) | G |
| 12 | Thorens et al | 2014 | Swiss | 13–67 | QeS | EG = 57 | ACP, IAT | EG = CBT | CBT = 6 (50 min) | Individual |
| 13 | Yang et al | 2017 | China | 18–30 | RCT | EG1 = 15 EG2 = 14 | IAS, BIS-11, MRS | EG1 = EA EG2 = PP | EA = 45 (30 min) PP = 11 (120 min) | G + I |
| 14 | Young | 2013 | EUA | 22–56 | QeS | EG = 128 | COQ, IAT | EG = CBT | CBT = 12 (NA) | - |
| 15 | Zhu et al | 2012 | China | 19–25 | RCT | EG1 = 39 EG2 = 36 EG3 = 37 | IAT, WMS | EG1 = EA EG2 = CT EG3 = EA + CT | EA = 10 (30 min) CBT = 5 (30 min) | G + I |
Legend: Es, experimental study; QeS, quasi-experimental study; CG, control group; EG, experimental groups; CBT, cognitive-behavioral therapy; PP, positive psychology; G, group therapy; I, individual therapy; EA, electroacupuncture; CT, comprehensive therapy; PPE, psychoeducational program; PE, physical exercise; APP, applicative; MDF, mindfulness; GR, gradual relaxation; BASNEF, Belief, Attitude, Subjective Norm, and Enabling Factors; NA, not available; BDQIA, Beard’s Diagnostic Questionnaire for Internet addiction; IOS-S, Internet Overuse Self-Rating Scale; TMDS, Time Management Disposition Scale; SDQ, Strength and Difficulties Questionnaire; SCARED, Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders; BASNEF, Belief, Attitude, Subjective Norm, and Enabling Factors; NSKQ, Knowledge Questionnaire; YDQ, Young’s Diagnostic Questionnaire; SCL-90, Brief Symptom Inventory; PIUQ, Problematic Internet Use Questionnaire; DASS, Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scales; SIAS, Social Interaction Anxiety Scale; Y-BOCS, Yale–Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale; QRI, Quality of Relationships nventory); SI, severity of Internet use; K-scale, Korean Internet addiction self-report test; IAS, Young’s Internet Addiction Scale; CDI, Children’s Depression Inventory; STAI, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; CIU, Compulsive Internet use; FFMQ, Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire; PHQ-ADS, Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale; IAT Internet addiction test; HAM-A, Hamilton Anxiety Scale; HDRS, Hamilton Depression Scale; CGI, Clinical Global Impressions; SCL-90, Brief Symptom Inventory; ACP, Avaliação clínica psiquiatrica; BIS-11, Barratt Impulsiveness Scale; MRS, Magnetic Resonance System; COQ, client outcome questionnaire); WMS, Wechsler Memory Scale
Main results found in the assessed studies
| N | Authors | Main results |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Du et al | |
| 2 | Gholamian et al | |
| 3 | Hui et al | The group that received the combined intervention ( |
| 4 | Ke et al. A | |
| 5 | Ke et al. B | |
| 6 | Khazaei et al | |
| 7 | Kim et al | |
| 8 | Pan | The combined intervention ( |
| 9 | Quinones et al | The |
| 10 | Santos et al | |
| 11 | Tas et al | |
| 12 | Thorens et al | Participants undergoing |
| 13 | Yang et al | Both |
| 14 | Young | |
| 15 | Zhu et al | In the three groups ( |
Legend: CBT, cognitive-behavioral therapy; PIU, problematic Internet use); CG, control group; BASNEF, Belief, Attitude, Subjective Norm, and Enabling Factors); EA, electroacupuncture; PP, positive psychology; PE, physical exercise; MDF, mindfulness; GR, gradual relaxation; PPE, psychoeducational program; CGI, Clinical Global Impressions; CT, comprehensive therapy
Fig. 2Forest plot showing standardized mean difference (95% CI) and the studies weighted regarding different interventions to reduce problematic internet use. Notes: (i) The repeating studies in the plot indicate the effect of each separate intervention; (ii) the studies 1, 2, 6, 9, 11, and 13 were compared with control groups, and the others were compared before and after the intervention; (iii) we excluded studies 8 and 12 from this plot due to the impossibility of calculating the standardized mean difference based on the data available in these articles
Fig. 3Forest plot showing standardized mean difference (95% CI) and the studies weighted regarding different interventions to reduce anxiety symptoms among individuals with PIU. Notes: (i) The repeating studies in the plot indicate the effect of each separate intervention; (ii) the studies 1, 9, and 11 were compared with control groups, and the others were compared before and after the intervention
Fig. 4Forest plot showing standardized mean difference (95% CI) and the studies weighted regarding different interventions to reduce depression symptoms among individuals with PIU. Notes: (i) The repeating studies in the plot indicate the effect of each separate intervention; (ii) the studies 9 and 11 were compared with control groups, and the others were compared before and after the intervention
| Category | Target question (e.g., overview or guideline) | Review being assessed |
|---|---|---|
| Patients/population(s) | Individuals with problematic internet use | How effective are psychological treatments/interventions for reducing symptoms of PIU, depression, and anxiety in individuals with problematic Internet use? |
| Intervention(s) | Psychotherapeutic; psychoeducational; psychosocial | |
| Comparator(s) | No intervention or intervention gold standard | |
| Outcome(s) | Treatment effectiveness for Internet abuse and the variables: anxiety and depression |
| Domain 1: Study eligibility criteria | ||
|---|---|---|
| Y/PY/ | ||
| Y/ | ||
| Y/ | ||
| Y/ | ||
| Y/PY/PN/ | ||
| Domain | Concern | Rationale for concern |
|---|---|---|
| LOW | According to the criteria identified in domain 1, the risk potential is LOW because the analyses included all information | |
| LOW | All criteria for study identification and selection were met and included in this paper | |
| LOW | All three domain criteria are detailed in the manuscript, reducing the risk of bias | |
| LOW | Based on the items suggested in the results summary, item 4.6 was not conducted. As for item 4.2, the participants’ losses were not detailed. Although most studies used CBT, other therapies were also detected, making the results more imprecise | |