Interventions combining mindfulness training with non-invasive brain stimulation and their impact on mental health outcomes: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness training programs and non-invasive brain stimulation are both evidence-based interventions that have applications in mental health disorders. While both have showed promising results on a range of symptoms related to mental health, their combination has more recently grabbed the attention of researchers. There is a theoretical framework for their synergistic effects, and these effects can be tested through a variety of neurophysiological and clinical outcomes. This emerging field of research, which is regularly extended with new trials, has not yet been systematically reviewed. This systematic review protocol aims to present a rationale for combining these two interventions and to document the methodical approach to our systematic review before data extraction. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Four electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO) and three clinical trial registries (Clinical Trials, EU Trials, WHO ICTRP) were searched. All randomized controlled trials testing the combination of mindfulness-based interventions and non-invasive brain stimulation in humans will be included. As primary outcome, data on change in anxiety and depression symptoms from baseline, and, as secondary outcomes, other mental health outcomes data will be gathered. Data will be extracted independently by two authors using a predefined extraction form. Depending on the clinical heterogeneity of the included studies, the research team will decide whether a quantitative synthesis is appropriate for each of the predefined outcomes. If there is considerable statistical heterogeneity, subgroup analyses and meta-regression will be performed. Bias will be assessed using a revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials and the strength of evidence in our review will be assessed using the GRADE form in GRADEPro. We started our scoping searches in November 2022. This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was finished and submitted before the end of the independent full-text selection process by two members of the team. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval and consent to participate were not applicable to our systematic review. Our dissemination plan includes the publication of our systematic review and meta-analysis in an international peer-reviewed journal as well as international communication of our results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number CRD42022353971.

Mindfulness interventions for craving reduction in substance use disorders and behavioral addictions: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: High-quality evidence is still required to affirm the efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) in craving reduction. MBIs may be particularly appropriate for this purpose given the neurobiological mechanisms of addiction with automatic behavior in response to the negative affect. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to study the efficacy of MBIs in craving reduction and to synthetize the newly published data. METHODS: We searched four databases and three clinical trial registries for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to August 2023, including studies with MBIs in all types of substance use disorders or behavioral addictions. We chose as our outcome of interest the change from the baseline of craving measures at posttreatment. Standardized mean difference was used as an effect size estimator. RESULTS: We included 17 RCTs with 1228 participants. The overall effect size was estimated at -0.70 (95% CI -1.15, -0.26) in favor of MBIs. CONCLUSION: Due to the high inconsistency (I2 = 92%), we were unable to conclude that there is a medium to large effect size. Overall risk of bias was high for most studies, and the GRADE approach detected a low quality of evidence. Previous clinical and fundamental research suggest that MBIs have a promising potential in addiction medicine. However, further investigation of whether MBIs effectively reduce craving is needed, and innovative solutions for resolving methodological limitations in MBI research are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration ID CRD42020221141.

A qualitative study of professionals' perspectives on the ethics of medically-delivered safer injection education for people who inject drugs.

BACKGROUND: In this qualitative analysis we aimed to explore addiction physicians' perspectives on safer injection education for people who inject drugs, especially: (1) on possible means of introducing safer injection education in the medical environment, (2) on the compatibility of safer injection education with each physician's core values and goals, and (3) on possible reasons for the ethical dilemma in safer injection education. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with eleven physicians practicing addiction medicine in France in clinical and harm reduction settings. RESULTS: All participants were in favor of educational interventions for people who inject drugs. Nonetheless, these interventions varied from simple advice to injection supervision and they were seen as less acceptable when they concerned the practical and material aspects of injection. Some participants found that physicians practicing in clinical settings, where patients consult mostly to stop their drug use, should not practice safer injection education. On the contrary, other participants claimed that safer injection education was essential in all settings and was not a choice but rather a duty for addiction physicians. The ethical dilemma of such intervention when delivered by medical staff was viewed as a complex phenomenon, related to the representations of intravenous drug use and to societal expectations from physicians. CONCLUSION: Physicians' views on safer injection education for people who inject drugs reveal an emotionally charged subject related to the structural organization of addiction management in France. Such education is marked by an arduous history of harm reduction policies in France. IRB REGISTRATION: #00011928.

Prevalence of internet addiction in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background and aim: In the last two decades, the proportion of internet users has greatly increased worldwide. Data regarding internet addiction (IA) are lacking in Africa compared to other continents. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence of IA in African countries. Methods: We systematically sought relevant articles in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and Cochrane database published before September 25, 2021. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool, and we estimated the pooled prevalence of IA using a random-effects meta-analytic model. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Results: We included 22 studies (13,365 participants), and collected data from Egypt, Ethiopia, Morocco, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania and Tunisia between 2013 and 2021. The mean age of participants ranged from 14.8 to 26.1 years, and the most used tool for IA screening was the Young's 20-item Internet Addiction Test. The pooled prevalence rate of IA was 40.3% (95% CI: 32.2%-48.7%), with substantial heterogeneity. The pooled prevalence for Northern Africa was 44.6% (95% CI: 32.9%-56.7%), significantly higher than the prevalence in sub-Saharan Africa, which was 31.0% (95% CI: 25.2%-37.1%). The risk of bias was moderate for most studies, the certainty was very low, and we found no publication bias. Discussion and conclusions: Four in every ten individuals was considered to have IA in Africa. Further research with methodological optimization seems needed, especially for IA screening tools and the representativity of some subregions.

Non-invasive brain stimulation for smoking cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) methods have showed promising results for the treatment of tobacco use disorder, but little is known about the efficacy of NIBS on sustained tobacco abstinence. We aimed to assess its effectiveness for long-term smoking cessation. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT). PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, PsycINFO and clinical trials registries were systematically searched for relevant studies up to May 2021. Relevant studies included adult smokers seeking smoking cessation, included in an RCT using NIBS [specifically repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)], and with follow-up of more than 4 weeks. There were no restrictions on location. Abstinence rates in the active NIBS groups were compared with abstinence rates in sham NIBS or in usual treatment groups, from 4 weeks to 12 months following the quit attempt. Smoking abstinence was measured on an intention-to-treat basis and we used risk ratios (RRs) as measures of effect size. RESULTS: Seven studies were included (n = 699 patients). In all included studies, the control groups were receiving sham NIBS and only data from 3 to 6 months were analysable. By pooling the seven included studies, the RR of sustained abstinence of any form of NIBS relative to sham NIBS was 2.39 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.26-4.55; I2  = 40%]. Subgroup analyses found that the RR was even higher when excitatory rTMS was used on the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (RR = 4.34; 95% CI = 1.69-11.18; I2  = 0%) or when using deep rTMS targeting the lateral prefrontal cortex and insula bilaterally (RR = 4.64; 95% CI = 1.61-13.39; I2  = 0%). A high risk of bias was found in four included studies. We also determined, using grades of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation, that overall there was a low level of confidence in the results. CONCLUSION: Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) may improve smoking abstinence rates from 3 to 6 months after quitting smoking, compared with sham NIBS or usual treatment.