RESUMEN
Objective: The objective of this scoping review was to map the range of measurement tools used to study the prevalence of common mental health conditions in COVID-19 ICU survivors. Introduction: Increased rates of admission to and survivorship from intensive care units (ICUs) have been observed in recent years, particularly during the global pandemic. ICU patients are at a higher risk of developing depressive, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms. Due to the high burden of disease, an accurate understanding of long-term mental health challenges for this population is key. Unfortunately, there is significant variability in reported prevalence rates. Heterogeneity in measurement tools potentially contribute to this. Inclusion criteria: Studies were eligible if they (a) reported mental health outcomes of adult patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and admitted to an ICU, (b) used standardised mental health outcome measures, and (3) were peer-reviewed. Methods: Searches were conducted in PubMed, PsycInfo, and Scopus. The initial search retrieved 1234 publications. After de-duplication and title and abstract screening, 72 full-text articles were examined for eligibility and 44 articles were excluded, leaving 28 eligible studies. Reference lists of the eligible studies were screened, and four other studies were added. 32 studies were ultimately included in this review. Results: Significant heterogeneity of measurement tools and clinical thresholds were observed. Only 6.25% of the studies compared changes in mental health outcomes to baseline measurements. Between five and nine unique measurement tools were used to study depression, anxiety, and PTSD, respectively. Studies were also observed to use up to 19 different thresholds to establish the prevalence of PTSD. Conclusions: The heterogeneity of measurement tools and thresholds continues to confound prevalence rate estimations of mental health complications post-ICU admission. Future research will benefit from consistency in the use of recommended outcome measures and the use of psychometrically comparable cut-off points between key measures.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Existing clinical trials of cognitive behavioural therapies with a trauma focus (CBTs-TF) are underpowered to examine key variables that might moderate treatment effects. We aimed to determine the efficacy of CBTs-TF for young people, relative to passive and active control conditions, and elucidate putative individual-level and treatment-level moderators. METHODS: This was an individual participant data meta-analysis of published and unpublished randomised studies in young people aged 6-18 years exposed to trauma. We included studies identified by the latest UK National Institute of Health and Care Excellence guidelines (completed on Jan 29, 2018) and updated their search. The search strategy included database searches restricted to publications between Jan 1, 2018, and Nov 12, 2019; grey literature search of trial registries ClinicalTrials.gov and ISRCTN; preprint archives PsyArXiv and bioRxiv; and use of social media and emails to key authors to identify any unpublished datasets. The primary outcome was post-traumatic stress symptoms after treatment (<1 month after the final session). Predominantly, one-stage random-effects models were fitted. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42019151954. FINDINGS: We identified 38 studies; 25 studies provided individual participant data, comprising 1686 young people (mean age 13·65 years [SD 3·01]), with 802 receiving CBTs-TF and 884 a control condition. The risk-of-bias assessment indicated five studies as low risk and 20 studies with some concerns. Participants who received CBTs-TF had lower mean post-traumatic stress symptoms after treatment than those who received the control conditions, after adjusting for post-traumatic stress symptoms before treatment (b=-13·17, 95% CI -17·84 to -8·50, p<0·001, τ2=103·72). Moderation analysis indicated that this effect of CBTs-TF on post-traumatic stress symptoms post-treatment increased by 0·15 units (b=-0·15, 95% CI -0·29 to -0·01, p=0·041, τ2=0·03) for each unit increase in pre-treatment post-traumatic stress symptoms. INTERPRETATION: This is the first individual participant data meta-analysis of young people exposed to trauma. Our findings support CBTs-TF as the first-line treatment, irrespective of age, gender, trauma characteristics, or carer involvement in treatment, with particular benefits for those with higher initial distress. FUNDING: Swiss National Science Foundation.