RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Mind-body therapies (MBTs) have gained popularity among patients with cancer as a supportive therapy. To date, no systematic reviews have assessed the effect of MBTs on the health outcomes in women with gynecological cancer. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the effectiveness of MBTs on quality of life, anxiety, depression, cancer-related pain, and fatigue among women with gynecological cancer. METHODS: We searched and screened randomized controlled trials in 7 databases, trial registries, and gray literature from the databases' inception to December 2021. Data were extracted from eligible studies, with each study's quality assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Meta-analyses were conducted using RevMan 5.4. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were performed. The quality of evidence across the studies was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: Nine trials were included. Statistically significant effects of MBTs on depression (standardized mean difference, -0.56; 95% confidence interval, -1.01 to -0.11; P = .01), pain (standardized mean difference, -1.60; 95% confidence interval, -3.14 to -0.07; P = .04), and fatigue (standardized mean difference, -1.17; 95% confidence interval, -2.16 to -0.18; P = .02) were observed, but not on quality of life and anxiety. The quality of evidence was low due to the high risks of bias and high heterogeneity among the studies. CONCLUSIONS: Mind-body therapies were effective in reducing depression, pain, and fatigue of women with gynecological cancer. However, the low quality of the evidence implies the need for more future studies with better methodologies. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Mind-body therapies may be used as an additional strategy to help manage depressive mood, pain, and fatigue among women with gynecological cancer.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to synthesise evidence of the effectiveness of psychoeducation in improving self-efficacy and social support and reducing depression and anxiety in first-time mothers. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted on nine databases, grey literature, and trial registries for randomised controlled trials published from the databases' inception to 27 December 2021. Two independent reviewers screened studies, extracted data, and appraised the risk of bias. RevMan 5.4 was used for the meta-analyses of all outcomes. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses were conducted. Overall evidence quality was appraised using GRADE approach. RESULTS: Twelve studies involving 2083 first-time mothers were included. The meta-analyses favoured psychoeducation as compared to control groups. At immediate post-intervention, statistically significant increments were seen in self-efficacy and social support, while a significant reduction in depression was observed but not in anxiety. At three months postpartum, a statistically significant decrease in depression was observed, but the effects on self-efficacy and social support were insignificant. CONCLUSION: Psychoeducation improved first-time mothers' self-efficacy, social support, and depression. However, the evidence was very uncertain. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Psychoeducation might be incorporated into patient education of first-time mothers. More studies with familial and digital-based psychoeducation interventions, especially in non-Asian countries, are needed.
