Journal article icon

Journal article

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for post-traumatic stress disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Abstract:
Background Available evidence on the comparative efficacy and acceptability of psychotherapies for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in children and adolescents remains uncertain. Objective We aimed to compare and rank the different types and formats of psychotherapies for PTSD in children and adolescents. Methods We searched eight databases and other international registers up to 31 December 2020. The pairwise meta-analyses and frequentist network meta-analyses estimated pooled standardised mean differences (SMDs) and ORs with random-effects model. Efficacy at post-treatment and follow-up, acceptability, depressive and anxiety symptoms were measured. Findings We included 56 randomised controlled trials with 5327 patients comparing 14 different types of psychotherapies and 3 control conditions. For efficacy, cognitive processing therapy (CPT), behavioural therapy (BT), individual trauma-focused cognitive–behavioural therapy (TF-CBT), eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing, and group TF-CBT were significantly superior to all control conditions at post-treatment and follow-up (SMDs between −2.42 and −0.25). Moreover, CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT were more effective than supportive therapy (SMDs between −1.92 and −0.49). Results for depressive and anxiety symptoms were similar to the findings for the primary outcome. Most of the results were rated as’moderate’ to’very low’ in terms of confidence of evidence. Conclusions CPT, BT and individual TF-CBT appear to be the best choices of psychotherapy for PTSD in young patients. Other types and different ways of delivering psychological treatment can be alternative options. Clinicians should consider the importance of each outcome and the patients’ preferences in real clinical practice
Publication status:
Published
Peer review status:
Peer reviewed

Actions

Access Document

Files:
Publisher copy:
10.1136/ebmental-2021-300346
Publication website:
https://iris.unimore.it/bitstream/11380/1368076/1/153.full.pdf

Authors

More by this author
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0002-3984-5508
More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0001-5179-8321
More by this author
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0009-0002-7599-7231
More by this author
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0003-0451-4597


Publisher:
BMJ
Journal:
BMJ Mental Health More from this journal
Volume:
24
Issue:
4
Pages:
153-160
Publication date:
2021-10-01
Acceptance date:
2021-09-20
DOI:
ISSN:
1362-0347


Language:
English
Keywords:
Pubs id:
1198206
Local pid:
pubs:1198206
Source identifiers:
W3203185705
Deposit date:
2026-03-26
ARK identifier:
This ORA record was generated from metadata provided by an external service. It has not been edited by the ORA Team.

Terms of use


Views and Downloads






If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record

TO TOP