Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Cancer is one of the leading causes of mortality in the world which imposes numerous psychological burdens on the patients. Psycho-spiritual interventions such as meaning-based therapies may help decrease these challenges. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to investigate the effects of meaning-based psychotherapy on post-traumatic growth and death anxiety of patients with cancer.
METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Proquest, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched until 30 September 2023. The Cochrane Collaboration\'s tool was used to assess the quality of the included studies. A random-effect model was preferred, and statistical analysis was performed by STATA software version 17.
RESULTS: A total of 17 studies were included in the systematic review. Eleven articles examined the impact of meaning-based interventions on death anxiety and six articles examined post-traumatic growth in cancer patients. Ten studies with a total of 555 participants were included for analysis of the effect of logotherapy versus routine care on death anxiety. Analysis showed a significant decrease effect of logotherapy versus routine care on death anxiety (SMD, - 4.05 (- 6.20, - 1.90); I2, 98.38%). Three studies with a total of 364 participants were included for analysis of the effect of logotherapy versus routine care on post-traumatic growth in patients with cancer. Analysis showed a positive but non-significant effect of logotherapy versus routine care on post-traumatic growth (SMD, 2.05 (- 0.91, 5.01); I2, 99.08%).
CONCLUSIONS: The qualitative analysis showed the positive impact of meaning-based psychotherapy interventions on death anxiety and post-traumatic growth in cancer patients, but the results of the meta-analysis on post-traumatic growth were not statistically significant. The review shows the need for more clinical trial studies in larger and more diverse samples in terms of cancer types and cultural background.
METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Proquest, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched until 30 September 2023. The Cochrane Collaboration\'s tool was used to assess the quality of the included studies. A random-effect model was preferred, and statistical analysis was performed by STATA software version 17.
RESULTS: A total of 17 studies were included in the systematic review. Eleven articles examined the impact of meaning-based interventions on death anxiety and six articles examined post-traumatic growth in cancer patients. Ten studies with a total of 555 participants were included for analysis of the effect of logotherapy versus routine care on death anxiety. Analysis showed a significant decrease effect of logotherapy versus routine care on death anxiety (SMD, - 4.05 (- 6.20, - 1.90); I2, 98.38%). Three studies with a total of 364 participants were included for analysis of the effect of logotherapy versus routine care on post-traumatic growth in patients with cancer. Analysis showed a positive but non-significant effect of logotherapy versus routine care on post-traumatic growth (SMD, 2.05 (- 0.91, 5.01); I2, 99.08%).
CONCLUSIONS: The qualitative analysis showed the positive impact of meaning-based psychotherapy interventions on death anxiety and post-traumatic growth in cancer patients, but the results of the meta-analysis on post-traumatic growth were not statistically significant. The review shows the need for more clinical trial studies in larger and more diverse samples in terms of cancer types and cultural background.
摘要：
背景：癌症是世界上死亡的主要原因之一，给患者带来了许多心理负担。心理-精神干预，如基于意义的疗法可能有助于减少这些挑战。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在探讨基于意义的心理治疗对癌症患者创伤后成长和死亡焦虑的影响。
方法：PubMed，Scopus,Proquest,WebofScience,和谷歌学者一直搜索到2023年9月30日。Cochrane协作工具用于评估纳入研究的质量。随机效应模型是首选，采用STATA软件17版进行统计学分析。
结果：共有17项研究纳入系统评价。11篇文章研究了基于意义的干预措施对死亡焦虑的影响，6篇文章研究了癌症患者的创伤后成长。纳入了10项研究，共555名参与者，用于分析逻辑疗法与常规护理对死亡焦虑的影响。分析表明，与常规护理相比，认知疗法对死亡焦虑（SMD，-4.05（-6.20，-1.90）；I2，98.38%）。纳入了三项共364名参与者的研究，以分析逻辑疗法与常规护理对癌症患者创伤后成长的影响。分析表明，与常规护理相比，逻辑疗法对创伤后成长有积极但不显著的影响(SMD，2.05（-0.91，5.01）；I2，99.08%）。
结论：定性分析表明，基于意义的心理治疗干预措施对癌症患者的死亡焦虑和创伤后成长具有积极影响，但创伤后成长的荟萃分析结果无统计学意义.该综述表明，就癌症类型和文化背景而言，需要在更大，更多样化的样本中进行更多的临床试验研究。
方法：PubMed，Scopus,Proquest,WebofScience,和谷歌学者一直搜索到2023年9月30日。Cochrane协作工具用于评估纳入研究的质量。随机效应模型是首选，采用STATA软件17版进行统计学分析。
结果：共有17项研究纳入系统评价。11篇文章研究了基于意义的干预措施对死亡焦虑的影响，6篇文章研究了癌症患者的创伤后成长。纳入了10项研究，共555名参与者，用于分析逻辑疗法与常规护理对死亡焦虑的影响。分析表明，与常规护理相比，认知疗法对死亡焦虑（SMD，-4.05（-6.20，-1.90）；I2，98.38%）。纳入了三项共364名参与者的研究，以分析逻辑疗法与常规护理对癌症患者创伤后成长的影响。分析表明，与常规护理相比，逻辑疗法对创伤后成长有积极但不显著的影响(SMD，2.05（-0.91，5.01）；I2，99.08%）。
结论：定性分析表明，基于意义的心理治疗干预措施对癌症患者的死亡焦虑和创伤后成长具有积极影响，但创伤后成长的荟萃分析结果无统计学意义.该综述表明，就癌症类型和文化背景而言，需要在更大，更多样化的样本中进行更多的临床试验研究。
