目的:本研究的目的是比较身心实践(MBPs)和多种心理学方法的功效,并通过网络荟萃分析(NMA)确定缓解医护人员工作相关压力的最佳方法。
方法:我们应用了六个电子数据库,即PubMed,WebofScience,Embase,PsycINFO,科克伦,和中国国家知识基础设施从成立到2023年9月16日确定相关RCT,并实施了基于PICOS原则的搜索策略。数据选择,提取,偏倚分析由单独的研究人员独立和重复进行。状态16.0用于进行NMA以比较各种疗法的有效性。
结果:我们确定了23项研究,包括MBP和三种不同的心理疗法,即正念相关疗法(MRT),心理教育治疗(PT),综合治疗(CT),分为11种具体技术,即瑜伽,冥想技巧(MT),气功,肌肉松弛(MR),生物反馈治疗(BT),基于正念的干预措施(MBIs),改良正念减压(MBSR-M),基于正念的干预措施与他人相结合(MBIs-C),基于正念的意识(MBA),PT和CT。我们对MBP和三种心理治疗的NMA结果表明,MBP(SMD=-0.90,CrI:-1.26,-0.05,SUCRA=99%)对HCWs的职业压力有效,其次是捷运(SMD=-0.48,CrI:-0.87,-0.08,SUCRA=66.5%)。11种特定技术的NMA结果表明,瑜伽(SMD=1.36,CrI:0.91,1.81,SUCRA=97.5%)是缓解HCWs压力的最有效技术,其次是MR(SMD=1.36,CrI:0.91,1.81,SUCRA=87.3%)。
结论:我们的研究表明,MBP可能是改善HCWs职业压力的最有效干预措施。此外,瑜伽可能是MBP中最理想的。医院管理者应重视瑜伽在解决医务工作者职业压力方面的作用。
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of mind-body practices (MBPs) and multiple psychological methods, and identify the optimal method for relieving work-related stress among healthcare workers (HCWs) by network meta-analysis (NMA).
METHODS: We applied six electronic databases, namely PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane, and Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure to identify relevant RCTs from inception to September 16, 2023, and implemented a search strategy based on the PICOS principles. Data selection, extraction, and analysis of bias were carried out independently and in duplicate by separate researchers. State 16.0 was used to conduct NMA for comparing the effectiveness of various therapies.
RESULTS: We identified 23 studies including MBPs and three different psychological therapies, namely mindfulness-related therapy (MRT), psychoeducational therapy (PT), and comprehensive therapy (CT), which were divided into eleven specific techniques, namely yoga, meditation techniques (MT), Qigong, muscle relaxation(MR), biofeedback therapy (BT), mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs), modified mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR-M), mindfulness-based interventions combined with others (MBIs-C), mindfulness-based awareness(MBA), PT and CT. Our NMA results of MBPs and three psychological therapies showed MBPs (SMD = -0.90, CrI:-1.26, -0.05, SUCRA = 99%) were effective for occupational stress in HCWs, followed by MRT(SMD = -0.48, CrI:-0.87, -0.08, SUCRA = 66.5%). NMA results of eleven specific techniques showed yoga (SMD = 1.36, CrI:0.91, 1.81, SUCRA = 97.5%) was the most effective technique in relieving the stress of HCWs, followed by MR (SMD = 1.36, CrI:0.91, 1.81, SUCRA = 87.3%).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggested MBPs may be the most effective intervention to improve the occupational stress of HCWs. Furthermore, yoga is likely to be the most optimal of MBPs. Hospital managers should attach importance to yoga in addressing occupational stress among medical workers.