Do psychological interventions reduce depression in hemodialysis patients? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Ruiqi Chen; Lu Xing; Yongshu Diao; Jiahui Qian; Chao You; Xiaolian Jiang

doi:10.4172/2161-0959.C1.028

Do psychological interventions reduce depression in hemodialysis patients? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

9^th International Conference on Dialysis and Renal Care

August 18-19, 2016 London, UK

Ruiqi Chen, Lu Xing, Yongshu Diao, Jiahui Qian, Chao You and Xiaolian Jiang

Sichuan University, China

Posters & Accepted Abstracts: J Nephrol Ther

Abstract :

Objectives: The purpose of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the effects of psychological interventions on depression treatment in hemodialysis patients. Methods: The protocol of this meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016037063). All the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compare any psychological intervention with a control psychological intervention, usual care or no-treatment in depression treatment in hemodialysis patients aged above 18 and diagnosed with depression were retrieved in the following databases: Embase, Pubmed, PsycINFO, CDSR, and CENTRAL. The reference lists of identified RCTs were also screened. We accepted each individual trialâ�?�?s criteria for depression diagnosis. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate the quality of studies, RevMan (5.3) was used to analyze the data, and the evidence quality of the combined results was evaluated using GRADE (3.6.1). Results: Eight RCTs were included. The combined results showed that psychological interventions significantly reduced the scores of the Beck Depression inventory (P<0.001) and the inter-dialysis weight gain (P<0.001). However, due to the high heterogeneity, the effect size combinations of sleep quality and quality of life were not performed. Conclusion: Psychological interventions could reduce the degree of depression and improve fluid intake restriction adherence. However, we could not conclude that psychological interventions were safe for hemodialysis patients because none of the included studies reported the side effects of them. Besides, the methodological quality of some included studies was low and publication bias might not be accurately evaluated because of the limited number of studies. So, more rigorously designed and comprehensive research is needed.