Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

ACC 2024 Congress

Catch up on all the top stories and latest evidence in cardiology research with our ACC 2024 Congress hub page.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Systematic Reviews
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2018

Open Access 01-12-2018 | Protocol

Adverse effects of psychotherapy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors: Rahel Klatte, Bernhard Strauss, Christoph Flückiger, Jenny Rosendahl

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

While it is well known that psychotherapy is efficacious in the treatment of mental disorders, much less is known about the adverse effects of psychotherapeutic interventions. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the definition, frequency, nature, and severity of adverse effects occurring parallel to or following psychotherapeutic treatment and to compare it against control groups.

Methods

All registered randomised controlled trials published since 2004 (publication year of harm-reporting extension of the CONSORT statement) with adult patients fulfilling clinical criteria of defined mental disorders, which compare individual or group psychotherapy against a control group, will be included. First, a search through international trial registers as well as a search in literature databases (e.g. MEDLINE) and in relevant journals (e.g. Trials) for study protocols will be conducted to identify eligible trials. In a second step, we will search for respective publications of the results of the eligible studies. Publications will be retrieved and screened for eligibility. Two previously trained, independent raters will extract the data in duplicate. Reporting of adverse effects will be descriptively analysed regarding frequency, heterogeneity, and longitudinal course. We will further compare the adverse effects of psychotherapeutic interventions against various control groups. For each categorical outcome, we will calculate relative risks (RR) together with 95% confidence intervals. For continuous outcomes, standardised mean differences (Hedges’ g) with a 95% confidence interval will be computed. Between-study heterogeneity will be tested with the Q statistic and quantified using I2.

Discussion

Preselecting studies with regard to randomised controlled trials might induce bias due to dropout before the beginning of treatment or end of treatment. However, we will thoroughly assess the negative effects of randomisation, e.g. reasons for non-randomisation, if reported. Even if delayed adverse effects might be overlooked in randomised controlled trials, these are the only sources of causal evidence.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews 2017: CRD42017055507 (17 January 2017)
Literature
1.
Foulkes P. The therapist as a vital factor in side-effects of psychotherapy. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2010;44(2):189.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Linden M. How to define, find and classify side effects in psychotherapy: from unwanted events to adverse treatment reactions. Clin Psychol Psychother. 2013;20(4):286–96.CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
Rozental A, Andersson G, Boettcher J, et al. Consensus statement on defining and measuring negative effects of internet interventions. Internet Interv. 2014;1:12–9.CrossRef
5.
6.
Mohr DC. Negative outcome in psychotherapy - a critical review. Clin Psychol Sci Pr. 1995;2(1):1–27.CrossRef
7.
Lambert MJ, Ogles BM. The efficacy and effectiveness of psychotherapy. In: Lambert MJ, editor. Bergin and Garfield’s handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change. New York: Wiley and Sons; 2004. p. 139–93.
8.
Ladwig I, Rief W, Nestoriuc Y. What are the risks and side effects to psychotherapy? - development of an Inventory for the Assessment of Negative Effects of Psychotherapy (INEP). Verhaltenstherapie. 2014;24:252–63.CrossRef
9.
Schmoll D. Side effects of psychodynamic therapy. Psychotherapeut. 2012;57:395–401.CrossRef
10.
Nestoriuc Y. Risiken und Nebenwirkung psychotherapeutischer Behandlung: Wie und warum sollten sie erfasst werden? Psychotherapie im Dialog. 2015;4:36–9.
11.
Hand I, Lamontagne Y. The exacerbation of interpersonal problems after rapid phobia-removal. Psychother. 1976;13:405–11.CrossRef
12.
Buckley P, Karasu TB, Charles E. Psychotherapists view their personal therapy. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice. 1981;18:299–305.CrossRef
13.
Boisvert CM. Negative treatment effects: is it time for a black box warning? Am Psychol. 2010;65(7):680–1.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Cuervo LG, Clarke M. Balancing benefits and harms in health care: we need to get better evidence about harms. Br Med J. 2003;327:65–6.CrossRef
15.
Peterson AL, Roache JD, Raj J, et al. The need for expanded monitoring of adverse events in behavioral health clinical trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2013;34(1):152–4.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Jonsson U, Alaie I, Parling T, et al. Reporting of harms in randomized controlled trials of psychological interventions for mental and behavioral disorders: a review of current practice. Contemp Clin Trials. 2014;38(1):1–8.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Meister R, von Wolff A, Mohr H, et al. Adverse event methods were heterogeneous and insufficiently reported in randomized trials on persistent depressive disorder. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;71:97–108.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Scott J, Young AH. Psychotherapies should be assessed for both benefit and harm. Br J Psychiatry. 2016;208(3):208–9.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Parry GD, Crawford MJ, Duggan C. Iatrogenic harm from psychological therapies - time to move on. Br J Psychiatry. 2016;208:210–2.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Wampold B, Imel Z. The great psychotherapy debate. 2nd ed. New York: Taylor & Francis; 2015.CrossRef
21.
Jonsson U, Johanson J, Nilsson E, et al. Adverse effects of psychological therapy: an exploratory study of practitioners’ experiences from child and adolescent psychiatry. Clin Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2016;21(3):432–46.CrossRefPubMed
22.
23.
Reuter L, Bengel J, Scheidt CE. Non-response to therapy in acute and rehabilitative psychosomatic inpatient care - a systematic review. Z Psychosom Med Psychother. 2014;60(2):121–45.PubMed
24.
Westen D, Morrison K. A multidimensional meta-analysis of treatments for depression, panic, and generalized anxiety disorder: an empirical examination of the status of empirically supported therapies. J Consult Clin Psych. 2001;69(6):875–99.CrossRef
25.
Ioannidis JP, Chew P, Lau J. Standardized retrieval of side effects data for meta-analysis of safety outcomes. A feasibility study in acute sinusitis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55(6):619–26.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Flückiger C, Regli D, Grawe K, et al. Similarities and differences between retrospective and pre-post measurements of outcome. Psychother Res. 2007;17(3):371–7.CrossRef
27.
28.
Ernst E, Pittler MH. Assessment of therapeutic safety in systematic reviews: literature review. Br Med J. 2001;323(7312):546.CrossRef
29.
30.
Merikangas KR, He JP, Burstein M, et al. Lifetime prevalence of mental disorders in U.S. adolescents: results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication – Adolescent Supplement (NCS-A). J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2010;49(10):980–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
31.
Kessler RC, Avenevoli S, Costello EJ, et al. Prevalence, persistence, and sociodemographic correlates of DSM-IV disorders in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication Adolescent Supplement. Arch Gen Psychiat. 2012;69(4):372–80.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Jacobi F, Hofler M, Siegert J, et al. Twelve-month prevalence, comorbidity and correlates of mental disorders in Germany: the mental health module of the German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Adults (DEGS1-MH). Int J Meth Psych Res. 2014;23(3):304–19.CrossRef
33.
Olfson M, Marcus SC. National trends in outpatient psychotherapy. Am J Psychiatry. 2010;167(12):1456–63.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Ioannidis JP, Lau J. Completeness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas. JAMA. 2001;285(4):437–43.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Dimidjian S, Hollon SD. How would we know if psychotherapy were harmful? Am Psychol. 2010;65(1):21–33.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Mays DT, Franks CM. Getting worse - psychotherapy or no treatment - jury should still be out. Prof Psychol. 1980;11(1):78–92.
37.
Sterne JAC, Egger M, Moher D. Addressing reporting biases. In: JPT H, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. https://​training.​cochrane.​org/​handbook. Accessed 20 Nov 2017.
38.
39.
Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Altman DG, et al. SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2013;158(3):200–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
Castonguay LG, Beutler LE. Principles of therapeutic change that work. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006.
41.
Rhule DM. Take care to do no harm: harmful interventions for youth problem behavior. Prof Psychol Res Pr. 2005;36:618–25.CrossRef
42.
Swift JK, Greenberg RP. Premature discontinuation in adult psychotherapy: a meta-analysis. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2012;80(4):547–59.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Swift JK, Greenberg RP. A treatment by disorder meta-analysis of dropout from psychotherapy. J Psychother Integr. 2014;24(3):193–207.CrossRef
44.
Swift JK, Greenberg RP, Tompkins KA, et al. Treatment refusal and premature termination in psychotherapy, pharmacotherapy, and their combination: a meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons. Psychotherapy (Chic). 2017;54(1):47–57.CrossRef
45.
Higgins JPT, Sterne JAC, Savović J, et al. A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. In: Chandler J, McKenzie J, Boutron I, Welch V, editors. Cochrane Methods. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;10(Suppl 1). dx.​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​14651858.​CD201601.
46.
Wahab IA, Pratt NL, Kalisch LM, et al. The detection of adverse events in randomized clinical trials: can we really say new medicines are safe? Curr Drug Saf. 2013;8(2):104–13.CrossRefPubMed
47.
Jacobson NS, Truax P. Clinical significance. A statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consult Psychol. 1991;5(1):12–9.CrossRef
48.
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, et al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Br Med J. 2003;327(7414):557–60.CrossRef
49.
Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Br Med J. 1997;315(7109):629–34.CrossRef
50.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians? Br Med J. 2008;336(7651):995–8.CrossRef
51.
Betz BJ. Experiences in research in psychotherapy with schizophrenic patients. In: Strupp HH, Luborsky L, editors. Research in psychotherapy. Washington, D.C: American Psychological Association; 1962. p. 41–60.CrossRef
52.
Cartwright RD, Vogel JL. A comparison of changes in psychoneurotic patients during matched periods of therapy and no-therapy. J Consult Psychol. 1960;24:121–7.CrossRef
53.
Bent S, Padula A, Avins AL. Brief communication: better ways to question patients about adverse medical events: a randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(4):257–61.CrossRefPubMed
54.
Olsen H, Klemetsrud T, Stokke HP, et al. Adverse drug reactions in current antihypertensive therapy: a general practice survey of 2586 patients in Norway. Blood Press. 1999;8(2):94–101.CrossRefPubMed
55.
Edwards JE, McQuay HJ, Moore RA, et al. Reporting of adverse effects in clinical trials should be improved: lessons from acute postoperative pain. J Pain Symptom Manag. 1999;18(6):427–37.CrossRef
56.
Papanikolaou PN, Christidi GD, Ioannidis JP. Comparison of evidence on harms of medical interventions in randomized and nonrandomized studies. CMAJ. 2006;174(5):635–41.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Adverse effects of psychotherapy: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
Authors
Rahel Klatte
Bernhard Strauss
Christoph Flückiger
Jenny Rosendahl
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2018
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0802-x

Other articles of this Issue 1/2018

Systematic Reviews 1/2018 Go to the issue

Research

A systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing azacitidine and decitabine for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome

Protocol

Cholera diagnosis in human stool and detection in water: protocol for a systematic review of available technologies

Research

CYP genetic variants and toxicity related to anti-tubercular agents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Protocol

Anxiety and the development and maintenance of anorexia nervosa: protocol for a systematic review

Protocol

Screening for small for gestational age using third-trimester ultrasound markers: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of screening test accuracy

Protocol

Economic evaluation of HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis strategies: protocol for a methodological systematic review and quantitative synthesis