Effectiveness of non-pharmacological therapies for treating post-stroke depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Abstract

ObjectivePost-stroke depression (PSD) is a common neurological and psychiatric sequelae following a stroke, often surpassing the primary effects of the stroke due to its strong correlation with high mortality rates. In recent years, non-pharmacological therapy has garnered significant attention as a supplementary treatment for PSD, becoming widely adopted in clinical practice. However, the efficacy of specific intervention strategies remains unclear. This study aimed to conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) of published studies to compare the efficacy of different non-pharmacological therapies for treating PSD. MethodWe systematically searched five databases from inception through March 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating non-pharmacological therapies for the treatment of PSD. We considered individual intervention and intervention class. Intervention classes included traditional Chinese medicine (TCM), non-invasive electrotherapy stimulation (NIES), psychotherapy (PT), exercise therapy, hyperbaric oxygen, and combined interventions. The NMA was conducted using R and Stata software, following a frequency-based methodology. Assessment of methodological quality and risk of bias was conducted using the Risk of Bias assessment tool 2.0. Therapies were ranked using the P-score, and box-plots visualization, meta-regression, and sensitivity analysis, were performed to assess transitivity, heterogeneity, and consistency, respectively. ResultsThe NMA included 43 studies with a total of 3138 participants. Random-effects models revealed significant efficacy for acupuncture (ACUP) (P-score = 0.92; pooled standardized mean difference (95% CI): −3.12 (−4.63 to −1.60)) and transcranial direct current stimulation (P-score = 0.85; −2.78 (−5.06 to −0.49)) compared to the treatment as usual (TAU) group. In categorical comparisons, TCM_PT (P-score = 0.82; −1.91 (−3.54 to −0.28)), TCM (P-score = 0.79; −1.65 (−2.33 to −0.97)), and NIES (P-score = 0.74; −1.54 (−2.62 to −0.46)) showed significant differences compared to TAU group. Furthermore, our results indicated no significant difference between PT and the control groups. However, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis results indicated very low overall evidence grade. ConclusionLimited evidence suggests that ACUP may be the most effective non-pharmacological therapy for improving PSD, and TCM_PT is the best intervention class. However, the evidence quality is very low, underscoring the need for additional high-quality RCTs to validate these findings, particularly given the limited number of RCTs available for each therapy.