Cited by 115Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and TherapiesMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMindfulness and Compassion Interventions

The evidence base for psychological interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review of reviews

Open access
Prothero, Louise, Barley, Elizabeth, Galloway, James, Georgopoulou, Sofia, Sturt, Jackie·2018·International Journal of Nursing Studies

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Psychological interventions are an important but often overlooked adjunctive treatment option for patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Findings from systematic reviews of psychological interventions for this patient group are conflicting. A systematic review of reviews can explain inconsistencies between studies and provide a clearer understanding of the effects of interventions. OBJECTIVES: To: 1) determine the effectiveness of psychological interventions in improving biopsychosocial outcomes for adults with rheumatoid arthritis, 2) determine the relationship between the intensity of the psychological interventions (number of sessions, duration of sessions, duration of intervention) on outcomes, and 3) assess the impact of comparator group (usual care, education only) on outcomes. DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review of reviews using the following inclusion criteria: 1) randomised controlled trials of psychological interventions (including cognitive behavioural therapy, supportive counselling, psychotherapy, self-regulatory techniques, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy and disclosure therapy) provided as an adjunct to medication, 2) included rheumatoid arthritis patients aged ≥ 18 years, 3) reported findings for at least 1 of the primary outcomes: pain, fatigue, psychological status, functional disability and disease activity and 4) were published in English between January 2000 and March 2015 (updated January 2018). DATA SOURCES: We searched in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects. Reference lists were searched for additional reviews. REVIEW METHODS: Study selection and 50% of the quality assessments were performed by two independent reviewers. Methodological quality was measured using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews checklist. Data extraction was conducted by one reviewer using a predesigned data extraction form. RESULTS: Eight systematic reviews met inclusion criteria (one review was excluded due to its low-quality score). Small post intervention improvements in patient global assessment, functional disability, pain, fatigue, anxiety and depression were observed. The effect on coping, self-efficacy and physical activity was greater. Improvements in depression, coping and physical activity were maintained (8.5-14 months). Interventions delivered over a longer period with a maintenance component appeared more effective. Attention, education, and placebo control groups produced some improvements but not as large as those produced by the psychological interventions. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological interventions result in small to moderate improvements in biopsychosocial outcomes for patients with rheumatoid arthritis in addition to those achieved by standard care. Several priorities for future research were identified, including determining the cost effectiveness of non-psychologically trained health professionals delivering psychological interventions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2018.03.008

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • For CBT, the findings are similar to those in high quality reviews; for example, Bernady 2010 used Cochrane methods including GRADE in a review of psychological interventions for adults with fibromyalgia, including 29 RCTs, and this agreement extends to CBT in rheumatoid arthritis (Prothero 2018).

    “For CBT, the findings are similar to those in high quality reviews. For example, Bernady 2010 used Cochrane methods including GRADE in a review of psychological interventions for adults with fibromyalgia, including 29 RCTs. This agreement extends to CBT in rheumatoid arthritis (Prothero 2018).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 54 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prothero, L., Barley, E., Galloway, J., Georgopoulou, S., & Sturt, J.
Affiliations
  • King's College London (GB)
  • University of West London (GB)
  • University of East London (GB)
Corresponding author
Prothero, Louise
Venue
International Journal of Nursing Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-06
Volume
82
Pages
20-29
ISSN
0020-7489 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2793007471
Cited by
115
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
2.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2020-07-01)
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Nursing Studies (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UEL Research Repository (University of East London) (acceptedVersion)
  • City Research Online (City University London) (acceptedVersion)
  • UWL Repository (University of West London) (submittedVersion)
  • Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • UEL Research Repository (University of East London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) (RP-PG-0610-10066)
  • King’s College Hospital Charity
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
Keywords
psychological intervention, adjunctive therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, supportive counseling, psychotherapy, pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety, functional disability, coping, self-efficacy, physical activity, intervention intensity, maintenance of treatment effects, biopsychosocial outcomes, cost-effectiveness
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Arthritis, Rheumatoid, Humans, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Evidence-Based Medicine

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review