Introduction Worldwide, it is estimated that 264 million people meet the diagnostic criteria for anxiety conditions. Effective treatment regimens consist of cognitive and behavioural therapies. During the COVID-19 pandemic, treatment delivery relied heavily on telemedicine technologies which enabled remote consultation with patients via phone or video platforms. We aim to identify, appraise and synthesise randomised controlled trials comparing telehealth to face-to-face delivery of care to individuals of any age or gender, diagnosed with anxiety disorders, and disorders with anxiety features. Methods To conduct this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched three electronic databases, clinical trial registries and citing-cited references of included studies. Results A total of five small randomised controlled trials were includable; telehealth was conducted by video in three studies, and by telephone in two. The risk of bias for the 5 studies was low to moderate for most domains. Outcomes related to anxiety, depression symptom severity, obsessive-compulsive disorder, function, working alliance, and satisfaction were comparable between the two modes of delivery at each follow-up time point (immediately post-intervention, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months), with no significant differences reported ( p > 0.05). None of the trials reported on the costs of telehealth compared to face-to-face care. Discussion For effectively treating anxiety and related conditions, interventions delivered by telehealth appear to be as effective as the same therapy delivered in-person. However, further high-quality trials are warranted to determine the effectiveness, acceptability, feasibility, and cost-effectiveness of telehealth interventions for the management of a wider range of anxiety disorders and treatments.

BackgroundAlthough uncomplicated urinary tract infection (UTI) is commonly treated with antibiotics, the duration of symptoms without their use is not established; this hampers informed decision making about antibiotic use.AimTo determine the natural history of uncomplicated UTI in adults.Design and settingSystematic review.MethodPubMed was searched for articles published until November 2019, along with reference lists of articles identified in the search. Eligible studies were those involving adults with UTIs in either the placebo group of randomised trials or in single-group prognostic studies that did not use antibiotics and measured symptom duration. A modified version of a risk of bias assessment for prognostic studies was used. Outcomes were the percentage of patients who, at any time point, were symptom free, had symptom improvement, or had worsening symptoms (failed to improve). Adverse event data were also extracted.ResultsThree randomised trials (346 placebo group participants) were identified, all of which specified women only in their inclusion criteria. The risk of bias was generally low, but incomplete reporting of some details limited assessment. Over the first 9 days, the percentage of participants who were symptom free or reported improved symptoms was reported as rising to 42%. At 6 weeks, the percentage of such participants was 36%; up to 39% of participants failed to improve by 6 weeks. The rate of adverse effects was low and, in two trials, progression to pyelonephritis was reported in one placebo participant.ConclusionAlthough some uncertainty around the natural history of uncomplicated UTIs remains, some women appear to improve or become symptom free spontaneously, and most improvement occurs in the first 9 days. Other women either failed to improve or became worse over a variable timespan, although the rate of serious complications was low.

Background Mental disorders are a leading cause of distress and disability worldwide. To meet patient demand, there is a need for increased access to high-quality, evidence-based mental health care. Telehealth has become well established in the treatment of illnesses, including mental health conditions. Objective This study aims to conduct a robust evidence synthesis to assess whether there is evidence of differences between telehealth and face-to-face care for the management of less common mental and physical health conditions requiring psychotherapy. Methods In this systematic review, we included randomized controlled trials comparing telehealth (telephone, video, or both) versus the face-to-face delivery of psychotherapy for less common mental health conditions and physical health conditions requiring psychotherapy. The psychotherapy delivered had to be comparable between the telehealth and face-to-face groups, and it had to be delivered by general practitioners, primary care nurses, or allied health staff (such as psychologists and counselors). Patient (symptom severity, overall improvement in psychological symptoms, and function), process (working alliance and client satisfaction), and financial (cost) outcomes were included. Results A total of 12 randomized controlled trials were included, with 931 patients in aggregate; therapies included cognitive behavioral and family therapies delivered in populations encompassing addiction disorders, eating disorders, childhood mental health problems, and chronic conditions. Telehealth was delivered by video in 7 trials, by telephone in 3 trials, and by both in 1 trial, and the delivery mode was unclear in 1 trial. The risk of bias for the 12 trials was low or unclear for most domains, except for the lack of the blinding of participants, owing to the nature of the comparison. There were no significant differences in symptom severity between telehealth and face-to-face therapy immediately after treatment (standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.05, 95% CI −0.17 to 0.27) or at any other follow-up time point. Similarly, there were no significant differences immediately after treatment between telehealth and face-to-face care delivery on any of the other outcomes meta-analyzed, including overall improvement (SMD 0.00, 95% CI −0.40 to 0.39), function (SMD 0.13, 95% CI −0.16 to 0.42), working alliance client (SMD 0.11, 95% CI −0.34 to 0.57), working alliance therapist (SMD −0.16, 95% CI −0.91 to 0.59), and client satisfaction (SMD 0.12, 95% CI −0.30 to 0.53), or at any other time point (3, 6, and 12 months). Conclusions With regard to effectively treating less common mental health conditions and physical conditions requiring psychological support, there is insufficient evidence of a difference between psychotherapy delivered via telehealth and the same therapy delivered face-to-face. However, there was no includable evidence in this review for some serious mental health conditions, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorders, and further high-quality research is needed to determine whether telehealth is a viable, equivalent treatment option for these conditions.

Ensuring continuity of care for patients with major depressive disorders poses multiple challenges. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing real-time telehealth to face-to-face therapy for individuals with depression. We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central (to November 2020), conducted a citation analysis (January 2021), and searched clinical trial registries (March 2021). We included randomised controlled trials comparing similar or identical care, delivered via real-time telehealth (phone, video) to face-to-face. Outcomes included: depression severity, quality of life, therapeutic alliance, and care satisfaction. Where data were sufficient, mean differences were calculated. Nine trials (1268 patients) were included. There were no differences between telehealth and face-to-face care for depression severity at post-treatment (SMD −0.04, 95% CI −0.21 to 0.13, p = 0.67) or at other time points, except at 9 months post-treatment (SMD −0.39, 95% CI −0.75 to −0.02, p = 0.04). One trial reported no differences in quality-of-life scores at 3- or 12-months post-treatment. One trial found no differences in therapeutic alliance at weeks 4 and 14 of treatment. There were no differences in treatment satisfaction between telehealth and face-to-face immediately post-treatment (SMD −0.14, 95% CI −0.56 to 0.28, p = 0.51) or at 3 or 12-months. Evidence suggests that for patients with depression or depression symptoms, the provision of care via telehealth may be a viable alternative to the provision of care face-to-face. However, additional trials are needed with longer follow-up, conducted in a wider range of settings, and with younger patients.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Non-bullous impetigo is typically treated with antibiotics. However, the duration of symptoms without their use is not established which hampers informed decision-making about antibiotic use. Aim: To determine the natural history of non-bullous impetigo. Design and Setting: Systematic review. Method: We searched PubMed up to January 2020 and reference lists of articles identified in the search. Eligible studies involved participants with impetigo in either the placebo group of randomised trials or in single-group prognostic studies not using antibiotics and measured time to resolution or improvement. A modified version of a risk of bias assessment for prognostic studies was used. Outcomes were percentage of participants who, at any timepoint, had: i) symptom resolution, ii) symptom improvement, or iii) failed to improve. Adverse event data were also extracted. Results: Seven randomised trials (557 placebo group participants) were identified. At about 7 days, the percentage of participants classified as resolved ranged from 13% to 74% across the studies, whereas the percentage classified as ‘failure to improve’ ranged from 16% to 41%. The rate of adverse effects was low. Incomplete reporting of some details limited assessment of risk of bias. Conclusions: While some uncertainty around the natural history of non-bullous impetigo remains, symptoms resolve in some patients by about 7 days without using antibiotics, with about one-quarter of patients not improving. Immediate antibiotic use may not be mandatory and discussions with patients should include the expected course of untreated impetigo and careful consideration of the benefits and harms of antibiotic use.

No abstract