Effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for alcohol use disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis update

Background: Given the accumulating research, evolving psychosocial treatment, and equivocal findings, updating WHO's Mental Health Gap Action Programme-2015 was necessary to ensure guidelines reflect effective strategies for alcohol use disorder (AUD).Objective: To estimate the effects of psychosocial interventions on drinking and related outcomes.Methods: We included randomized controlled trials published between January 2015 and June 2022 on adults with alcohol dependence (ICD 10/DSM-IV) and moderate to severe AUD (DSM-5), and those examined psychosocial interventions against treatment-as-usual (TAU) and active controls. Eight databases and registries were searched. Relative Risk (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) were used for dichotomous and continuous outcomes. We used Cochrane's risk of bias assessment (RoB2).Results: Of 873 screened records, 14 and 13 studies in the narrative synthesis and meta-analysis. Of the 2,575 participants, 71.5% were men. Thirteen studies used ICD 10/DSM IV diagnosis. Compared to TAU, any psychosocial intervention increased the relative risk of abstinence by 28% [N = 7, RR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.53, p = .01, NNT = 9]. There were minimal heterogeneity and no evidence of publication bias. Psychosocial interventions were not effective in reducing the drinking frequency (n = 2, Hedge's g = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.46 to 0.26, p = .57) and drinks/drinking days (N = 5, g = -0.10, 95% CI: -0.37 to 0.16, p = .43). Treatment discontinuation did not differ between intervention and control groups [RR = 1.09, 95% CI: 0.66 to 1.80].Conclusion: Psychosocial interventions are effective in improving abstinence but not in reducing drinking frequency or amount. Policymakers must consider this evidence to generate AUD treatment guidelines.Registration: PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022342608