Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2018 Jun 27;18(1):211.
doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1739-2.

The effect of positive psychology interventions on well-being and distress in clinical samples with psychiatric or somatic disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Farid Chakhssi  1   2 , Jannis T Kraiss  3 , Marion Sommers-Spijkerman  3 , Ernst T Bohlmeijer  3
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

The effect of positive psychology interventions on well-being and distress in clinical samples with psychiatric or somatic disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Farid Chakhssi et al. BMC Psychiatry. .

Abstract

Background: Although positive psychology interventions (PPIs) show beneficial effects on mental health in non-clinical populations, the current literature is inconclusive regarding its effectiveness in clinical settings. We aimed to examine the effects of PPIs on well-being (primary outcome), depression, anxiety, and stress (secondary outcomes) in clinical samples with psychiatric or somatic disorders.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. PsycINFO, PubMed, and Scopus were searched for controlled studies of PPIs in clinical samples between Jan 1, 1998 and May 31, 2017. Methodological quality of each study was rated. We used Hedges' adjusted g to calculate effect sizes and pooled results using random-effect models.

Results: Thirty studies were included, representing 1864 patients with clinical disorders. At post-intervention, PPIs showed significant, small effect sizes for well-being (Hedges' g = 0.24) and depression (g = 0.23) compared to control conditions when omitting outliers. Significant moderate improvements were observed for anxiety (g = 0.36). Effect sizes for stress were not significant. Follow-up effects (8-12 weeks), when available, yielded similar effect sizes. Quality of the studies was low to moderate.

Conclusion: These findings indicate that PPIs, wherein the focus is on eliciting positive feelings, cognitions or behaviors, not only have the potential to improve well-being, but can also reduce distress in populations with clinical disorders. Given the growing interest for PPIs in clinical settings, more high quality research is warranted as to determine the effectiveness of PPIs in clinical samples.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42016037451.

Keywords: Chronic illness; Distress; Interventions; Meta-analysis; Positive psychology; Well-being.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart of the study selection process
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Post-intervention effects of positive psychology interventions on well-being. The square boxes show Hedges’ g effect size and sample size (the larger the box, the larger the sample size) in each study, and the line the 95% confidence interval. The diamond reflects the pooled effect size and the line the width of the 95% confidence interval
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Post-treatment effects of positive psychology interventions on depression. The square boxes show Hedges’ g effect size and sample size (the larger the box, the larger the sample size) in each study, and the line the 95% confidence interval. The diamond reflects the pooled effect size and the line the width of the 95% confidence interval
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Post-treatment effects of positive psychology interventions on anxiety. The square boxes show Hedges’ g effect size and sample size (the larger the box, the larger the sample size) in each study, and the line the 95% confidence interval. The diamond reflects the pooled effect size and the width of the 95% confidence interval
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Post-treatment effects of positive psychology interventions on stress. The square boxes show Hedges’ g effect size and sample size (the larger the box, the larger the sample size) in each study, and the line the 95% confidence interval. The diamond reflects the pooled effect size and the width of the 95% confidence interval
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Duckworth AL, Steen TA, Seligman ME. Positive psychology in clinical practice. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2005;1:629–651. doi: 10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.1.102803.144154. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schueller SM, Parks AC. The science of self-help. Eur Psychol. 2014;19(2):145–155. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000181. - DOI
    1. Huppert FA, Whittington JE. Evidence for the independence of positive and negative well-being: implications for quality of life assessment. Br J Health Psychol. 2003;8(Pt 1):107–122. doi: 10.1348/135910703762879246. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Keyes CL. Mental illness and/or mental health? Investigating axioms of the complete state model of health. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2005;73(3):539–548. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.73.3.539. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lamers S, Westerhof GJ, Glas CA, Bohlmeijer ET. The bidirectional relation between positive mental health and psychopathology in a longitudinal representative panel study. J Posit Psychol. 2015;10(6):553–560. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2015.1015156. - DOI

MeSH terms