Work

Effectiveness of lifestyle interventions for preventing or managing the adverse cardiometabolic and other physical health effects of antipsychotic medications in children and adolescents: systematic review and meta-analysis

Year: 2025

Type: review

Study designs: Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis

Abstract: BACKGROUND: An increasing number of children and adolescents are prescribed second-generation antipsychotic medications, which may lead to cardiometabolic or other physical health impairments. It is unknown whether lifestyle interventions can prevent or manage these adverse effects. AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of lifestyle interventions for preventing or managing cardiometabolic risks and other adverse physical health outcomes in this population. METHOD: Four bibliographic databases were searched up to February 2024. Randomised controlled trials reporting a physical health outcome of children or adolescents (aged 6-17 years) taking antipsychotics and participating in a lifestyle intervention compared with treatment as usual (TAU) were eligible for inclusion. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool was used to assess risk of bias. Data were synthesised via a random-effects meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. RESULTS: Four studies with a total of 370 participants were included. Most (75%) had a high risk of bias. Lifestyle interventions resulted in moderate but statistically non-significant reductions in participants' body mass index (standard mean difference -0.70, 95% CI: -1.70 to 0.31) compared with TAU. Some studies reported improvements in other physical health outcomes favouring the intervention, although findings were inconsistent and varied across different measures. Reporting of secondary indicators of physical health, including participant or family health behaviours, was limited. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of lifestyle interventions for preventing or managing the cardiometabolic risk and other adverse physical health outcomes in this population is unclear due to the limited number of available trials, small samples and high risk of bias. Larger trials are needed.

Source: BJPsych Open

DOI: 10.1192/bjo.2025.10919