Background The benefits of cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT) and positive psychology therapy (PPT) in patients with cardiovascular disease are still not well defined. We assessed the efficacy of CBT and PPT on psychological outcomes in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients. Methods Randomized controlled trials evaluating CBT or PPT in CAD patients published until May 2018 were systematically analyzed. Primary outcomes were depression, stress, anxiety, anger, happiness, and vital satisfaction. Random effects meta-analyses using the inverse variance method were performed. Effects were expressed as standardized mean difference (SMD) or mean differences (MD) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs); risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane tool. Results Nineteen trials were included (n = 1956); sixteen evaluated CBT (n = 1732), and three PPT (n = 224). Compared with control groups, depressive symptoms (13 trials; SMD −0.80; 95% CI −1.33 to −0.26), and anxiety (11 trials; SMD −1.26; 95% CI −2.11 to −0.41) improved after the PI, and depression (6 trials; SMD −2.08; 95% CI −3.22 to −0.94), anxiety (5 trials; SMD −1.33; 95% CI −2.38 to −0.29), and stress (3 trials; SMD −3.72; 95% CI −5.91 to −1.52) improved at the end of follow-up. Vital satisfaction was significantly increased at follow-up (MD 1.30, 0.27, 2.33). Non-significant effects on secondary outcomes were found. Subgroup analyses were consistent with overall analyses. Conclusion CBT and PPT improve several psychological outcomes in CAD patients. Depression and anxiety improved immediately after the intervention while stress and vital satisfaction improve in the mid-term. Future research should assess the individual role of CBT and PPT in CAD populations.

No abstract

No abstract

An elevated percentage of incidences involving both the pre analytical and the analytical phase were observed during post-vasectomy seminal analysis. Inadequate conditions may affect the results and justify that spermatozoa may be seen in some but not all the ejaculates of the same patient. We recommend that two semen samples per patient are required to ensure that he is correctly evaluated. We propose to report a negative result as a spermatozoa count bellow the detection limit of our analytical procedure similar to other laboratory magnitudes to minimize the effect of fluctuations in such a low count of rare non motile sperm.

No abstract