Anxiety and depression are common among patients with chronic physical illnesses and have a significant impact on morbidity, quality of life, and health service utilisation. Psychological treatment of anxiety and depression has small to moderate efficacy in this group and is not commonly based on a model of causal mechanisms. A novel approach to understanding and improving mental health outcomes in physical illnesses is needed. One approach may be to explore the role of metacognitive beliefs which are reliably associated with anxiety and depression in individuals with mental health difficulties. The current systematic review aimed to evaluate the contribution of metacognitive beliefs to anxiety and depression across physical illnesses. Systematic searches were conducted on Web of Science, PsychINFO, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL of studies published between 1997 and January 2019. 13 eligible studies were identified that in sum comprised 2851 participants. Metacognitive beliefs were found to have reliable, moderate, positive and significant associations with anxiety and depression symptoms across a range of physical illnesses. There appeared to be commonality and some specificity in the relationships. Negative metacognitive beliefs concerned with uncontrollability and danger of worry were associated with both anxiety and depression across all physical illnesses assessed, whilst more specific associations emerged for individual medical conditions where positive beliefs about worry, cognitive confidence and cognitive self-consciousness were unique correlates. Negative metacognitive beliefs of uncontrollability and danger significantly and positively predicted symptoms of anxiety and depression after controlling for factors including age, gender, disease factors and cognition (illness perceptions and intolerance of uncertainty). The results suggest that the metacognitive model of psychological disorder is applicable to psychological symptoms of anxiety and depression across a range of chronic medical conditions, implying that metacognitive therapy might be helpful in improving outcomes in multiple morbidities that involve poor mental and medical health.

ObjectiveDepression and anxiety are up to three times more prevalent in cardiac patients than the general population and are linked to increased risks of future cardiac events and mortality. Psychological interventions for cardiac patients vary in content and are often associated with weak outcomes. A recent treatment, metacognitive therapy (MCT) has been shown to be highly effective at treating psychological distress in mental health settings. This is the first study to explore qualitatively, cardiac rehabilitation (CR) patients’ experiences and understanding of group MCT with the aim of examining aspects of treatment that patients experienced as helpful.MethodsIn-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 24 purposively sampled CR patients following group MCT. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.ResultsTwo main themes were identified: (1) general therapy factors that were seen largely as beneficial, where patients highlighted interaction with other CR patients and CR staff delivery of treatment and their knowledge of cardiology; (2) group MCT-specific factors that were seen as beneficial encompassed patients’ understanding of the intervention and use of particular group MCT techniques. Most patients viewed MCT in a manner consistent with the metacognitive model. All the patients who completed group MCT were positive about it and described self-perceived changes in their thinking and well-being. A minority of patients gave specific reasons for not finding the treatment helpful.ConclusionCR patients with anxiety and depression symptoms valued specific group MCT techniques, the opportunity to learn about other patients, and the knowledge of CR staff. The data supports the transferability of treatment to a CR context and advantages that this might bring.