Depression in the medically ill: diagnostic and therapeutic implications

Patient preference in psychological treatment and associations with self-reported outcome: national cross-sectional survey in England and Wales

BACKGROUND

Providers of psychological therapies are encouraged to offer patients choice about their treatment, but there is very little information about what preferences people have or the impact that meeting these has on treatment outcomes.

METHOD

Cross-sectional survey of people receiving psychological treatment from 184 NHS services in England and Wales. 14,587 respondents were asked about treatment preferences and the extent to which these were met by their service. They were also asked to rate the extent to which therapy helped them cope with their difficulties.

RESULTS

Most patients (12,549-86.0 %, 95 % CI: 85.5-86.6) expressed a preference for at least one aspect of their treatment. Of these, 4,600 (36.7 %, 95 % CI: 35.8-37.5) had at least one preference that was not met. While most patients reported that their preference for appointment times, venue and type of treatment were met, only 1,769 (40.5 %) of the 4,253 that had a preference for gender had it met. People who expressed a preference that was not met reported poorer outcomes than those with a preference that was met (Odds Ratios: appointment times = 0.29, venue = 0.32, treatment type = 0.16, therapist gender = 0.32, language in which treatment was delivered = 0.40).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients who took part in this survey had preferences about their treatment. People who reported preferences that were not met were less likely to state that treatment had helped them with their problems. Routinely assessing and meeting patient preferences may improve the outcomes of psychological treatment.

Does the use of atypical antipsychotics as adjunctive therapy in depression result in cost savings? Comparing healthcare costs and utilization between second-line treatment options

BACKGROUND

Several atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) are used as second-line agents for treatment resistant depression. AAPs can be expensive compared to other treatment options and can cause several side effects.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate healthcare costs and utilization of AAPs compared to other second-line agents.

METHODS

Observational study using Medicaid claims data (2006-2011). Subjects were depression-diagnosed adult members with at least two prescriptions of antidepressant medications followed by a second-line agent. Gamma generalized linear models (GLM) produced estimates of the difference in mean expenditures among treatment groups after adjusting for individual baseline characteristics using propensity scores. Negative binomial models produced estimates of the difference in number of hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits.

RESULTS

A total of 3910 members received second-line treatment. Treatment groups were AAPs (n = 2211), augmentation agents other than AAPs (n = 1008), and antidepressant switching (n = 691). AAPs resulted in higher mean adjusted pharmacy costs and higher mean adjusted total mental health-related costs. Mean adjusted total healthcare costs and number of inpatient and ED visits were not different among treatments.

CONCLUSION

The results show no evidence that AAPs used as second-line treatment for depression results in overall cost savings or lower inpatient and ED visits compared to other treatment strategies.

Vilazodone: A landmark antidepressant approval or another “me-too” drug?

Vilazodone is a novel antidepressant which is indicated for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adult patients. This article reviews the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of vilazodone, and discusses published and ongoing research on the medication.

Vilazodone: in major depressive disorder

Vilazodone, a novel antidepressant agent that combines selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) activity and serotonin 5-HT(1A) receptor partial agonist activity in a single molecule, is indicated for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in the US. It is administered orally, once daily, with food. At the recommended dosage of 40 mg/day, vilazodone was effective in the short-term treatment of MDD in adults, as evidenced by significant improvements versus placebo on multiple measures of depression, including the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17), in two pivotal, 8-week, randomized, double-blind, phase III studies. Significant differences between vilazodone and placebo on the MADRS and HAM-D-17 were seen after 1 week of treatment (first efficacy timepoint) in one of the two studies. Long-term treatment with vilazodone 40 mg/day was associated with an improvement from baseline in depressive symptoms in a 52-week, noncompar-ative, phase III study. Vilazodone was generally well tolerated in the short- and long-term treatment of MDD, with diarrhoea and nausea being the most frequently occurring treatment-emergent adverse events. Vilazodone had a minimal impact on sexual functioning in the three phase III studies.

If at first you don't succeed: a review of the evidence for antidepressant augmentation, combination and switching strategies

Major depressive disorder is a common and disabling illness that leads to significant reductions in quality of life and considerable cost to society. Despite numerous advances in the pharmacological treatment of depression, many patients remain ill despite initial treatment. Beyond first-line treatment, current guidelines recommend either augmentation or switching of the initial antidepressant. In this narrative review, we summarize the data from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses in order to concisely discuss how the impact of current research can be translated into clinical practice and, ultimately, into lasting improvements in patient outcomes. The augmentation strategies reviewed are lithium, thyroid hormone, pindolol, psychostimulants and second-generation antipsychotics. The data on switching from first-line antidepressants to other antidepressants are also reviewed, and include switching within the same class, switching to other first-line antidepressant classes and switching to less commonly prescribed antidepressants. Finally, the strategy of antidepressant combinations is examined. Overall, the strength of evidence supporting a trial of augmentation or a switch to a new agent is very similar, with remission rates between 25% and 50% in both cases. Our review of the evidence suggests several conclusions. First, although it is true that adjunctive lithium and thyroid hormone have established efficacy, we can only be confident that this is true for use in combination with tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), and the trials were done in less treatment-resistant patients than those who typically receive TCAs today. Of these two options, triiodothyronine augmentation seems to offer the best benefit/risk ratio for augmentation of modern antidepressants. After failure of a first-line selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), neither a switch within class nor a switch to a different class of antidepressant is unequivocally supported by the data, although switching from an SSRI to venlafaxine or mirtazapine may potentially offer greater benefits. Interestingly, switching from a newer antidepressant to a TCA after a poor response to the former is not supported by strong evidence. Of all strategies to augment response to new-generation antidepressants, quetiapine and aripiprazole are best supported by the evidence, although neither the cost effectiveness nor the longer-term benefit of these strategies has been established. The data to guide later steps in the treatment of resistant depression are sparse. Given the wide variety of options for the treatment of major depressive disorder, and the demonstrated importance of truly adequate treatment to the long-term outcomes of patients facing this illness, it is clear that further well conducted studies are needed.

Prevalence of depression in a general hospital in Izhevsk, Russia

BACKGROUND

There are a lot of studies on depressive disorders in a general hospital done across the world, but no data from Russia on this subject was found in international psychiatric journals or MEDLINE.

AIMS

to determine the prevalence of depressive disorders in medical inpatients in Izhevsk, the capital of the Udmurt Republic, a region in Russia, and to identify associated factors.

METHOD

A sample of 323 adult medical inpatients was composed. The Russian version of the MINI 5.0.0 was used.

RESULTS

The prevalence of lifetime and current depressive disorders was 30% and 20.7%, respectively. Depression was more common in women, widowed or divorced, retired or disabled, with low income and bad family relationships, and among respondents with a chronic somatic illness. Depression had a high comorbidity with organic mental and anxiety disorders. Only 40.3% of the individuals with depression had referred for psychiatric consultations, most of them being treated with fluvoxamine.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence of depression was substantial but consistent with other studies. Taking into consideration associated factors, physicians can improve recognition and treatment of depression in medical inpatients.