PRACTICE GUIDELINE FOR THE Treatment of Patients With Major Depressive Disorder
01 Jan 2010-
About: The article was published on 2010-01-01 and is currently open access. It has received 1417 citations till now. The article focuses on the topics: Guideline & Major depressive disorder.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: It is suggested that disrupting focal pathological activity in limbic-cortical circuits using electrical stimulation of the subgenual cingulate white matter can effectively reverse symptoms in otherwise treatment-resistant depression.
3,610 citations
Cites background from "PRACTICE GUIDELINE FOR THE Treatmen..."
...While depression can be effectively treated in the majority of patients by either medication or some form of evidence-based psychotherapy (American Psychiatric Association, 2000), up to 20% of patients fail to respond to standard interventions (Fava, 2003; Keller et al., 1992)....
[...]
TL;DR: It is suggested that a refined definition of anhedonia that distinguishes between deficits in pleasure and motivation is essential for the purposes of identifying its neurobiological substrates and introduced the term "decisionalAnhedonia" to address the influence of anhydonia on reward decision-making.
1,166 citations
TL;DR: After unsuccessful treatment with an SSRI, approximately one in four patients had a remission of symptoms after switching to another antidepressant, suggesting any one of the medications in the study provided a reasonable second-step choice for patients with depression.
Abstract: Background After unsuccessful treatment for depression with a selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), it is not known whether switching to one antidepressant is more effective than switching to another. Methods We randomly assigned 727 adult outpatients with a nonpsychotic major depressive disorder who had no remission of symptoms or could not tolerate the SSRI citalopram to receive one of the following drugs for up to 14 weeks: sustained-release bupropion (239 patients) at a maximal daily dose of 400 mg, sertraline (238 patients) at a maximal daily dose of 200 mg, or extended-release venlafaxine (250 patients) at a maximal daily dose of 375 mg. The study was conducted in 18 primary and 23 psychiatric care settings. The primary outcome was symptom remission, defined by a total score of 7 or less on the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17) at the end of the study. Scores on the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology — Self Report (QIDS-SR-16), obtained at treatment visits, de...
921 citations
TL;DR: Cognitive therapy can be as effective as medications for the initial treatment of moderate to severe major depression, but this degree of effectiveness may depend on a high level of therapist experience or expertise.
Abstract: Background There is substantial evidence that antidepressant medications treat moderate to severe depression effectively, but there is less data on cognitive therapy’s effects in this population. Objective To compare the efficacy in moderate to severe depression of antidepressant medications with cognitive therapy in a placebo-controlled trial. Design Random assignment to one of the following: 16 weeks of medications (n = 120), 16 weeks of cognitive therapy (n = 60), or 8 weeks of pill placebo (n = 60). Setting Research clinics at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, and Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn. Patients Two hundred forty outpatients, aged 18 to 70 years, with moderate to severe major depressive disorder. Interventions Some study subjects received paroxetine, up to 50 mg daily, augmented by lithium carbonate or desipramine hydrochloride if necessary; others received individual cognitive therapy. Main Outcome Measure The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale provided continuous severity scores and allowed for designations of response and remission. Results At 8 weeks, response rates in medications (50%) and cognitive therapy (43%) groups were both superior to the placebo (25%) group. Analyses based on continuous scores at 8 weeks indicated an advantage for each of the active treatments over placebo, each with a medium effect size. The advantage was significant for medication relative to placebo, and at the level of a nonsignificant trend for cognitive therapy relative to placebo. At 16 weeks, response rates were 58% in each of the active conditions; remission rates were 46% for medication, 40% for cognitive therapy. Follow-up tests of a site × treatment interaction indicated a significant difference only at Vanderbilt University, where medications were superior to cognitive therapy. Site differences in patient characteristics and in the relative experience levels of the cognitive therapists each appear to have contributed to this interaction. Conclusion Cognitive therapy can be as effective as medications for the initial treatment of moderate to severe major depression, but this degree of effectiveness may depend on a high level of therapist experience or expertise.
920 citations
TL;DR: To screen for depression in postpartum women and evaluate positive screen findings to determine the timing of episode onset, rate and intensity of self-harm ideation, and primary and secondary DSM-IV disorders to inform treatment and policy decisions.
Abstract: Importance The period prevalence of depression among women is 21.9% during the first postpartum year; however, questions remain about the value of screening for depression. Objectives To screen for depression in postpartum women and evaluate positive screen findings to determine the timing of episode onset, rate and intensity of self-harm ideation, and primary and secondary DSM-IV disorders to inform treatment and policy decisions. Design Sequential case series of women who recently gave birth. Setting Urban academic women's hospital. Participants During the maternity hospitalization, women were offered screening at 4 to 6 weeks post partum by telephone. Screen-positive women were invited to undergo psychiatric evaluations in their homes. Main Outcomes and Measures A positive screen finding was an Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) score of 10 or higher. Self-harm ideation was assessed on EPDS item 10: “The thought of harming myself has occurred to me” (yes, quite often; sometimes; hardly ever; never). Screen-positive women underwent evaluation with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV for Axis I primary and secondary diagnoses. Results Ten thousand mothers underwent screening, with positive findings in 1396 (14.0%); of these, 826 (59.2%) completed the home visits and 147 (10.5%) completed a telephone diagnostic interview. Screen-positive women were more likely to be younger, African American, publicly insured, single, and less well educated. More episodes began post partum (40.1%), followed by during pregnancy (33.4%) and before pregnancy (26.5%). In this population, 19.3% had self-harm ideation. All mothers with the highest intensity of self-harm ideation were identified with the EPDS score of 10 or higher. The most common primary diagnoses were unipolar depressive disorders (68.5%), and almost two-thirds had comorbid anxiety disorders. A striking 22.6% had bipolar disorders. Conclusions and Relevance The most common diagnosis in screen-positive women was major depressive disorder with comorbid generalized anxiety disorder. Strategies to differentiate women with bipolar from unipolar disorders are needed. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00282776
720 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: The present scale has been devised for use only on patients already diagnosed as suffering from affective disorder of depressive type, used for quantifying the results of an interview, and its value depends entirely on the skill of the interviewer in eliciting the necessary information.
Abstract: Types of Rating Scale The value of this one, and its limitations, can best be considered against its background, so it is useful to consider the limitations of the various rating scales extant. They can be classified into four groups, the first of which has been devised for use on normal subjects. Patients suffering from mental disorders score very highly on some of the variables and these high scores serve as a measure of their illness. Such scales can be very useful, but have two defects: many symptoms are not found in normal persons; and less obviously, but more important, there is a qualitative difference between symptoms of mental illness and normal variations of behaviour. The difference between the two is not a philosophical problem but a biological one. There is always a loss of function in illness, with impaired efficiency. Self-rating scales are popular because they are easy to administer. Aside from the notorious unreliability of self-assessment, such scales are of little use for semiliterate patients and are no use for seriously ill patients who are unable to deal with them. Many rating scales for behaviour have been devised for assessing the social adjustment of patients and their behaviour in the hospital ward. They are very useful for their purpose but give little or no information about symptoms. Finally, a number of scales have been devised specifically for rating symptoms of mental illness. They cover the whole range of symptoms, but such all-inclusiveness has its disadvantages. In the first place, it is extremely difficult to differentiate some symptoms, e.g., apathy, retardation, stupor. These three look alike, but they are quite different and appear in different settings. Other symptoms are difficult to define, except in terms of their settings, e.g., mild agitation and derealization. A more serious difficulty lies in the fallacy of naming. For example, the term "delusions" covers schizophrenic, depressive, hypochrondriacal, and paranoid delusions. They are all quite different and should be clearly distinguished. Another difficulty may be summarized by saying that the weights given to symptoms should not be linear. Thus, in schizophrenia, the amount of anxiety is of no importance, whereas in anxiety states it is fundamental. Again, a schizophrenic patient who has delusions is not necessarily worse than one who has not, but a depressive patient who has, is much worse. Finally, although rating scales are not used for making a diagnosis, they should have some relation to it. Thus the schizophrenic patients should have a high score on schizophrenia and comparatively small scores on other syndromes. In practice, this does not occur. The present scale has been devised for use only on patients already diagnosed as suffering from affective disorder of depressive type. It is used for quantifying the results of an interview, and its value depends entirely on the skill of the interviewer in eliciting the necessary information. The interviewer may, and should, use all information available to help him with his interview and in making the final assessment. The scale has undergone a number of changes since it was first tried out, and although there is room for further improvement, it will be found efficient and simple in use. It has been found to be of great practical value in assessing results of treatment.
29,488 citations
TL;DR: In addition to making criteria-based diagnoses of depressive disorders, the PHQ-9 is also a reliable and valid measure of depression severity, which makes it a useful clinical and research tool.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: While considerable attention has focused on improving the detection of depression, assessment of severity is also important in guiding treatment decisions. Therefore, we examined the validity of a brief, new measure of depression severity.
26,004 citations
TL;DR: In this article, an exploración de the avances contemporaneos en la teoria del aprendizaje social, con especial enfasis en los importantes roles que cumplen los procesos cognitivos, indirectos, and autoregulatorios.
Abstract: Una exploracion de los avances contemporaneos en la teoria del aprendizaje social, con especial enfasis en los importantes roles que cumplen los procesos cognitivos, indirectos, y autoregulatorios.
20,904 citations
TL;DR: The construction of a depression rating scale designed to be particularly sensitive to treatment effects is described, and its capacity to differentiate between responders and non-responders to antidepressant treatment was better than the HRS, indicating greater sensitivity to change.
Abstract: The construction of a depression rating scale designed to be particularly sensitive to treatment effects is described. Ratings of 54 English and 52 Swedish patients on a 65 item comprehensive psychopathology scale were used to identify the 17 most commonly occurring symptoms in primary depressive illness in the combined sample. Ratings on these 17 items for 64 patients participating in studies of four different antidepressant drugs were used to create a depression scale consisting of the 10 items which showed the largest changes with treatment and the highest correlation to overall change. The inner-rater reliability of the new depression scale was high. Scores on the scale correlated significantly with scores on a standard rating scale for depression, the Hamilton Rating Scale (HRS), indicating its validity as a general severity estimate. Its capacity to differentiate between responders and non-responders to antidepressant treatment was better than the HRS, indicating greater sensitivity to change. The practical and ethical implications in terms of smaller sample sizes in clinical trials are discussed.
11,923 citations
TL;DR: Although mental disorders are widespread, serious cases are concentrated among a relatively small proportion of cases with high comorbidity, as shown in the recently completed US National Comorbidities Survey Replication.
Abstract: Background Little is known about the general population prevalence or severity of DSM-IV mental disorders. Objective To estimate 12-month prevalence, severity, and comorbidity of DSM-IV anxiety, mood, impulse control, and substance disorders in the recently completed US National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Design and Setting Nationally representative face-to-face household survey conducted between February 2001 and April 2003 using a fully structured diagnostic interview, the World Health Organization World Mental Health Survey Initiative version of the Composite International Diagnostic Interview. Participants Nine thousand two hundred eighty-two English-speaking respondents 18 years and older. Main Outcome Measures Twelve-month DSM-IV disorders. Results Twelve-month prevalence estimates were anxiety, 18.1%; mood, 9.5%; impulse control, 8.9%; substance, 3.8%; and any disorder, 26.2%. Of 12-month cases, 22.3% were classified as serious; 37.3%, moderate; and 40.4%, mild. Fifty-five percent carried only a single diagnosis; 22%, 2 diagnoses; and 23%, 3 or more diagnoses. Latent class analysis detected 7 multivariate disorder classes, including 3 highly comorbid classes representing 7% of the population. Conclusion Although mental disorders are widespread, serious cases are concentrated among a relatively small proportion of cases with high comorbidity.
10,951 citations