Adjunctive treatment

About: Adjunctive treatment is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 5540 publications have been published within this topic receiving 161798 citations.

Exercise for depression

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Depression is a common and important cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Depression is commonly treated with antidepressants and/or psychological therapy, but some people may prefer alternative approaches such as exercise. There are a number of theoretical reasons why exercise may improve depression. This is an update of an earlier review first published in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of exercise in the treatment of depression in adults compared with no treatment or a comparator intervention. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Controlled Trials Register (CCDANCTR) to 13 July 2012. This register includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: The Cochrane Library (all years); MEDLINE (1950 to date); EMBASE (1974 to date) and PsycINFO (1967 to date). We also searched www.controlled-trials.com, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. No date or language restrictions were applied to the search.We conducted an additional search of the CCDANCTR up to 1st March 2013 and any potentially eligible trials not already included are listed as 'awaiting classification.' SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials in which exercise (defined according to American College of Sports Medicine criteria) was compared to standard treatment, no treatment or a placebo treatment, pharmacological treatment, psychological treatment or other active treatment in adults (aged 18 and over) with depression, as defined by trial authors. We included cluster trials and those that randomised individuals. We excluded trials of postnatal depression. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors extracted data on primary and secondary outcomes at the end of the trial and end of follow-up (if available). We calculated effect sizes for each trial using Hedges' g method and a standardised mean difference (SMD) for the overall pooled effect, using a random-effects model risk ratio for dichotomous data. Where trials used a number of different tools to assess depression, we included the main outcome measure only in the meta-analysis. Where trials provided several 'doses' of exercise, we used data from the biggest 'dose' of exercise, and performed sensitivity analyses using the lower 'dose'. We performed subgroup analyses to explore the influence of method of diagnosis of depression (diagnostic interview or cut-off point on scale), intensity of exercise and the number of sessions of exercise on effect sizes. Two authors performed the 'Risk of bias' assessments. Our sensitivity analyses explored the influence of study quality on outcome. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-nine trials (2326 participants) fulfilled our inclusion criteria, of which 37 provided data for meta-analyses. There were multiple sources of bias in many of the trials; randomisation was adequately concealed in 14 studies, 15 used intention-to-treat analyses and 12 used blinded outcome assessors.For the 35 trials (1356 participants) comparing exercise with no treatment or a control intervention, the pooled SMD for the primary outcome of depression at the end of treatment was -0.62 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.81 to -0.42), indicating a moderate clinical effect. There was moderate heterogeneity (I² = 63%).When we included only the six trials (464 participants) with adequate allocation concealment, intention-to-treat analysis and blinded outcome assessment, the pooled SMD for this outcome was not statistically significant (-0.18, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.11). Pooled data from the eight trials (377 participants) providing long-term follow-up data on mood found a small effect in favour of exercise (SMD -0.33, 95% CI -0.63 to -0.03).Twenty-nine trials reported acceptability of treatment, three trials reported quality of life, none reported cost, and six reported adverse events.For acceptability of treatment (assessed by number of drop-outs during the intervention), the risk ratio was 1.00 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.04).Seven trials compared exercise with psychological therapy (189 participants), and found no significant difference (SMD -0.03, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.26). Four trials (n = 300) compared exercise with pharmacological treatment and found no significant difference (SMD -0.11, -0.34, 0.12). One trial (n = 18) reported that exercise was more effective than bright light therapy (MD -6.40, 95% CI -10.20 to -2.60).For each trial that was included, two authors independently assessed for sources of bias in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration 'Risk of bias' tool. In exercise trials, there are inherent difficulties in blinding both those receiving the intervention and those delivering the intervention. Many trials used participant self-report rating scales as a method for post-intervention analysis, which also has the potential to bias findings. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Exercise is moderately more effective than a control intervention for reducing symptoms of depression, but analysis of methodologically robust trials only shows a smaller effect in favour of exercise. When compared to psychological or pharmacological therapies, exercise appears to be no more effective, though this conclusion is based on a few small trials. Language: en

Responsive cortical stimulation for the treatment of medically intractable partial epilepsy

Abstract: Objectives This multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial assessed the safety and effectiveness of responsive cortical stimulation as an adjunctive therapy for partial onset seizures in adults with medically refractory epilepsy. Methods A total of 191 adults with medically intractable partial epilepsy were implanted with a responsive neurostimulator connected to depth or subdural leads placed at 1 or 2 predetermined seizure foci. The neurostimulator was programmed to detect abnormal electrocorticographic activity. One month after implantation, subjects were randomized 1:1 to receive stimulation in response to detections (treatment) or to receive no stimulation (sham). Efficacy and safety were assessed over a 12-week blinded period and a subsequent 84-week open-label period during which all subjects received responsive stimulation. Results Seizures were significantly reduced in the treatment (-37.9%, n = 97) compared to the sham group (-17.3%, n = 94; p = 0.012) during the blinded period and there was no difference between the treatment and sham groups in adverse events. During the open-label period, the seizure reduction was sustained in the treatment group and seizures were significantly reduced in the sham group when stimulation began. There were significant improvements in overall quality of life (p Conclusions Responsive cortical stimulation reduces the frequency of disabling partial seizures, is associated with improvements in quality of life, and is well-tolerated with no mood or cognitive effects. Responsive stimulation may provide another adjunctive treatment option for adults with medically intractable partial seizures. Classification of evidence This study provides Class I evidence that responsive cortical stimulation is effective in significantly reducing seizure frequency for 12 weeks in adults who have failed 2 or more antiepileptic medication trials, 3 or more seizures per month, and 1 or 2 seizure foci.

Vagus nerve stimulation therapy for partial-onset seizures A randomized active-control trial

Abstract: Objective: The purpose of this multicenter, add-on, double-blind, randomized, active-control study was to compare the efficacy and safety of presumably therapeutic (high) vagus nerve stimulation with less (low) stimulation. Background: Chronic intermittent left vagus nerve stimulation has been shown in animal models and in preliminary clinical trials to suppress the occurrence of seizures. Methods: Patients had at least six partial-onset seizures over 30 days involving complex partial or secondarily generalized seizures. Concurrent antiepileptic drugs were unaltered. After a 3-month baseline, patients were surgically implanted with stimulating leads coiled around the left vagus nerve and connected to an infraclavicular subcutaneous programmable pacemaker-like generator. After randomization, device initiation, and a 2-week ramp-up period, patients were assessed for seizure counts and safety over 3 months. The primary efficacy variable was the percentage change in total seizure frequency compared with baseline. Results: Patients receiving high stimulation (94 patients, ages 13 to 54 years) had an average 28% reduction in total seizure frequency compared with a 15% reduction in the low stimulation group (102 patients, ages 15 to 60 year; p = 0.04). The high-stimulation group also had greater improvements on global evaluation scores, as rated by a blinded interviewer and the patient. High stimulation was associated with more voice alteration and dyspnea. No changes in physiologic indicators of gastric, cardiac, or pulmonary functions occurred. Conclusions: Vagus nerve stimulation is an effective and safe adjunctive treatment for patients with refractory partial-onset seizures. It represents the advent of a new, nonpharmacologic treatment for epilepsy.

Dexamethasone for the treatment of tuberculous meningitis in adolescents and adults.

Abstract: background Tuberculous meningitis kills or disables more than half of those affected with the disease. Previous studies have been too small to determine whether adjunctive treatment with corticosteroids can reduce the risk of disability or death among adults with tuberculous meningitis, and the effect of coinfection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is unclear. methods We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in Vietnam in patients over 14 years of age who had tuberculous meningitis, with or without HIV infection, to determine whether adjunctive treatment with dexamethasone reduced the risk of death or severe disability after nine months of follow-up. We conducted prespecified subgroup analyses and intention-to-treat analyses. results A total of 545 patients were randomly assigned to groups that received either dexamethasone (274 patients) or placebo (271 patients). Only 10 patients (1.8 percent) had been lost to follow-up at nine months of treatment. Treatment with dexamethasone was associated with a reduced risk of death (relative risk, 0.69; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.52 to 0.92; P=0.01). It was not associated with a significant reduction in the proportion of severely disabled patients (34 of 187 patients [18.2 percent] among survivors in the dexamethasone group vs. 22 of 159 patients [13.8 percent] in the placebo group, P=0.27) or in the proportion of patients who had either died or were severely disabled after nine months (odds ratio, 0.81; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.58 to 1.13; P=0.22). The treatment effect was consistent across subgroups that were defined by disease-severity grade (stratified relative risk of death, 0.68; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.52 to 0.91; P=0.007) and by HIV status (stratified relative risk of death, 0.78; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.59 to 1.04; P=0.08). Significantly fewer serious adverse events occurred in the dexamethasone group than in the placebo group (26 of 274 patients vs. 45 of 271 patients, P=0.02). conclusions Adjunctive treatment with dexamethasone improves survival in patients over 14 years of age with tuberculous meningitis but probably does not prevent severe disability.

Exenatide effects on diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular risk factors and hepatic biomarkers in patients with type 2 diabetes treated for at least 3 years.

Abstract: Background: Exenatide, an incretin mimetic for adjunctive treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), reduced hemoglobin A1c (A1C) and weight in clinical trials. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of ≥ 3 years exenatide therapy on glycemic control, body weight, cardiometabolic markers, and safety.Methods: Patients from three placebo-controlled trials and their open-label extensions were enrolled into one open-ended, open-label clinical trial. Patients were randomized to twice daily (BID) placebo, 5 µg exenatide, or 10 µg exenatide for 30 weeks, followed by 5 µg exenatide BID for 4 weeks, then 10 µg exenatide BID for ≥3 years of exenatide exposure. Patients continued metformin and/or sulfonylureas.Results: 217 patients (64% male, age 58 ± 10 years, weight 99 ± 18 kg, BMI 34 ± 5 kg/m2, A1C 8.2 ± 1.0% [mean ± SD]) completed 3 years of exenatide exposure. Reductions in A1C from baseline to week 12 (−1.1 ± 0.1% [mean ± SEM]) were sustained to 3 years (−1.0 ± 0.1%; p < 0.0001), with 46% ac...