Prevalence of depression and anxiety symptoms after stroke in young adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Young adults with stroke have distinct professional and social roles making them vulnerable to symptoms of post-stroke depression (PSD) and post-stroke anxiety (PSA). Prior reviews have examined the prevalence of anxiety and depression in stroke populations. However, there are a lack of studies that have focused on these conditions in young adults. OBJECTIVE: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies that reported on symptoms of PSD, PSA and comorbid PSD/PSA in young adults aged 18 to 55 years of age. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and PsycINFO were searched for studies reporting the prevalence of symptoms of PSD and/or PSA in young adults with stroke from inception until June 23, 2023. We included studies that evaluated depression and/or anxiety symptoms with screening tools or interviews following ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke. Validated methods were employed to evaluate risk of bias. RESULTS: 4748 patients from twenty eligible studies were included. Among them, 2420 were also evaluated for symptoms of PSA while 847 participants were evaluated for both PSD and PSA symptoms. Sixteen studies were included in the random effects meta-analysis for PSD symptoms, with a pooled prevalence of 31 % (95 % CI 24-38 %). Pooled PSA symptom prevalence was 39 % (95 % CI 30-48 %) and comorbid PSD with PSA symptom prevalence was 25 % (95 % CI 12-39 %). Varying definitions of 'young adult', combinations of stroke subtypes, and methods to assess PSD and PSA contributed to high heterogeneity amongst studies. CONCLUSIONS: We identified high heterogeneity in studies investigating the prevalence of symptoms of PSD and PSA in young adults, emphasizing the importance of standardized approaches in future research to gain insight into the outcomes and prognosis of PSD and PSA symptoms following stroke in young adults. Larger longitudinal epidemiological studies as well as studies on tailored interventions are required to address the mental health needs of this important population. FUNDING: None.

A practical guide to living evidence: Reducing the knowledge-to-practice gap.

Living evidence involves continuous evidence surveillance to incorporate new relevant evidence into systematic reviews and clinical practice guideline recommendations as soon as it becomes available. Thus, living evidence may improve the timeliness of recommendation updates and reduce the knowledge-to-practice gap. When considering a living evidence model, several processes and practical aspects need to be explored. Some of these include identifying the need for a living evidence model, funding, governance structure, time, team skills and capabilities, frequency of updates, approval and endorsement and publication and dissemination.

Individual patient data meta-analysis of the effects of fluoxetine on functional outcomes after acute stroke.

BACKGROUND: Three large randomized controlled trials of fluoxetine for stroke recovery have been performed. We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDM) on the combined data. METHODS: Fixed effects meta-analyses were performed on the combined data set, for the primary outcome (modified Rankin scale (mRS) at 6 months), and secondary outcomes common to the individual trials. As a sensitivity analysis, summary statistics from each trial were created and combined. FINDINGS: The three trials recruited a combined total of 5907 people (mean age 69.5 years (SD 12.3), 2256 (38%) females, 2-15 days post-stroke) from Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom, Sweden, and Vietnam; and randomized them to fluoxetine 20 mg daily or matching placebo for 6 months. Data on 5833 (98.75%) were available at 6 months. The adjusted ordinal comparison of mRS was similar in the two groups (common OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.05, p = 0.37). There were no statistically significant interactions between the minimization variables (baseline probability of being alive and independent at 6 months, time to treatment, motor deficit, or aphasia) and pre-specified subgroups (including age, pathological type, inability to assess mood, proxy or patient consent, baseline depression, country). Fluoxetine increased seizure risk (2.64% vs 1.8%, p = 0.03), falls with injury (6.26% vs 4.51%, p = 0.03), fractures (3.15% vs 1.39%, p < 0.0001) and hyponatremia (1.22% vs 0.61%, p = 0.01) but reduced new depression (10.05% vs 13.42%, p < 0.0001). At 12 months, there was no difference in adjusted mRS (n = 5760; common OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.07). Sensitivity analyses gave the same results. INTERPRETATION: Fluoxetine 20 mg daily for 6 months did not improve functional recovery. It increased seizures, falls with injury, and bone fractures but reduced depression frequency at 6 months.

Cognitive outcomes from the randomised, active-controlled Ketamine for Adult Depression Study (KADS).

BACKGROUND: Due to its rapid antidepressant effect, ketamine has recently been clinically translated for people with treatment-resistant depression. However, its cognitive profile remains unclear, particularly with repeated and higher doses. In the present study, we report the cognitive results from a recent large multicentre randomised controlled trial, the Ketamine for Adult Depression Study (KADS). METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel group, multicentre phase 3 trial study we investigated potential cognitive changes following repeated treatment of subcutaneous racemic ketamine compared to an active comparator, midazolam, over 4 weeks, which involved two cohorts; Cohort 1 involved a fixed dose treatment protocol (0.5 mg/kg ketamine), Cohort 2 involved a dose escalation protocol (0.5-0.9 mg/kg) based on mood outcomes. Participants with treatment-resistant Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) were recruited from 7 mood disorder centres and were randomly assigned to receive ketamine (Cohort 1 n = 33; Cohort 2 n = 53) or midazolam (Cohort 1 n = 35; Cohort 2 n = 53) in a 1:1 ratio. Cognitive measurements were assessed at baseline and at the end of randomised treatment. RESULTS: Results showed that in Cohort 1, there were no differences between ketamine and midazolam in cognitive outcomes. For Cohort 2, there was similarly no difference between conditions for cognitive outcomes. LIMITATIONS: The study included two Cohorts with different dosing regimes. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the cognitive safety of repeated fixed and escalating doses at least in the short-term in people with treatment resistant MDD.

Comparisons between group- and individual-based interventions to support recovery from stroke and ischaemic heart disease in the community: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: To map and summarise available literature on the effectiveness or other benefits of group- and individual-based interventions provided for adults living with stroke or ischaemic heart disease (IHD) in the community. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The review was conducted based on JBI methodology and reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews. Articles were retrieved from: Medline, PsychInfo, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL from 2002-2022. Extracted data from eligible studies included type of health outcomes (e.g., impairments), retention and adherence, social connectedness, and the costs associated with group- and individual-based interventions. RESULTS: After screening, five articles (representing 4 unique studies) comparing a group- and individual-based intervention were included (total sample size n = 87). Three types of interventions were assessed: exercise (3/5), communication (1/5), and occupational therapy (1/5). Effectiveness of group- and individual-based interventions at improving health outcomes (i.e. physical ability, communication, motivation, and quality of life) is unclear. Currently there is insufficient evidence to guide clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence comparing interventions delivered in a group and individual modality for adults living with stroke or IHD. Adequately powered studies are needed to determine if mode of delivery is equivalent or more cost effective.

Rehabilitation interventions can be offered individually or in group settings with clinicians choosing the most appropriate modality.Both group- and individual-based interventions have advantages and disadvantages, with clinical, practical, and economic factors as important considerations when deciding between the two modalities.Based on this scoping review, the authors conclude that there is currently insufficient evidence to guide clinical practice in deciding which mode of delivery (group or individual) is optimal.There is insufficient research evidence to guide clinicians in their choice between offering rehabilitation interventions for stroke or IHD in groups or individually.

Statistical analysis plan for the Recovery-focused Community support to Avoid readmissions and improve Participation after Stroke randomised controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Unplanned hospital presentations may occur post-stroke due to inadequate preparation for transitioning from hospital to home. The Recovery-focused Community support to Avoid readmissions and improve Participation after Stroke (ReCAPS) trial was designed to test the effectiveness of receiving a 12-week, self-management intervention, comprising personalised goal setting with a clinician and aligned educational/motivational electronic messages. Primary outcome is as follows: self-reported unplanned hospital presentations (emergency department/admission) within 90-day post-randomisation. We present the statistical analysis plan for this trial. METHODS/DESIGN: Participants are randomised 1:1 in variable block sizes, with stratification balancing by age and level of baseline disability. The sample size was 890 participants, calculated to detect a 10% absolute reduction in the proportion of participants reporting unplanned hospital presentations/admissions, with 80% power and 5% significance level (two sided). Recruitment will end in December 2023 when funding is expended, and the sample size achieved will be used. Logistic regression, adjusted for the stratification variables, will be used to determine the effectiveness of the intervention on the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated using appropriate regression models. The primary outcome analysis will be based on intention to treat. A p-value ≤ 0.05 will indicate statistical significance. An independent Data Safety and Monitoring Committee has routinely reviewed the progress and safety of the trial. CONCLUSIONS: This statistical analysis plan ensures transparency in reporting the trial outcomes. ReCAPS trial will provide novel evidence on the effectiveness of a digital health support package post-stroke. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ACTRN12618001468213. Registered on August 31, 2018. SAP version 1.13 (October 12 2023) Protocol version 1.12 (October 12, 2022) SAP revisions Nil.

Mental health in the two years following hypertensive and normotensive pregnancy: The Postpartum, Physiology, Psychology and Paediatric follow-up (P4) cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum mental illnesses and hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) are both common, and both associated with adverse maternal and child health outcomes. However, the relationship between them is unclear. This study aimed to investigate prevalence and symptom severity of depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) 2-years postpartum in women with normal blood pressure (NBP) during pregnancy versus preeclampsia or gestational hypertension (GH). METHODS: Two-years follow-up of the prospective Postpartum, Physiology, Psychology and Paediatric (P4) Cohort Study was conducted in metropolitan Australia. Prevalence and symptom severity of depression (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, EPDS > 12), anxiety (7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, GAD-7 ≥ 10) and PTSD (Posttraumatic stress Diagnostic Scale, PDS/PDS-5) were measured and calculated for women with NBP, preeclampsia and GH. RESULTS: Among 365 participants (NBP: n = 271, preeclampsia: n = 75, GH: n = 19), 2-years postpartum depression prevalence was 3.9% (95% CI 2.3-6.4%): 4.4% after NBP, and 2.7% after preeclampsia (p = 0.53). Anxiety prevalence was higher after GH than NBP (15.8% versus 3.3%, p = 0.02). Prevalence of any mental illness (depression/anxiety/PTSD) was 5.9% (95% CI 3.8-8.8%); 5.6% after NBP, 4.1% after PE, and 15.8% after GH (p = 0.15). Although PTSD prevalence was low (1.4%), and similar between groups (p = 0.97), around 3 times more women after PE (8.1%), compared to NBP (2.5%), recalled childbirth as traumatic (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Preeclampsia, although associated with persistent perceptions of traumatic childbirth, did not alter the risk of mental illnesses at 2-years postpartum. GH (albeit in a small subgroup) was associated with increased anxiety scores. Larger, multicentre studies are required to clarify relationships between HDP and postpartum mental illness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered on 18/11/2013 with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry. REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN 12613 00,126 0718.

Control intervention design for preclinical and clinical trials: Consensus-based core recommendations from the third Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.

Control comparator selection is a critical trial design issue. Preclinical and clinical investigators who are doing trials of stroke recovery and rehabilitation interventions must carefully consider the appropriateness and relevance of their chosen control comparator as the benefit of an experimental intervention is established relative to a comparator. Establishing a strong rationale for a selected comparator improves the integrity of the trial and validity of its findings. This Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable (SRRR) taskforce used a graph theory voting system to rank the importance and ease of addressing challenges during control comparator design. "Identifying appropriate type of control" was ranked easy to address and very important, "variability in usual care" was ranked hard to address and of low importance, and "understanding the content of the control and how it differs from the experimental intervention" was ranked very important but not easy to address. The CONtrol DeSIGN (CONSIGN) decision support tool was developed to address the identified challenges and enhance comparator selection, description, and reporting. CONSIGN is a web-based tool inclusive of seven steps that guide the user through control comparator design. The tool was refined through multiple rounds of pilot testing that included more than 130 people working in neurorehabilitation research. Four hypothetical exemplar trials, which span preclinical, mood, aphasia, and motor recovery, demonstrate how the tool can be applied in practice. Six consensus recommendations are defined that span research domains, professional disciplines, and international borders.

Control intervention design for preclinical and clinical trials: Consensus-based core recommendations from the third Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.

Control comparator selection is a critical trial design issue. Preclinical and clinical investigators who are doing trials of stroke recovery and rehabilitation interventions must carefully consider the appropriateness and relevance of their chosen control comparator as the benefit of an experimental intervention is established relative to a comparator. Establishing a strong rationale for a selected comparator improves the integrity of the trial and validity of its findings. This Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable (SRRR) taskforce used a graph theory voting system to rank the importance and ease of addressing challenges during control comparator design. "Identifying appropriate type of control" was ranked easy to address and very important, "variability in usual care" was ranked hard to address and of low importance, and "understanding the content of the control and how it differs from the experimental intervention" was ranked very important but not easy to address. The CONtrol DeSIGN (CONSIGN) decision support tool was developed to address the identified challenges and enhance comparator selection, description, and reporting. CONSIGN is a web-based tool inclusive of seven steps that guide the user through control comparator design. The tool was refined through multiple rounds of pilot testing that included more than 130 people working in neurorehabilitation research. Four hypothetical exemplar trials, which span preclinical, mood, aphasia, and motor recovery, demonstrate how the tool can be applied in practice. Six consensus recommendations are defined that span research domains, professional disciplines, and international borders.

Efficacy and safety of a 4-week course of repeated subcutaneous ketamine injections for treatment-resistant depression (KADS study): randomised double-blind active-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Prior trials suggest that intravenous racemic ketamine is a highly effective for treatment-resistant depression (TRD), but phase 3 trials of racemic ketamine are needed. AIMS: To assess the acute efficacy and safety of a 4-week course of subcutaneous racemic ketamine in participants with TRD. Trial registration: ACTRN12616001096448 at www.anzctr.org.au. METHOD: This phase 3, double-blind, randomised, active-controlled multicentre trial was conducted at seven mood disorders centres in Australia and New Zealand. Participants received twice-weekly subcutaneous racemic ketamine or midazolam for 4 weeks. Initially, the trial tested fixed-dose ketamine 0.5 mg/kg versus midazolam 0.025 mg/kg (cohort 1). Dosing was revised, after a Data Safety Monitoring Board recommendation, to flexible-dose ketamine 0.5-0.9 mg/kg or midazolam 0.025-0.045 mg/kg, with response-guided dosing increments (cohort 2). The primary outcome was remission (Montgomery-Åsberg Rating Scale for Depression score ≤10) at the end of week 4. RESULTS: The final analysis (those who received at least one treatment) comprised 68 in cohort 1 (fixed-dose), 106 in cohort 2 (flexible-dose). Ketamine was more efficacious than midazolam in cohort 2 (remission rate 19.6% v. 2.0%; OR = 12.1, 95% CI 2.1-69.2, P = 0.005), but not different in cohort 1 (remission rate 6.3% v. 8.8%; OR = 1.3, 95% CI 0.2-8.2, P = 0.76). Ketamine was well tolerated. Acute adverse effects (psychotomimetic, blood pressure increases) resolved within 2 h. CONCLUSIONS: Adequately dosed subcutaneous racemic ketamine was efficacious and safe in treating TRD over a 4-week treatment period. The subcutaneous route is practical and feasible.

EMPOWERED trial: protocol for a randomised control trial of digitally supported, highly personalised and measurement-based care to improve functional outcomes in young people with mood disorders.

OBJECTIVES: Many adolescents and young adults with emerging mood disorders do not achieve substantial improvements in education, employment, or social function after receiving standard youth mental health care. We have developed a new model of care referred to as 'highly personalised and measurement-based care' (HP&MBC). HP&MBC involves repeated assessment of multidimensional domains of morbidity to enable continuous and personalised clinical decision-making. Although measurement-based care is common in medical disease management, it is not a standard practice in mental health. This clinical effectiveness trial tests whether HP&MBC, supported by continuous digital feedback, delivers better functional improvements than standard care and digital support. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: This controlled implementation trial is a PROBE study (Prospective, Randomised, Open, Blinded End-point) that comprises a multisite 24-month, assessor-blinded, follow-up study of 1500 individuals aged 15-25 years who present for mental health treatment. Eligible participants will be individually randomised (1:1) to 12 months of HP&MBC or standardised clinical care. The primary outcome measure is social and occupational functioning 12 months after trial entry, assessed by the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale. Clinical and social outcomes for all participants will be monitored for a further 12 months after cessation of active care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This clinical trial has been reviewed and approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Sydney Local Health District (HREC Approval Number: X22-0042 & 2022/ETH00725, Protocol ID: BMC-YMH-003-2018, protocol version: V.3, 03/08/2022). Research findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, presentations at scientific conferences, and to user and advocacy groups. Participant data will be deidentified. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12622000882729.

Pharmacological, non-invasive brain stimulation and psychological interventions, and their combination, for treating depression after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Depression is an important morbidity associated with stroke that impacts on recovery, yet is often undetected or inadequately treated. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of pharmacological intervention, non-invasive brain stimulation, psychological therapy, or combinations of these to treat depression after stroke. SEARCH METHODS: This is a living systematic review. We search for new evidence every two months and update the review when we identify relevant new evidence. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review. We searched the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Stroke, and Cochrane Depression Anxiety and Neurosis, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases, two clinical trials registers, reference lists and conference proceedings (February 2022). We contacted study authors. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing: 1) pharmacological interventions with placebo; 2) non-invasive brain stimulation with sham stimulation or usual care; 3) psychological therapy with usual care or attention control; 4) pharmacological intervention and psychological therapy with pharmacological intervention and usual care or attention control; 5) pharmacological intervention and non-invasive brain stimulation with pharmacological intervention and sham stimulation or usual care; 6) non-invasive brain stimulation and psychological therapy versus sham brain stimulation or usual care and psychological therapy; 7) pharmacological intervention and psychological therapy with placebo and psychological therapy; 8) pharmacological intervention and non-invasive brain stimulation with placebo and non-invasive brain stimulation; and 9) non-invasive brain stimulation and psychological therapy versus non-invasive brain stimulation and usual care or attention control, with the intention of treating depression after stroke. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data from included studies. We calculated mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data, and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed heterogeneity using the I² statistic and certainty of the evidence according to GRADE. MAIN RESULTS: We included 65 trials (72 comparisons) with 5831 participants. Data were available for: 1) 20 comparisons; 2) nine comparisons; 3) 25 comparisons; 4) three comparisons; 5) 14 comparisons; and 6) one comparison. We found no trials for comparisons 7 to 9. Comparison 1: Pharmacological interventions Very low-certainty evidence from eight trials suggests pharmacological interventions decreased the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88; P = 0.002; 8 RCTs; 1025 participants) at end of treatment and very low-certainty evidence from six trials suggests that pharmacological interventions decreased the number of people with inadequate response to treatment (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.70; P = 0.0002; 6 RCTs; 511 participants) compared to placebo. More adverse events related to the central nervous system (CNS) (RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.15; P = 0.008; 5 RCTs; 488 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and gastrointestinal system (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.19; P = 0.002; 4 RCTs; 473 participants; very low-certainty evidence) were noted in the pharmacological intervention than in the placebo group. Comparison 2: Non-invasive brain stimulation Very low-certainty evidence from two trials show that non-invasive brain stimulation had little to no effect on the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.14; P = 0.14; 2 RCTs; 130 participants) and the number of people with inadequate response to treatment (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.52, 1.37; P = 0.49; 2 RCTs; 130 participants) compared to sham stimulation. Non-invasive brain stimulation resulted in no deaths. Comparison 3: Psychological therapy Very low-certainty evidence from six trials suggests that psychological therapy decreased the number of people meeting the study criteria for depression at end of treatment (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.95; P = 0.01; 521 participants) compared to usual care/attention control. No trials of psychological therapy reported on the outcome inadequate response to treatment. No differences in the number of deaths or adverse events were found in the psychological therapy group compared to the usual care/attention control group. Comparison 4: Pharmacological interventions with psychological therapy No trials of this combination reported on the primary outcomes. Combination therapy resulted in no deaths. Comparison 5: Pharmacological interventions with non-invasive brain stimulation Non-invasive brain stimulation with pharmacological intervention reduced the number of people meeting study criteria for depression at end of treatment (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.64 to 0.91; P = 0.002; 3 RCTs; 392 participants; low-certainty evidence) but not the number of people with inadequate response to treatment (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.30; P = 0.75; 3 RCTs; 392 participants; very low-certainty evidence) compared to pharmacological therapy alone. Very low-certainty evidence from five trials suggest no difference in deaths between this combination therapy (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.27 to 4.16; P = 0.93; 487 participants) compared to pharmacological therapy intervention and sham stimulation or usual care. Comparison 6: Non-invasive brain stimulation with psychological therapy No trials of this combination reported on the primary outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low-certainty evidence suggests that pharmacological, psychological and combination therapies can reduce the prevalence of depression while non-invasive brain stimulation had little to no effect on the prevalence of depression. Pharmacological intervention was associated with adverse events related to the CNS and the gastrointestinal tract. More research is required before recommendations can be made about the routine use of such treatments.

ANTECEDENTES: La depresión tiene una morbilidad importante asociada con el accidente cerebrovascular que repercute en la recuperación, pero que a menudo no se detecta o se trata de manera inadecuada. OBJETIVOS: Evaluar los efectos beneficiosos y perjudiciales de las intervenciones farmacológicas, la estimulación cerebral no invasiva, la terapia psicológica o las combinaciones de éstas para tratar la depresión después del accidente cerebrovascular. MÉTODOS DE BÚSQUEDA: Esta es una revisión sistemática continua. Cada dos meses se busca nueva evidencia y la revisión se actualiza cuando se identifica evidencia nueva relevante. Consultar el estado actual de esta revisión en la Base de Datos Cochrane de Revisiones Sistemáticas (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews). Se realizaron búsquedas en los Registros especializados del Grupo Cochrane de Accidentes cerebrovasculares (Cochrane Stroke) y del Grupo Cochrane de Depresión, ansiedad y neurosis (Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis), en CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, otras cinco bases de datos, dos registros de ensayos clínicos, listas de referencias y resúmenes de congresos (febrero de 2022). Se estableció contacto con autores de estudios. CRITERIOS DE SELECCIÓN: Ensayos controlados aleatorizados (ECA) que compararan: 1) intervenciones farmacológicas con placebo; 2) estimulación cerebral no invasiva con estimulación simulada o atención habitual; 3) terapia psicológica con atención habitual o control de atención; 4) intervención farmacológica y terapia psicológica con intervención farmacológica y atención habitual o control de atención; 5) intervención farmacológica y estimulación cerebral no invasiva con intervención farmacológica y estimulación simulada o atención habitual; 6) estimulación cerebral no invasiva y terapia psicológica versus estimulación cerebral simulada o atención habitual y terapia psicológica; 7) intervención farmacológica y terapia psicológica con placebo y terapia psicológica; 8) intervención farmacológica y estimulación cerebral no invasiva con placebo y estimulación cerebral no invasiva; y 9) estimulación cerebral no invasiva y terapia psicológica versus estimulación cerebral no invasiva y atención habitual o control de atención, con la intención de tratar la depresión después del accidente cerebrovascular. OBTENCIÓN Y ANÁLISIS DE LOS DATOS: Dos autores de la revisión, de forma independiente, seleccionaron los estudios, evaluaron el riesgo de sesgo y extrajeron los datos de los estudios incluidos. Se calculó la diferencia de medias (DM) o la diferencia de medias estandarizada (DME) para los datos continuos, y la razón de riesgos (RR) para los datos dicotómicos, con intervalos de confianza (IC) del 95%. La heterogeneidad se evaluó mediante la estadística I² y la certeza de la evidencia según GRADE. RESULTADOS PRINCIPALES: Se incluyeron 65 ensayos (72 comparaciones) con 5831 participantes. Se dispuso de datos para: 1) 20 comparaciones; 2) nueve comparaciones; 3) 25 comparaciones; 4) tres comparaciones; 5) 14 comparaciones; y 6) una comparación. No se encontraron ensayos para las comparaciones 7 a 9. Comparación 1: Intervenciones farmacológicas Evidencia de certeza muy baja de ocho ensayos indica que las intervenciones farmacológicas disminuyeron el número de personas que cumplían los criterios del estudio para la depresión (RR 0,70; IC del 95%: 0,55 a 0,88; p = 0,002; ocho ECA; 1025 participantes) al final del tratamiento y evidencia de certeza muy baja de seis ensayos indica que las intervenciones farmacológicas disminuyeron el número de personas con respuesta inadecuada al tratamiento (RR 0,47; IC del 95%: 0,32 a 0,70; p = 0,0002; seis ECA; 511 participantes) en comparación con placebo. Se observaron más eventos adversos relacionados con el sistema nervioso central (SNC) (RR 1,55; IC del 95%: 1,12 a 2,15; p = 0,008; cinco ECA; 488 participantes; evidencia de certeza muy baja) y el sistema gastrointestinal (RR 1,62; IC del 95%: 1,19 a 2,19; p = 0,002; cuatro ECA; 473 participantes; evidencia de certeza muy baja) en el grupo de intervención farmacológica que en el grupo placebo. Comparación 2: Estimulación cerebral no invasiva Evidencia de certeza muy baja de dos ensayos muestra que la estimulación cerebral no invasiva tuvo poco o ningún efecto sobre el número de personas que cumplían los criterios del estudio para la depresión (RR 0,67; IC del 95%: 0,39 a 1,14; p = 0,14; dos ECA; 130 participantes) y el número de personas con respuesta inadecuada al tratamiento (RR 0,84; IC del 95%: 0,52 a 1,37; p = 0,49; dos ECA; 130 participantes) en comparación con la estimulación simulada. La estimulación cerebral no invasiva no provocó muertes. Comparación 3: Terapia psicológica Evidencia de certeza muy baja de seis ensayos indica que la terapia psicológica disminuyó el número de personas que cumplían los criterios del estudio para la depresión al final del tratamiento (RR 0,77; IC del 95%: 0,62 a 0,95; p = 0,01; 521 participantes) en comparación con atención habitual/control de atención. Ningún ensayo de terapia psicológica informó sobre el desenlace respuesta inadecuada al tratamiento. No se encontraron diferencias en el número de muertes o eventos adversos en el grupo de terapia psicológica en comparación con el grupo de control de atención/atención habitual. Comparación 4: Intervenciones farmacológicas con terapia psicológica Ningún ensayo de esta combinación informó sobre los desenlaces principales. El tratamiento combinado no provocó muertes. Comparación 5: Intervenciones farmacológicas con estimulación cerebral no invasiva La estimulación cerebral no invasiva con intervención farmacológica redujo el número de personas que cumplían los criterios del estudio para la depresión al final del tratamiento (RR 0,77; IC del 95%: 0,64 a 0,91; p = 0,002; tres ECA; 392 participantes; evidencia de certeza baja), pero no el número de personas con respuesta inadecuada al tratamiento (RR 0,95; IC del 95%: 0,69 a 1,30; p = 0,75; tres ECA; 392 participantes; evidencia de certeza muy baja) en comparación con el tratamiento farmacológico solo. Evidencia de certeza muy baja de cinco ensayos no indica diferencias en las muertes entre este tratamiento combinado (RR 1,06; IC del 95%: 0,27 a 4,16; p = 0,93; 487 participantes) en comparación con la intervención de tratamiento farmacológico y la estimulación simulada o la atención habitual. Comparación 6: Estimulación cerebral no invasiva con terapia psicológica Ningún ensayo de esta combinación informó sobre los desenlaces principales. CONCLUSIONES DE LOS AUTORES: Evidencia de certeza muy baja indica que los tratamientos farmacológicos, las terapias psicológicas y los tratamientos combinados pueden reducir la prevalencia de la depresión, mientras que la estimulación cerebral no invasiva tuvo poco o ningún efecto sobre la prevalencia de la depresión. Las intervenciones farmacológicas se asociaron con eventos adversos relacionados con el SNC y el sistema gastrointestinal. Se necesitan más estudios de investigación antes de poder hacer recomendaciones sobre el uso habitual de dichos tratamientos.

Development of the stroke patient concerns inventory: A modified Delphi study.

OBJECTIVES: Stroke survivors often have unmet physical, psychological and/or social concerns. Patient Concerns Inventories (PCIs) have been developed for other health conditions to address concerns. Our objective was to develop a PCI for stroke care. METHODS: This was a development study, including Modified Delphi study design, with academic and healthcare professionals with stroke care expertise. In Stage 1, a draft Stroke PCI (Version 1a) was created through identifying patient-reported concerns post-stroke from three previous studies and through expert panel discussions using Nominal Group Technique. In Stage 2, Version 1a was sent to 92 academic and healthcare professionals with stroke care expertise. Participants ranked their top 20 Stroke PCI items in order of importance and provided feedback. Rankings were converted into scores, and, with the feedback, used to amend the Stroke PCI. Two further rounds of feedback followed until consensus was reached between participants. A final draft of the Stroke PCI was created. RESULTS: In stage 1, 64 potential Stroke PCI items were generated. In Stage 2, 38 participants (41.3%) responded to the request to rank Stroke PCI items. The three highest ranked items were 'Risk of another stroke', 'Walking', 'Recovery'. After three rounds of feedback and amendments, the final draft of the Stroke PCI consisted of 53 items. CONCLUSIONS: A Stroke PCI has been developed using patient-reported concerns in previous studies and input from academic and healthcare professionals. Future work will involve gathering further feedback on the tool and exploring its acceptability and usability in a pilot study.

"I tried to get help about my addiction but he just gave me tablets:" male Aboriginal drug and alcohol rehabilitation clients' experiences and preferences speaking about substance use in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Primary healthcare (PHC) services are crucial in supporting people who use substances. The aims of this study were to explore the experiences of Aboriginal males in NSW in treatment for substance use about speaking about their substance use with PHC staff, and their preferences for accessing PHC about their substance use. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with residential drug and alcohol rehabilitation treatment service clients. Thematic analysis was used to develop themes inductively and deductively. Two interviews were independently double coded by an Aboriginal researcher and the project was supported by an Aboriginal Advisory Group. RESULTS: Twenty male adults who self-identified as Aboriginal participated (mean age 27 years). Half reported visiting PHC and talking about their substance use before their residential service stay. Two major themes developed: (1) speaking up about substance use or mental health problems linked with substance use, (2) ways to improve access to PHC about substance use. Although some males were offered treatment, some were not, and others had concerns about the treatments offered. CONCLUSION: This research highlights opportunities to improve access and to better support Aboriginal males who use substances in PHC. Focus on culturally appropriate PHC and providing staff with training around substance use and treatment options may improve access. It is important to foster culturally appropriate services, develop PHC staff knowledge around substance use, focus on therapeutic relationships and have a range of treatment options available that can be tailored to individual circumstances.

Stroke in Africa: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the incidence and case-fatality rates.

BACKGROUND: The burden of stroke (a leading cause of disability and mortality) in Africa appears to be increasing, but a systematic review of the best available data to support or refute this observation is lacking. AIM: To determine the incidence and 1-month case-fatality rates from high-quality studies of stroke epidemiology among Africans. SUMMARY OF REVIEW: We searched and retrieved eligible articles on stroke epidemiology among indigenous Africans in bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Cochrane library) using predefined search terms from the earliest records through January 2022. Methodological assessment of eligible studies was conducted using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Pooling of incidence and case-fatality rates was performed via generalized linear models (Poisson-Normal random-effects model). Of the 922 articles retrieved, 14 studies were eligible for inclusion. The total number of stroke cases was 2568, with a population denominator (total sample size included in population-based registries or those who agreed to participate in door-to-door community studies) of 3,384,102. The pooled crude incidence rate of stroke per 100,000 persons in Africa was 106.49 (95% confidence interval (CI) = 58.59-193.55), I2 = 99.6%. The point estimate of the crude incidence rate was higher among males, 111.33 (95% CI = 56.31-220.12), I2 = 99.2%, than females, 91.14 (95% CI = 47.09-176.37), I2 = 98.9%. One-month case-fatality rate was 24.45 (95% CI = 16.84-35.50), I2 = 96.8%, with lower estimates among males, 22.68 (95% CI = 18.62-27.63), I2 = 12.9%, than females, 27.57 (95% CI = 21.47-35.40), I2 = 51.6%. CONCLUSION: The burden of stroke in Africa remains very high. However, little is known about the dynamics of stroke epidemiology among Africans due to the dearth of high-quality evidence. Further continent-wide rigorous epidemiological studies and surveillance programs using the World Health Organization STEPwise approach to Surveillance (WHO STEPS) framework are needed.

The effectiveness of postpartum interventions aimed at improving women's mental health after medical complications of pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum mental disorders including depression and anxiety are common. Medical complications of pregnancy, such as preeclampsia and gestational diabetes, are thought to increase the risk of mental disorders postpartum. However, it is unclear which interventions may be effective for preventing and/or treating postpartum mental disorders following a medically complicated pregnancy. We aimed to systematically review published literature on the effectiveness of postpartum interventions to improve women's mental health after medical complications of pregnancy. METHODS: Systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42021220030) was performed. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: (1) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), published 1st Jan 2001-12th August 2021 (2) outcome measures reported on postpartum mental disorders (3) participants had ≥ 1 medical complication during pregnancy (4) intervention entirely postpartum or contained a postpartum component (5) full-text available in English or Chinese. Risk of bias was assessed using the Revised Cochrane Criteria Risk of Bias. Random effects inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis was used to pool the individual standardized mean differences (SMD) in depression or anxiety scores between intervention and control groups. RESULTS: Of 5928 studies screened, 9 met inclusion criteria, and were based on non-pharmaceutical, combined lifestyle interventions that began shortly after childbirth, or as part of extended care packages beginning during pregnancy. Of these, 2 were rated as low risk of bias, 1 with some concerns, and 6 were at high risk. Meta-analysis was performed for 8 studies using standardized measures of depression and 7 for anxiety. There were statistically significant reductions in depression (SMD - 1.48; 95%CI: -2.41 to -0.55), and anxiety scores (SMD - 1.98; 95%CI: -3.03 to -0.94) in intervention versus control groups. Considerable heterogeneity was noted for pooled depression (I2 = 97.9%, p < 0.05), and anxiety (I2 = 96.8%, p < 0.05) results. CONCLUSION: Limited intervention studies aimed at improving postpartum mental disorders after medically complicated pregnancy were found, most with a high risk of bias. There was some evidence to suggest that postpartum depression and anxiety scores improved after early intervention. However, in general the current quality of evidence is low. Further, high-quality, interventional research is required in this understudied field.

Pharmaceutical interventions for emotionalism after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Antidepressants may be useful in the treatment of abnormal crying associated with stroke. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2004 and last updated in 2019. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of pharmaceutical treatment in people with emotionalism after stroke. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, and three trials registers (May 2022). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing psychotropic medication to placebo in people with stroke and emotionalism (also known as emotional lability, pathological crying or laughing, emotional incontinence, involuntary emotional expression disorder, and pseudobulbar affect). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias, extracted data from all included trials, and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the body of evidence. We calculated the mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data and the risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous data, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed heterogeneity using the I2 statistic. The primary emotionalism measures were the proportion of participants achieving at least a 50% reduction in abnormal emotional behaviour at the end of treatment, improved score on the Center for Neurologic Study - Lability Scale (CNS-LS) or Clinician Interview-Based Impression of Change (CIBIC), or diminished tearfulness. MAIN RESULTS: We did not identify any new trials for this update. We included seven trials with a total of 239 participants. Two trials had a cross-over design, but outcome data were not available from the first phase (precross-over) in an appropriate format for inclusion as a parallel randomised controlled trial (RCT). Thus, the results of the review are based on five trials with a total of 213 participants. It is uncertain whether fluoxetine increases the number of people who have a 50% reduction in emotionalism when compared to placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.26, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.77; P = 0.02; 1 trial, 19 participants) because the certainty of evidence is very low. Sertraline may lead to little to no difference in Center for Neurologic Study - Lability Scale (CNS-LS) scores and Clinician Interview-Based Impression of Change (CIBIC) scores when compared to placebo (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.50; P = 0.12; 1 trial, 28 participants; low-certainty evidence). Antidepressants probably increase the number of people who experience a reduction in tearfulness (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.86; P = 0.02; 3 trials, 164 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). No trials were found that evaluated the impact of other pharmaceutical interventions. Only two trial authors systematically recorded and reported adverse events, resulting in limited data on the potential harms of treatment. Six trials reported death as an adverse event and found no difference between the groups (antidepressants versus placebo) in the number of deaths reported (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.08 to 4.50; P = 0.61; 172 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This review provides very low- to moderate-certainty evidence that antidepressants may reduce the frequency and severity of emotionalism. The included trials were small and had some degree of bias. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Antidepressants may reduce the frequency and severity of crying or laughing episodes when compared to placebo, based on very low-certainty evidence. Our conclusions must be qualified by several methodological deficiencies in the trials and interpreted with caution despite the effect being very large. The effect does not seem specific to one drug or class of drugs. More reliable data are required before appropriate conclusions can be made about the treatment of post-stroke emotionalism. Future trialists investigating the effect of antidepressants in people with emotionalism after stroke should consider developing and using a standardised method to diagnose emotionalism, determine severity, and assess change over time; provide treatment for a sufficient duration and follow-up to better assess rates of relapse or maintenance; and include careful assessment and complete reporting of adverse events.

A mixed-methods feasibility study of a new digital health support package for people after stroke: the Recovery-focused Community support to Avoid readmissions and improve Participation after Stroke (ReCAPS) intervention.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for digital health programmes to support people living with stroke is growing. We assessed the feasibility of a protocol and procedures for the Recovery-focused Community support to Avoid readmissions and improve Participation after Stroke (ReCAPS) trial. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-method feasibility study. Participants with acute stroke were recruited from three hospitals (Melbourne, Australia). Eligibility: Adults with stroke discharged from hospital to home within 10 days, modified Rankin Score 0-4 and prior use of Short Message System (SMS)/email. While in hospital, recruited participants contributed to structured person-centred goal setting and completed baseline surveys including self-management skills and health-related quality of life. Participants were randomised 7-14 days after discharge via REDCap® (1:1 allocation). Following randomisation, the intervention group received a 12-week programme of personalised electronic support messages (average 66 messages sent by SMS or email) aligned with their goals. The control group received six electronic administrative messages. Feasibility outcomes included the following: number of patients screened and recruited, study retainment, completion of outcome measures and acceptability of the ReCAPS intervention and trial procedures (e.g. participant satisfaction survey, clinician interviews). Protocol fidelity outcomes included number of goals developed (and quality), electronic messages delivered, stop messages received and engagement with messages. We undertook inductive thematic analysis of interview/open-text survey data and descriptive analysis of closed survey questions. RESULTS: Between November 2018 and October 2019, 312 patients were screened; 37/105 (35%) eligible patients provided consent (mean age 61 years; 32% female); 33 were randomised (17 to intervention). Overall, 29 (88%) participants completed the12-week outcome assessments with 12 (41%) completed assessments in the allocated timeframe and 16 also completing the satisfaction survey (intervention=10). Overall, trial participants felt that the study was worthwhile and most would recommend it to others. Six clinicians participated in one of three focus group interviews; while they reported that the trial and the process of goal setting were acceptable, they raised concerns regarding the additional time required to personalise goals. CONCLUSION: The study protocol and procedures were feasible with acceptable retention of participants. Consent and goal personalisation procedures should be centralised for the phase III trial to reduce the burden on hospital clinicians. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12618001468213 (date 31/08/2018); Universal Trial Number: U1111-1206-7237.

Wishing to die or self-harm after stroke: A planned secondary analysis of the AFFINITY Randomised Controlled Trial.

We investigated the cumulative prevalence of self-harm ideation among stroke survivors of the AFFINITY trial. We assessed these thoughts with the last item of the PHQ-9, and functional impairment with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Of 1221 participants (age 63.9 ± 12.3 years, 775 men), 11 reported wishing to die or self-harm at baseline. By week 52, 36 of 1159 surviving participants had reported wishing to die or self-harm. Treatment with fluoxetine for 26 weeks did not change the prevalence of these thoughts compared with placebo. Clinically significant symptoms of depression were present in 95 % of participants with recurrent self-harm thoughts. The study was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12611000774921.