Patient-reported outcomes of psychiatric and/or mental health nursing in hospitals: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: There is a lack of distinct and measurable outcomes in psychiatric and/or mental health nursing which negatively impacts guiding clinical practice, assessing evidence-based nursing interventions, ensuring future-proof nursing education and establishing visibility as a profession and discipline. Psychiatric and/or mental health nursing struggle to demonstrate patient-reported outcomes to assess the effectiveness of their practice. A systematic review that summarising patient-reported outcomes, associated factors, measured nursing care/interventions and used measurement scales of psychiatric and/or mental health nursing in the adult population in acute, intensive and forensic psychiatric wards in hospitals will capture important information on how care can be improved by better understanding what matters and what is important to patients themselves. This review can contribute to the design, planning, delivery and assessment of the quality of current and future nursing care METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol follows the Cochrane methodological guidance on systematic reviews of interventions and The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocol. The search strategy will be identified by consultations with clinical and methodological experts and by exploring the literature. The databases Ovid MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, APA PsychARTICLES, Web of Science and Scopus will be searched for all published studies. Studies will be screened and selected with criteria described in the population, intervention, control and outcomes format after a pilot test by two researchers. Studies will be screened in two stages: (1) title and abstract screening and (2) full-text screening. Data extraction and the quality assessment based on the Johanna Briggs Institute guidelines will be conducted by two researchers. Data will be presented in a narrative synthesis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is needed since all data are already publicly accessible. The results of this work will be published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023363806.

Anhedonia in Depressive Disorder: A Narrative Review.

Since the introduction of DSM-III anhedonia has become a core depressive criterion and is defined as the loss of interest or pleasure. Although the origin of the word goes back to the end of the 19th century and numerous anhedonic symptoms are described in classic texts on depression, this centrality in the diagnosis of depression is only recent. Anhedonia is best described as a symptom complex with unclear boundaries cutting across the tripartite model of the mind (affect, volition, and cognition). Popular concepts of anhedonia pertain to the pleasure cycle and positive affectivity. These concepts partially overlap and are often mixed up, but clearly stem from different theoretical backgrounds: the affective science of reward processing versus more general, dimensional modelling of affect. The former concept seems more suitable to understand anhedonic emotions, the latter more suitable to understand anhedonic mood or trait. This narrative review covers the history of "anhedonia," the different anhedonic phenomena, and psychopathological concepts. An attempt is made to go beyond a merely descriptive psychopathology. Neurobiological and psychological insights shed a light on how symptoms are made and interconnected; these insights possibly call for a new psychopathological language.

The pharmacological management of agitated and aggressive behaviour: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Non-pharmacological interventions preferably precede pharmacological interventions in acute agitation. Reviews of pharmacological interventions remain descriptive or compare only one compound with several other compounds. The goal of this study is to compute a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect on restoring calmness after a pharmacological intervention, so a more precise recommendation is possible. METHOD: A search in Pubmed and Embase was done to isolate RCT's considering pharmacological interventions in acute agitation. The outcome is reaching calmness within maximum of 2 h, assessed by the psychometric scales of PANSS-EC, CGI or ACES. Also the percentages of adverse effects was assessed. RESULTS: Fifty-three papers were included for a systematic review and meta-analysis. Most frequent studied drug is olanzapine. Changes on PANNS-EC and ACES at 2 h showed the strongest changes for haloperidol plus promethazine, risperidon, olanzapine, droperidol and aripiprazole. However, incomplete data showed that the effect of risperidon is overestimated. Adverse effects are most prominent for haloperidol and haloperidol plus lorazepam. CONCLUSION: Olanzapine, haloperidol plus promethazine or droperidol are most effective and safe for use as rapid tranquilisation. Midazolam sedates most quickly. But due to increased saturation problems, midazolam is restricted to use within an emergency department of a general hospital.

Efficacy of Tranylcypromine in Bipolar Depression: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Currently, there is a paucity of treatment options with limited efficacy for bipolar depression. The monoamine oxidase inhibitor tranylcypromine might be an effective form of treatment. The current systematic review reassesses the efficacy and safety of tranylcypromine in bipolar depression. METHODS: For this systematic review comparing tranylcypromine with placebo or active comparators in bipolar depression, relevant randomized controlled trials were identified from systematic searches of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases. A manual search of the references of the included studies was also performed. RESULTS: Four studies with a total of 145 participants were identified. Response rates were higher in patients treated with tranylcypromine (60.0%-80.7%; overall response rate, 73.7%) compared with placebo, imipramine, and lamotrigine (the latter as add-on to a mood stabilizer) (12.9%-47.6%; overall response rate, 27.5%). The overall switch rate was 6.3% for patients treated with tranylcypromine and 18.4% for patients in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review provides evidence for the efficacy and safety of tranylcypromine treatment in bipolar depression. Additional research is required to establish the efficacy of tranylcypromine as add-on to a mood stabilizer.

Prescribing preferences in rapid tranquillisation: a survey in Belgian psychiatrists and emergency physicians.

BACKGROUND: The pharmacotherapeutic management of agitation is a common clinical challenge. Pharmacotherapy is frequently used, the use of published guidelines is not known. The purpose of this study was twofold; to describe the prescribing patterns of psychiatrists and emergency physicians and to evaluate to which extent guidelines are used. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey in the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium is carried out in 39 psychiatric hospitals, 11 psychiatric wards of a general hospital and 61 emergency departments. All physicians are asked for demographic information, their prescribing preferences, their use of guidelines and the type of monitoring (effectiveness, safety). For the basic demographic data and prescription preferences descriptive statistics are given. For comparing prescribing preferences of the drug between groups Chi square tests (or in case of low numbers Fisher's exact test) were performed. Mc Nemar test for binomial proportions for matched-pair data was performed to see if the prescription preferences of the participants differ between secluded and non-secluded patients. RESULTS: 550 psychiatrist and emergency physicians were invited. The overall response rate was 20% (n = 108). The number 1 preferred medication classes were antipsychotics (59.3%) and benzodiazepines (40.7%). In non-secluded patients, olanzapine (22.2%), lorazepam (21.3%) and clotiapine (19.4%) were most frequently picked as number 1 choice drug. In secluded patients, clotiapine (21.3%), olanzapine (21.3%) and droperidol (14.8%) were the three most frequently chosen number 1 preferred drugs. Between-group comparisons show that emergency physicians prefer benzodiazepines significantly more than psychiatrists do. Zuclopenthixol and olanzapine show a particular profile in both groups of physicians. Polypharmacy is more frequently used in secluded patients. Published guidelines and safety or outcome monitoring are rarely used. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that prescription practice in Flanders (Belgium) in acute agitation shows a complex relationship with published guidelines. Prescription preferences differ accordingly to medical specialty. These findings should be taken into account in future research.

Evidence-based treatment strategies for treatment-resistant bipolar depression: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Treatment resistance in bipolar depression is a common clinical problem that constitutes a major challenge for the treating clinician as there is a paucity of treatment options. The objective of this paper was to review the evidence for treatment options in treatment-resistant bipolar depression, as found in randomized controlled trials and with special attention to the definition and assessment of treatment resistance. METHODS: A Medline search (from database inception to May 2012) was performed using the search terms treatment resistance or treatment refractory, and bipolar depression or bipolar disorder, supplemented with 43 separate searches using the various pharmacologic agents or technical interventions as search terms. RESULTS: Only seven studies met our inclusion criteria. These studies examined the effects of ketamine (n = 1), (ar)modafinil (n = 2), pramipexole (n = 1), lamotrigine (n = 1), inositol (n = 1), risperidone (n = 1), and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) (n = 2). CONCLUSIONS: The available level I evidence for treatment strategies in resistant bipolar depression is extremely scarce, and although the response rates reported are reassuring, most of the strategies remain experimental. There is an urgent need for further study in homogeneous patient samples using a clear concept of treatment resistance.

Second generation antipsychotics in the treatment of bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Depressive symptoms and episodes dominate the course of bipolar disorder. However, the therapeutic armamentarium for bipolar depression is limited. Recent evidence points to the efficacy of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) for the treatment of bipolar depression. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy and safety of SGAs (randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials; used in monotherapy) in the treatment of adult patients with bipolar depression. Publication bias was corrected for by performing similar searches using the clinical trials register of the respective pharmaceutical companies, the Cochrane Database and ClinicalTrials.gov. Seven published papers were identified on the use of aripiprazole, olanzapine and quetiapine. Internal validity of the trials was fairly good, external validity only moderate. Different outcome measures of efficacy and safety were assessed. When the individual trials were looked at, quetiapine and to a lesser extent olanzapine demonstrated significant improvement in MADRS (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale) total scores. This was not demonstrated for aripiprazole. Efficacy was hampered by adverse events, such as weight gain, akathisia and somnolence/sedation. Both clinical heterogeneity of the included trials and statistical heterogeneity of the meta-analytic data were considerable. The number of quetiapine trials was disproportionate to the number of trials of aripiprazole and olanzapine. Further research is needed to assess differential efficacy of the different SGAs and their use in clinical practice.

Measuring catatonia: a systematic review of rating scales.

BACKGROUND: Despite a growing scientific and clinical interest in catatonia, its precise definition remains debated. AIM: The aim of this study was to offer a systematic review of the different rating scales that have been developed to assess catatonia in clinical practice. METHODS: A Medline-search was performed, up to December 2010. RESULTS: Seven catatonia rating scales were retrieved: the Modified Rogers Scale, the Rogers Catatonia Scale, the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS), and its revision, the Northoff Catatonia Rating Scale (NCRS), the Braunig Catatonia Rating Scale (BCRS), and the Kanner Scale. CONCLUSION: Several catatonia rating scales are proposed to detect the catatonic syndrome and to evaluate treatment response. BFCRS, NCRS and BCRS are reliable for use in variable populations in which catatonia is prevalent. The BFCRS is preferred for routine use, because of its validity and reliability, and its ease of administration.

Quality of life measurement in antidepressant trials. Is there an added value?

BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) measurement in medicine has gone a long way. It has gained popularity as a more humanitarian outcome measurement. In this paper, a review is given of its historical backgrounds with a special focus on the use of QoL assessment in psychiatry. Different theoretical concepts are discussed. A closer look is taken at the use of QoL measurements in antidepressant trials. METHODS: An analysis was performed on the use of QoL measurement in recent antidepressant trials of duloxetine and escitalopram. RESULTS: QoL measurement was found to have abandoned its initial purposes, and to have been used without any theoretical framework. CONCLUSIONS: Although frequently used in antidepressant trials, the analysis and reporting of results is virtually non-existent. It remains unclear if QoL measurement, as currently used, gives any information that is not already captured by more formal depression rating scales. The question then remains whether QoL measurement in antidepressant trials has any added value and, if so, whether this is just a story of missed opportunities.

Bipolar (spectrum) disorder and mood stabilization: standing at the crossroads?

Diagnosis and treatment of bipolar disorder has long been a neglected discipline. Recent years have shown an upsurge in bipolar research. When compared to major depressive disorder, bipolar research still remains limited and more expert based than evidence based. In bipolar diagnosis the focus is shifting from classic mania to bipolar depression and hypomania. There is a search for bipolar signatures in symptoms and course of major depressive episodes. The criteria for hypomania are softened, leading to a bipolar prevalence that now equals that of major depressive disorder. Anti-epileptics and atypical antipsychotics have joined lithium in the treatment of bipolar disorder. Fortunately, mood stabilization has become the core issue in bipolar disorder treatment. In contrast with recent trends in the diagnosis of bipolar disorder, treatment research remains more focused on classic mania than depression or hypomania. This leaves the clinician with the difficult task of diagnosing 'new bipolar patients' for whom no definite evidence-based treatment is available. An important efficacy-effectiveness gap further compromises the translation of the evidence base on bipolar disorder treatment into clinical practice. The recent upsurge of research on bipolar disorder is to be applauded, but further research is needed: for bipolar disorder in general, and for bipolar depression and the long-term treatment specifically. Given the complexity of the disorder and the many clinical uncertainties, effectiveness studies should be installed.

The many faces of fatigue in major depressive disorder.

Fatigue is a common complaint in the community and medical care settings. Different studies show a high comorbidity between fatigue and depressive disorder. Furthermore, fatigue is an important somatic symptom of depressive disorder and one of the main depressive presentations in primary-care medicine. Fatigue shows a slow response to antidepressant treatment and psychotherapy. Improved work performance is strongly correlated to improvement in energy. However, the assessment and treatment of fatigue in depressive disorder remains understudied. Different definitions of fatigue in depressive disorder are applied in DSM-IV and ICD-10, and depression rating scales all show a different coverage of this core depressive symptom, thereby hampering scientific research. Serotonin, norepinephrine, dopamine and histamine mediate symptoms of fatigue in depressive disorder. Although few data address the effect of antidepressants or augmentation strategies on fatigue-related symptoms, there is a pharmacological rationale for using antidepressant monotherapies, such as venlafaxine, bupropion, sertraline, fluoxetine, or augmentation of first-line treatment with stimulants or modafinil.

Rapid tranquilization: new approaches in the emergency treatment of behavioral disturbances.

Psychiatric emergencies are often accompanied by behavioral disturbances that interfere with normal assessment and call for immediate intervention. Different pharmacological treatment regimens have been used for this purpose. Most of these regimens are based upon common clinical practice and have limited evidence base. Recently, a major publication by experts in the field of emergency psychiatry has covered this topic and the therapeutic armamentarium has been extended with the atypical antipsychotics. However, research is still hampered by different methodological limitations: unclear definition of the agitated state and therapeutic goal, idiosyncratic measurement, small sample sizes. The perspective of the patient and the interaction between the emergency care setting and treatment regimen also need further attention. All these important, but often neglected issues are covered in a selective review of the literature.

Getting what you ask for: on the selectivity of depression rating scales.

A large number of rating scales has been developed to assess depression severity and change during antidepressant therapy. When reviewing the literature, the choice of the rating scales used in a particular study often seems arbitrary. The most frequently used observer rating scales, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and the most frequently used self-rating scale (the Beck Depression Inventory, or BDI) were developed more than 20 years ago. Their historical background is too often forgotten and they are reflections of their origin: the HDRS and the MADRS reflect antidepressant activity while the BDI reflects psychotherapy. Moreover, the HDRS is at risk of putting 'all depressions in one basket', while the MADRS is at risk of putting 'all antidepressants in one basket'. Therefore, the question whether a particular antidepressant could be more effective in a particular subtype of depression cannot be answered. Observer rating scales are more frequently used than self-rating scales, and when scales are used that do exist in an observer rating and a self-rating version, interesting differences are found. The present paper does not suggest that one scale is better than another, but suggests that a better knowledge of their differential background can help the researcher choose the correct scale for his purposes.