A randomised, open-label, pragmatic pilot comparison of oral and intravenous ketamine in treatment-resistant depression.

BACKGROUND: For depression, ketamine is more conveniently administered by oral than by intravenous (iv) routes. The relative antidepressant efficacy of oral vs iv ketamine is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess the acute efficacy and the persistence of improvement with open-label oral versus iv ketamine in outpatients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). METHODS: Adults with TRD were randomized to oral (N=30) or IV (N=31) ketamine. Oral ketamine was dosed at 150 mg in 50 mL of water, sipped across 15 min. IV ketamine was dosed at 0.5 mg/kg, infused across 40 min. Ketamine sessions (total, 7) were administered on alternate days for 2 weeks. Ongoing antidepressant drugs were continued unchanged. Patients were assessed at baseline, day 14, and day 30. The primary outcome was the endpoint Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression score on day 14. Secondary outcomes were endpoint scores on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Beck Depression Inventory, and Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness and Improvement. RESULTS: Overall dropout was lower with oral than with iv ketamine (26.7 % vs 54.8 %; P=0.03). The 2 groups did not differ in depression ratings and in response and remission rates on all instruments on both days 14 and 30. Adverse events such as headache (56.7 % vs 74.2 %) and drowsiness (0.0 % vs 22.6 %) were less common with oral ketamine. CONCLUSION: In TRD outpatients treated in general hospitals, oral ketamine maybe better accepted and tolerated than iv ketamine. Conclusions about relative efficacy cannot be drawn because of the high dropout rate with iv ketamine.

Psychometric properties and factor structure of the suicidal narrative inventory in major depression: A multicentric evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The Suicidal Narrative Inventory (SNI) is a 38-item self-report measure developed to assess elements of the suicidal narrative, a subacute, predominantly cognitive, presuicidal construct. Our objectives were to assess the factor structure, validity, and reliability of the SNI-38 among adults with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design, we administered the Hindi version of the SNI along with other self-report measures to adults with MDD, recruited from 24 tertiary care hospitals across India. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to assess the factor structure of SNI-38. Reliability (internal consistency) was assessed using Cronbach's alpha (α). Convergent, discriminant, and criterion validity of the SNI-38 were tested by comparing it against other appropriate measures. RESULTS: We collected usable responses from 654 Hindi-speaking participants (Mean age = 36.9 ± 11.9 years, 50.2% female). The eight-factor solution of the SNI showed good model fit indices (χ2[637] = 3345.58, p <.001, CFI =.98, and RMSEA =.08). Internal consistencies for the SNI subscale scores were good to excellent, α ranging from .73 to.92. While most subscales significantly converged with other measures, associations were comparatively weaker and inconsistent for the 'thwarted belongingness' and 'goal reengagement' subscales. CONCLUSION: Consistent with prior data, our study confirmed an eight-factor solution and demonstrated adequate psychometric properties for the Hindi version of the SNI-38 in our sample. These findings provide empirical support for the use of SNI to assess the suicidal narrative among Indian adults with MDD.