Team-based visits within Swedish child healthcare services: a national cross-sectional study.

Complex healthcare needs can be met through effective interprofessional collaboration. Since 2014, Swedish Child Healthcare Services (CHS) include universal team-based visits with a nurse and a physician who perform such visits at the age of 4 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and 2.5 to 3 years, as well as targeted team-based visits to address additional needs. The aim of this study was to describe the prevalence of team-based visits in the Swedish CHS and possible associations between team-based visits and contextual factors that may affect its implementation. A national cross-sectional survey was conducted using a web-based questionnaire distributed to all reachable nurses, physicians, and psychologists (n =3,552) engaged in the CHS. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and binary and multivariate logistic regressions. The response rate was 32%. Team-based visits were reported by 82% of the respondents. For nurses and physicians, the most frequent indication was specific ages, while for psychologists it was to provide parental support. Respondents working at Family Centers were more likely to perform team-based visits in general, at 2.5 to 3 years and in case of additional needs, compared to respondents working at Child Health Centers (CHC) and other workplaces. In conclusion, team-based visits are well implemented, but the pattern differs depending on the contextual factors. Targeted team-based visits and team-based visits at the age of 2.5 to 3 years are most unequally implemented.

Post hoc analysis of a randomised, placebo-controlled, active-reference 6-week study of brexpiprazole in acute schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: We provide a closer look at the result of a randomised, placebo-controlled, active-reference (quetiapine XR), flexible-dose, 6-week study of brexpiprazole in schizophrenia, which did not meet its primary endpoint - change from baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. We also investigate potential expectancy bias from the well-known side-effect profile of the active reference that could have affected the study outcome. METHODS: Pre-specified sensitivity analyses of the primary end point were performed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) last observation carried forward (LOCF) and observed cases (OC). Post hoc analyses of change from baseline in PANSS total score were performed using the mixed model for repeated measures approach with treatment groups split by having typical adverse events with potential for functional unblinding, for example, somnolence, increase in weight, dizziness, dry mouth and sedation. RESULTS: Pre-specified sensitivity analyses showed separation from placebo for brexpiprazole at week 6: LOCF, ANCOVA: -4.3 [95% CI (-8.0, -0.5), p = 0.0254]. OC, ANCOVA: -3.9 [95% CI (-7.3, -0.5), p = 0.0260]. Patients treated with brexpiprazole experiencing typical adverse events with potential for functional unblinding before or at Week 2 had a least square (LS) mean PANSS change of -29.5 (improvement), with a difference in change from baseline to Week 6 in PANSS total score between brexpiprazole and placebo of -13.5 [95% CI (-23.1, -4.0), p = 0.0057], and those who did not had an LS mean change of -18.9 and a difference between brexpiprazole and placebo of -2.9 [95% CI (-7.2, 1.4), p = 0.1809]. CONCLUSION: Pre-specified sensitivity analyses showed separation from placebo for brexpiprazole at Week 6. A post hoc analysis suggested a potential confounding of efficacy rating towards symptom improvement in patients who experience known side effects of quetiapine XR.

Adjunctive Brexpiprazole and Functioning in Major Depressive Disorder: A Pooled Analysis of Six Randomized Studies Using the Sheehan Disability Scale.

BACKGROUND: Patients with major depressive disorder and inadequate response to antidepressant treatments may experience a prolonged loss of functioning. This post hoc analysis aimed to determine the effect of adjunctive brexpiprazole on functioning in such patients. METHODS: A pooled analysis of data from the 6-week, randomized, double-blind treatment phases of 6 studies of adjunctive brexpiprazole (2 and 3 mg/d in fixed-dose studies; 1-3 mg/d in flexible-dose studies) vs placebo in patients with major depressive disorder and inadequate response to antidepressant treatments (NCT01360645, NCT01360632, NCT02196506, NCT01727726, NCT00797966, NCT01052077). Functioning was measured by change in Sheehan Disability Scale score from baseline to week 6. RESULTS: Considering Sheehan Disability Scale mean score across all 6 studies (n = 2066 randomized), the least squares mean difference between antidepressant treatments + brexpiprazole and antidepressant treatments + placebo at week 6 was -0.40 (95% CI: -0.56, -0.23; P < .0001). Antidepressant treatments + brexpiprazole showed a greater benefit than antidepressant treatments + placebo on the social life (-0.45; -0.63, -0.27; P < .001) and family life (-0.50; -0.70, -0.31; P < .001) items but not on the work/studies item (-0.16; -0.38, 0.06; P = .16). Pooled analyses of just the (1) fixed-dose, (2) flexible-dose, and (3) Phase 3 studies showed the same pattern of benefits for antidepressant treatments + brexpiprazole. CONCLUSIONS: Brexpiprazole, as adjunct to antidepressant treatments, improved functioning in patients with major depressive disorder and inadequate response to antidepressant treatments.

Effect of Brexpiprazole on Prolactin: An Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Studies in Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Hyperprolactinemia is an undesirable effect of most antipsychotics because of D2-receptor blockade. We assessed the effect of the D2-receptor partial agonist brexpiprazole on prolactin, based on pooled data from three 6-week, randomized, placebo-controlled studies and two open-label extension studies in patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: In the short-term studies, patients received 0.25, 1, 2, 4 mg brexpiprazole or placebo; or flexible-dose brexpiprazole (2-4 mg/d), placebo, or active reference. The extension studies were 52-week, flexible-dose (1-4 mg/d) studies. We studied changes from baseline and shifts in prolactin status in patients with normal or elevated prolactin levels at baseline, and prolactin-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: Median changes from baseline to week 6 in brexpiprazole-treated patients in short-term studies were as follows: 3.63 ng/mL (females), 0.26 ng/mL (males); placebo: -2.15 ng/mL (females), -1.08 ng/mL (males).Median changes from baseline to week 52 in long-term studies were 0.60 ng/mL (females) and 0.18 ng/mL (males). Prolactin levels in patients with baseline values greater than 1× upper limit of normal tended to decrease over time regardless of previous treatment.The proportions of brexpiprazole-treated patients with greater than 3× upper limit of normal postbaseline prolactin values in short-term studies were as follows: 1.5% (females), 1.6% (males); placebo: 3.6% (females), 3.4% (males). Corresponding figures in long-term studies were 5.3% (females) and 2.0% (males).In short-term studies, the incidence of prolactin-related TEAEs was 1.8% for brexpiprazole and 0.6% for placebo. In long-term studies, the incidence of prolactin-related TEAEs was 1.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Small changes in prolactin levels, low proportions of patients with postbaseline elevated prolactin values, and low incidence of prolactin-related TEAEs were observed after treatment with brexpiprazole.

Are clear boundaries a prerequisite for well-functioning collaboration in home health care? A mixed methods study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to examine whether professional collaboration in home health care is associated with clear boundaries between principals' areas of responsibility and the professions areas of responsibility, respectively. METHODS: Data were derived from a web-based survey that was carried out in one county in the middle of Sweden during spring 2013. Participants were health professionals and managers from the county council and from all the municipalities in the county. Both structured and open-ended questions were utilised. A total of 421 individuals (90% women) answered the structured questions, and 91 individuals (22% of the 421) answered the open-ended questions. Quantitative data were analysed with descriptive statistics methods, tests of independence and of correlation strength. Qualitative data were analysed with content analysis. RESULTS: The results from the structured questions showed that well-functioning collaboration was associated with clear boundaries between principals in the county overall, and for respondents in two of three parts of the county. Association between clear boundaries between professions and well-functioning collaboration was found in the county overall among the municipality population. However, in one part of the county, we did not find any correlations between well-functioning collaboration and clear boundaries between professions or principals, with the exception of home help services. The analysis of the open questions gave similar results as the quantitative analysis, illustrated within three themes: The significance of concepts, trust and interdependence, and collaboration as a means for well-being. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that, recently after an organisational change, clear boundaries between the principals' areas of responsibility and professions' area of responsibility respectively are necessary for effective cooperation between professionals. If the organisation and professionals have previous positive experience of colocated activities, clear boundaries do not share the same importance.

Economic stress and condescending treatment in childhood and adult self-rated health: results from a population study in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Even today, 12% of the children in Sweden live in poverty and many children are exposed to adverse experiences, such as being bullied, which may have long-term consequences on public health. This study examined the associations between economic stress and condescending treatment in childhood and self-rated health (SRH) in adulthood. METHODS: The study is based on 26,706 persons who responded to a postal survey questionnaire sent to a random sample of men and women aged 25-84 years in 2012 (response rate 53%). The associations between childhood circumstances and adult SRH were analysed by logistic regression, adjusting for sex, age, economic stress in adulthood, condescending treatment in adulthood, socioeconomic status and several other known material, behavioural and psychosocial risk factors. RESULTS: In total, 39% of both men and women reported economic stress in their family during childhood. 36% of the men and 41% of the women indicated that they had been treated in a condescending manner, e.g. in school or at home, during childhood. Both economic stress in childhood and condescending treatment in childhood were strongly associated with adult SRH. The associations attenuated, but were still statistically significant after adjustment for adulthood circumstances and other risk factors. CONCLUSION: Economic stress in childhood and condescending treatment in childhood were associated with SRH in adulthood, both independently and through adulthood circumstances. The results underline the importance of taking into account both material and psychosocial circumstances over the whole life course when developing public health measures.

Safety and tolerability of dexmecamylamine (TC-5214) adjunct to ongoing antidepressant therapy in patients with major depressive disorder and an inadequate response to antidepressant therapy: results of a long-term study.

Safety and tolerability are important considerations when selecting patients' treatment for major depressive disorder. We report the long-term safety and tolerability of the nicotinic channel modulator dexmecamylamine (TC-5214), adjunct to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs)/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) in patients with major depressive disorder and who had an inadequate response to antidepressants. This 52-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study explored the long-term safety and tolerability of dexmecamylamine. Patients were randomized 3:1 to receive flexibly dosed dexmecamylamine 1 to 4 mg adjunct to SSRI/SNRI or placebo plus SSRI/SNRI. The patient population comprised inadequate responders from 2 Phase III acute dexmecamylamine studies (NCT01157078 [study 002], NCT01153347 [study 004]) and de novo patients who responded inadequately during a 6-week open-label antidepressant treatment period preceding randomization. Safety and tolerability were assessed by monitoring adverse events, vital signs, and physical and laboratory parameters. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed on most efficacy-related end points. Sustained efficacy was analyzed using logistic regression. Overall, 813 patients were randomized (610 received dexmecamylamine, 203 received placebo). In total, 82.4% and 84.6% of patients, respectively, experienced an adverse event. Adverse events occurring more frequently with dexmecamylamine vs placebo were constipation (19.6% vs 6.0%), dizziness (12.0% vs 7.0%), and dry mouth (9.7% vs 5.0%). Back pain (2.8% vs 8.5%), weight increase (4.4% vs 7.0%), and fatigue (5.6 % vs 7.5%) occurred more frequently in placebo-treated patients. No notable differences were observed between dexmecamylamine and placebo for any secondary end point. In this long-term study, safety and tolerability of dexmecamylamine were consistent with that reported in acute Phase III studies of dexmecamylamine.

Social inequalities in self-reported refraining from health care due to financial reasons in Sweden: health care on equal terms?

BACKGROUND: The main goal of the health care system in Sweden is good health and health care on equal terms for the entire population. This study investigated the existence of social inequalities in refraining from health care due to financial reasons in Sweden. METHODS: The study is based on 38,536 persons who responded to a survey questionnaire sent to a random sample of men and women aged 18-84 years in 2008 (response rate 59%). The proportion of persons who during the past three months due to financial reasons limited or refrained from seeking health care, purchasing medicine or seeking dental care is reported. The groups were defined by gender, age, country of origin, educational level and employment status. The prevalence of longstanding illness was used to describe morbidity in these groups. Differences between groups were tested with chi-squared statistics and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: In total, 3% reported that they had limited or refrained from seeking health care, 4% from purchasing medicine and 10% from seeking dental care. To refrain from seeking health care was much more common among the unemployed (12%) and those on disability pension (10%) than among employees (2%). It was also more common among young adults and persons born outside the Nordic countries. Similar differences also apply to purchasing medicine and dental care. The odds for refraining from seeking health care, purchasing medicine or seeking dental care due to financial reasons were 2-3 times higher among persons with longstanding illness than among persons with no longstanding illness. CONCLUSIONS: There are social inequalities in self-reported refraining from health care due to financial reasons in Sweden even though the absolute levels vary between different types of care. Often those in most need refrain from seeking health care which contradicts the national goal of the health care system. The results suggest that the fare systems of health care and dental care should be revised because they contribute to inequalities in health care.

Evaluation of adjunct extended-release quetiapine fumarate on sleep disturbance and quality in patients with major depressive disorder and an inadequate response to on-going antidepressant therapy.

Sleep disturbance is common in depression and is a risk factor for recurrence and suicide. This analysis evaluated the effects of adjunct extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) on sleep disturbance and quality in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and an inadequate response to on-going antidepressant therapy. Pooled data from two 6-wk, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were analysed post hoc. Patients received once-daily quetiapine XR [(150 mg/d), n = 309; (300 mg/d), n = 307] or placebo (n = 303) adjunct to on-going antidepressant therapy. Analyses included: change from randomization in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Item 4 (reduced sleep) score; Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD) Items 4 (insomnia-early), 5 (insomnia-middle) and 6 (insomnia-late) scores; HAMD sleep disturbance factor (Items 4+5+6); Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) global score. Change in MADRS total score was also evaluated in patients stratified by HAMD sleep disturbance factor score (high ≥ 4 and low < 4) at randomization. At week 6, adjunct quetiapine XR (150 and 300 mg/d) reduced MADRS Item 4, HAMD Items 4, 5 and 6, HAMD sleep disturbance factor and PSQI global scores from randomization vs. placebo (all p < 0.001). In patients with high sleep disturbance, quetiapine XR (both doses) improved depressive symptoms (MADRS total score) vs. placebo from week 1 onwards (p < 0.01). Adjunct quetiapine XR improved sleep disturbance and quality vs. placebo in patients with MDD and an inadequate response to on-going antidepressant treatment, and was effective against depressive symptoms in patients experiencing high sleep disturbance.

Evaluation of the effects of extended release quetiapine fumarate monotherapy on sleep disturbance in patients with major depressive disorder: a pooled analysis of four randomized acute studies.

Effects of once-daily extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy on sleep quality and disturbance in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) were evaluated. Pooled data from four 6- or 8-wk placebo-controlled quetiapine XR (50-300 mg/d) monotherapy studies (D1448C00001; D1448C00002; D1448C00003; D1448C00004) were analysed. Primary efficacy end-point was change from randomization in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score. Post hoc analyses of secondary end-points were conducted for change from randomization in: MADRS item 4 (reduced sleep); Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD) items 4 (insomnia-early), 5 (insomnia-middle), 6 (insomnia-late) and sleep disturbance factor (items 4 + 5+6) scores; Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) global scores. MADRS total score change was also evaluated in patients experiencing high and low baseline sleep disturbance (HAMD sleep disturbance factor scores ⩾4 and < 4, respectively). In total, 1808 patients were randomized to quetiapine XR or placebo across four studies. At last assessment, quetiapine XR reduced MADRS item 4, HAMD items 4, 5 and 6, HAMD sleep disturbance factor score and PSQI global scores from baseline vs. placebo (p < 0.001). For those experiencing high sleep disturbance (n = 865, quetiapine XR; n = 514, placebo), quetiapine XR improved MADRS total score vs. placebo at all visits (p < 0.001). For those with low sleep disturbance (n = 252, quetiapine XR; n = 121, placebo), quetiapine XR improved MADRS total score vs. placebo at weeks 2 (p < 0.001), 4 and 6 (both p < 0.05). In conclusion, quetiapine XR (50-300 mg/d) monotherapy improved symptoms of sleep disturbance vs. placebo in patients with MDD, including those with either high or low baseline sleep disturbance levels.

Randomized, double-blind study of the efficacy and tolerability of extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in elderly patients with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in elderly patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). DESIGN: An 11-week (9-week randomized; 2-week posttreatment phase), double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase III study (D1448C00014). SETTING: A total of 53 centers in Argentina, Estonia, Finland, Russia, Ukraine, and the United States. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 338 patients (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition diagnosis of MDD, age ≥66 years, Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D] total score ≥22, HAM-D Item 1 [depressed mood] score ≥2) were randomized (mean age: 71.3 years). INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to quetiapine XR (n = 166; flexible-dosing 50-300 mg/day) or placebo (n = 172). MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome was Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score change from randomization at Week 9. RESULTS: At Week 9, quetiapine XR (least squares [LS] means: -16.33, standard error [SE]: 0.95; mean change: -16.0, standard deviation [SD]: 9.3) significantly reduced MADRS total score from randomization versus placebo (LS means [SE]: -8.79 [0.94]; mean [SD]: -9.0 [9.9]); significant improvements were also seen at Week 1 (LS means [SE]: -4.65 [0.53] versus -2.56 [0.53], respectively; mean [SD]: -4.3 [5.1] versus -2.4 [3.7], respectively). At Week 9, secondary outcome variables significantly improved with quetiapine XR versus placebo, including MADRS response (≥50% reduction in total score); MADRS remission (total score ≤8); HAM-D total, HAM-A total, HAM-A psychic and somatic cluster, and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) total scores; proportion of patients with CGI-Improvement score of 2 or less; Q-LES-Q-SF% maximum total, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index global, and pain Visual Analog Scale scores. Common adverse events (>10% patients with quetiapine XR) were somnolence, headache, dry mouth, and dizziness. CONCLUSION: In elderly patients with MDD, quetiapine XR monotherapy (50-300 mg/day, flexibly dosed) is effective at improving depressive symptoms, with symptom improvement observed as early as Week 1. Overall tolerability and safety were consistent with the known profile of quetiapine.

Double-blind, randomized study of extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in older patients with generalized anxiety disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to evaluate once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in older patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). METHODS: An 11-week (9-week treatment; 2-week posttreatment), randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (D1448C00015) of flexibly-dosed quetiapine XR (50-300 mg/day) or placebo conducted at 47 sites (Estonia, Poland, Russia, Ukraine, and USA) between September 2006 and April 2008. Patients (≥66 years) with DSM-IV diagnosis of GAD, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score of ≥20 with item 1 (anxious mood) and 2 (tension) scores of ≥2, Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score of ≥4, and Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score of ≤16 were eligible for inclusion. Primary endpoint: week 9 change from randomization in HAM-A total score. RESULTS: Patients were randomized to quetiapine XR (n = 223) or placebo (n = 227). At week 9, quetiapine XR significantly reduced HAM-A total score versus placebo (least squares mean -14.97 versus -7.21; p < 0.001); symptom improvement with quetiapine XR versus placebo was significant at week 1 (p < 0.001). At week 9, quetiapine XR demonstrated significant benefits over placebo for HAM-A response and remission rates, HAM-A psychic and somatic cluster, MADRS total, CGI-S, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index global, pain visual analog scale, and Quality of Life, Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire short form % maximum total scores and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (% patients with a score of 1/2) (all p < 0.001). Adverse events (>5% in either treatment group) included somnolence, dry mouth, dizziness, headache, and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: Quetiapine XR (50-300 mg/day) monotherapy is effective in the short term in improving symptoms of anxiety in older patients with GAD, with symptom improvement seen as early as week 1. Tolerability findings were generally consistent with the known profile of quetiapine.

Extended release quetiapine fumarate in major depressive disorder: analysis in patients with anxious depression.

BACKGROUND: A pooled analysis was performed on data from two studies evaluating the efficacy of once-daily extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy for patients with major depressive disorder. Through these analyses (based on Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) measures), we aim to further evaluate the efficacy of quetiapine XR in depressed patients with high levels of anxiety symptoms. METHODS: Secondary analyses were conducted of pooled individual patient data from two 8-week (6-week randomized phase, 2-week drug discontinuation phase), double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of quetiapine XR (50-300 mg/day). Outcomes included change from randomization at Week 6 in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score for patients with anxious and nonanxious depression. RESULTS: Of 968 patients included in the analysis, 788 (81.4%) were classified as anxious depressed (defined as HAM-D anxiety/somatization factor score ≥ 7) and 180 (18.6%) were nonanxious. For patients with anxious depression and nonanxious depression, statistically significant differences versus placebo in MADRS total score were recorded for quetiapine XR 150 mg/day (-3.24, P < .001 and -4.82, P < .01, respectively) and 300 mg/day (-3.57, P < .001 and -3.39, P < .05, respectively) at Week 6. In the second analysis using an alternate definition of anxious depression (baseline HAM-A total score ≥ 20), quetiapine XR 150 and 300 mg/day resulted in significant differences versus placebo in MADRS total score reduction in patients with high and lower levels of anxiety. The adverse event (AE) profile was similar irrespective of baseline anxiety levels, although patients with anxious depression reported a somewhat greater incidence of AEs. CONCLUSION: Quetiapine XR monotherapy improved symptoms of depression in patients with higher and lower levels of anxiety.

Tolerability of extended-release quetiapine fumarate compared with immediate-release quetiapine fumarate in older patients with Alzheimer's disease with symptoms of psychosis and/or agitation: a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the safety and tolerability of extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) compared with quetiapine immediate-release (quetiapine IR) in older patients with Alzheimer's disease with symptoms of psychosis and/or agitation. METHODS: This was a 6-week, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised study. Of the 109 patients screened, 100 were randomised to receive quetiapine XR (n = 68) or quetiapine IR (n = 32), at doses of 50 and 25 mg/day, respectively. Treatment was escalated to 100 mg/day by Day 4. At Day 8, a flexible-dose (50-300 mg/day) period began when dose adjustment was made at the investigator's discretion. The primary variable was incidence and type of adverse events (AEs). Secondary variables included efficacy and other safety assessments. RESULTS: Mean daily doses were 143.6 and 142.0 mg in the quetiapine XR and quetiapine IR groups, respectively. Ninety patients completed the study; only one withdrew (in the quetiapine XR group) because of an AE. Laboratory evaluations identified severe neutropaenia (one patient), mild neutropaenia (three patients) and eosinophilia (five patients); however, these were not reported, as AEs and confounding factors, such as patient age, concomitant illness and medication, made it difficult to determine any relationship to quetiapine treatment. Numerical improvements from baseline were seen across both treatment groups in Neuropsychiatric Inventory frequency × severity total, Neuropsychiatric Inventory-Nursing Home version, Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory, Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scores. CONCLUSION: Quetiapine XR dosed up to 300 mg/day was generally well tolerated, with a similar profile to that of quetiapine IR.

Determinants for return to work among sickness certified patients in general practice.

BACKGROUND: Long-term sickness absence is one of the main risk factors for permanent exit out of the labour market. Early identification of the condition is essential to facilitate return to work. The aim of this study was to analyse possible determinants of return to work and their relative impact. METHODS: All 943 subjects aged 18 to 63 years, sickness certified at a Primary Health Care Centre in Sweden from 1 January until 31 August 2004, were followed up for three years. Baseline information on sex, age, sick leave diagnosis, employment status, extent of sick leave, and sickness absence during the year before baseline was obtained, as was information on all compensated days of sick leave, disability pension and death during follow-up. RESULTS: Slightly more than half the subjects were women, mean age was 39 years. Half of the study population returned to work within 14 days after baseline, and after three years only 15 subjects were still on sick leave. In multivariate proportional hazards regression analysis the extent of previous sick leave, age, being on part-time sick leave, and having a psychiatric, musculoskeletal, cardiovascular, nervous disease, digestive system, or injury or poisoning diagnosis decreased the return to work rate, while being employed increased it. Marital status, sex, being born in Sweden, citizenship, and annual salary had no influence. In logistic regression analyses across follow-up time these variables altogether explained 88-90% of return to work variation. CONCLUSIONS: Return to work was positively or negatively associated by a number of variables easily accessible in the GP's office. Track record data in the form of previous sick leave was the most influential variable.

The effects of psilocybin on cognitive and emotional functions in healthy participants: Results from a phase 1, randomised, placebo-controlled trial involving simultaneous psilocybin administration and preparation.

BACKGROUND: Psilocybin, a psychoactive serotonin receptor partial agonist, has been reported to acutely reduce clinical symptoms of depressive disorders. Psilocybin's effects on cognitive function have not been widely or systematically studied. AIM: The aim of this study was to explore the safety of simultaneous administration of psilocybin to healthy participants in the largest randomised controlled trial of psilocybin to date. Primary and secondary endpoints assessed the short- and longer-term change in cognitive functioning, as assessed by a Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) Panel, and emotional processing scales. Safety was assessed via endpoints which included cognitive function, assessed by CANTAB global composite score, and treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) monitoring. METHODS: In this phase 1, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, healthy participants (n = 89; mean age 36.1 years; 41 females, 48 males) were randomised to receive a single oral dose of 10 or 25 mg psilocybin, or placebo, administered simultaneously to up to six participants, with one-to-one psychological support - each participant having an assigned, dedicated therapist available throughout the session. RESULTS: In total, 511 TEAEs were reported, with a median duration of 1.0 day; 67% of all TEAEs started and resolved on the day of administration. There were no serious TEAEs, and none led to study withdrawal. There were no clinically relevant between-group differences in CANTAB global composite score, CANTAB cognitive domain scores, or emotional processing scale scores. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that 10 mg and 25 mg doses of psilocybin were generally well tolerated when given to up to six participants simultaneously and did not have any detrimental short- or long-term effects on cognitive functioning or emotional processing. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/) number: 2018-000978-30.

A randomized, double-blind study of once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in patients with generalized anxiety disorder.

This study evaluated once-daily, extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). This was a 10-week (8-week active treatment/2-week posttreatment drug-discontinuation/tapering phase), double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study (D1448C00009). Primary end point was change from randomization at week 8 in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score. Overall, 951 patients with GAD were randomized (quetiapine XR: 50 mg/d, n = 234; 150 mg/d, n = 241; 300 mg/d, n = 241; placebo, n = 235). At week 8, HAM-A total scores significantly (P < 0.001) improved versus placebo (-11.10) with quetiapine XR 50 mg/d (-13.31) and 150 mg/d (-13.54), but not 300 mg/d (-11.87; P = 0.240). At week 1, HAM-A total scores significantly improved versus placebo (-5.94) with quetiapine XR 50 mg/d (-7.47; P < 0.01), 150 mg/d (-8.19; P < 0.001), and 300 mg/d (-7.23; P < 0.01). Versus placebo at week 8, quetiapine XR 50 and 150 mg/d significantly improved HAM-A psychic (P < 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively) and somatic (P < 0.001; P < 0.01, respectively) cluster scores, HAM-A response (≥ 50% total score reduction; P < 0.05), and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement categorical changes (P < 0.05). For quetiapine XR 150 mg/d, significant (P < 0.05) improvements were seen for HAM-A remission (total score, ≤ 7) and Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness scores. For quetiapine XR 300 mg/d, improvements in these secondary variables were not significantly different versus placebo. Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index global scores improved with all 3 doses (quetiapine: XR 50 mg/d, -4.07 [P < 0.05]; 150 mg/d, -4.38 [P < 0.05]; 300 mg/d, -3.97 [P < 0.05], versus -3.31 with placebo). Adverse events (>10% with quetiapine XR) were dry mouth, somnolence, sedation, dizziness, headache, and fatigue. Quetiapine XR (50/150 mg/d) monotherapy was effective at week 8 in patients with GAD; symptom improvement was seen at week 1 for all doses (50/150/300 mg/d). Safety and tolerability were consistent with the known profile of quetiapine.

Efficacy and tolerability of extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in patients with generalised anxiety disorder: an analysis of pooled data from three 8-week placebo-controlled studies.

OBJECTIVE: Prospectively planned pooled analysis evaluating efficacy and tolerability of acute quetiapine XR monotherapy in generalised anxiety disorder. METHODS: Data from three 10-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of similar design were analysed. RESULTS: At Week 8, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score significantly improved with quetiapine XR: least squares means change -13.31, p < 0.001 (50 mg/day, n = 452), -14.39, p < 0.001 (150 mg/day, n = 673) and -12.50, p < 0.05 (300 mg/day, n = 444) versus -11.30 placebo; significant (p < 0.001, n = 665) improvements versus placebo were observed with each dose at Week 1. Significant improvements versus placebo at Week 8 are as follows: HAM-A psychic symptom subscale, Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index global scores for all quetiapine XR doses; HAM-A response and remission rates, HAM-A somatic symptom subscale score, Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness total score, % patients with Clinical Global Impression-Improvement score ≤2 with quetiapine XR 50 and 150 mg/day; and Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire short form % maximum total score with quetiapine XR 150 mg/day. In the quetiapine XR 50, 150 and 300 mg/day and placebo groups, 13.2%, 16.5%, 24.0% and 5.4% of patients discontinued because of an adverse event, and 1.9%, 1.4%, 3.7% and 1.8% of patients experienced clinically significant changes in glucose. The most common adverse events with quetiapine XR included dry mouth, somnolence, sedation and constipation. CONCLUSION: Quetiapine XR monotherapy reduced the symptoms of generalised anxiety disorder, with improvement from Week 1. Adverse events were consistent with the known tolerability profile of quetiapine.

Predictors and trajectories of treatment response to SSRIs in patients suffering from PTSD.

Paroxetine and sertraline are the only FDA approved drugs for treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Although both drugs show better outcomes than placebo, not all patients benefit from treatment. We examined predictors and latent classes of SSRI treatment response in patients with PTSD. Symptom severity was measured over a 12-week period in 390 patients suffering from PTSD treated with open-label sertraline or paroxetine and a double-blinded placebo. First, growth curve modeling (GCM) was used to examine population-level predictors of treatment response. Second, growth mixture modeling (GMM) was used to group patients into latent classes based on their treatment response trajectories over time and to investigate predictors of latent class membership. Gender, childhood sexual trauma, and sexual assault as index trauma moderated the population-level treatment response using GCM. GMM identified three classes: fast responders, responders with low pretreatment symptom severity and responders with high pretreatment symptom severity. Class membership was predicted based on time since index trauma, severity of depression, and severity of anxiety. The study shows that higher severity of comorbid disorders does not result in an inferior response to treatment and suggests that patients with longer time since index trauma might particularly benefit from treatment with sertraline or paroxetine.

Extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR): a once-daily monotherapy effective in generalized anxiety disorder. Data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled study.

The efficacy and tolerability of extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) once-daily monotherapy in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) was assessed. This multicentre, double-blind, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled, phase III trial consisted of a 1- to 4-wk enrolment/wash-out period and a 10-wk (8-wk active treatment, 2-wk post-treatment drug-discontinuation) study period; 873 patients were randomized to 50 mg or 150 mg quetiapine XR, 20 mg paroxetine, or placebo. Primary endpoint was change from randomization at week 8 in Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAMA) total score. At week 8, all active agents produced significant improvements in HAMA total and psychic subscale scores vs. placebo; HAMA somatic subscale scores were significantly reduced only by 150 mg quetiapine XR. Significant separation from placebo (-2.90) in HAMA total score was observed at day 4 for 50 mg quetiapine XR (-4.43, p<0.001) and 150 mg quetiapine XR (-3.86, p<0.05), but not for paroxetine (-2.69). Remission (HAMA total score 7) rates at week 8 were significantly higher for 150 mg quetiapine XR (42.6%, p<0.01) and paroxetine (38.8%, p<0.05) vs. placebo (27.2%). The most common adverse events (AEs) were dry mouth, somnolence, fatigue, dizziness, and headache, for quetiapine XR, and nausea, headache, dizziness for paroxetine. A lower proportion of patients reported sexual dysfunction with quetiapine XR [0.9% (50 mg), 1.8% (150 mg)] than with placebo (2.3%) or paroxetine (7.4%). The incidence of AEs potentially related to extrapyramidal symptoms was: quetiapine XR: 50 mg, 6.8%, 150 mg, 5.0%; placebo, 1.8%; and paroxetine, 8.4%. Once-daily quetiapine XR is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for patients with GAD, with symptom improvement seen as early as day 4.