Is There a Burnout Epidemic among Medical Students? Results from a Systematic Review.

Background and Objectives: Medical students represent the ideal target group for promoting mental health and mental wellbeing, being exposed to specific risk factors, such as the content of medical training, the exposure to sickness and death, and a stressful academic routine. Medical students report high levels of cynicism and emotional exhaustion, which represent two of the essential features of burnout syndrome. In this systematic review, studies assessing the levels of burnout among medical students through validated tools worldwide were analyzed. Materials and Methods: A systematic review has been performed in order to identify studies: (1) focusing on samples of medical students; (2) evaluating burnout syndrome using validated tools; (3) providing prevalence data on burnout; and (4) written in English. Results: Out of the 5547 papers initially obtained, 64 were finally included in the analysis. The sample sizes ranged from 51 to 2682 participants. Almost all studies had a cross-sectional design; the Maslach Burnout Inventory and its related versions were the most frequently used assessment tools. The prevalence of burnout, which was stratified based on gender and academic stage, ranged from 5.6 to 88%. Burnout was mostly predicted by thoughts of stopping medical education, negative life events, lack of support, dissatisfaction, and poor motivation. Conclusions: The prevalence of burnout syndrome in medical students is quite heterogeneous, reaching a peak of 88% in some countries. However, several predictors have been identified, including negative life events or poor motivation. These findings highlight the need to develop preventive interventions targeting the future generation of medical doctors, in order to improve their coping strategies and resilience styles.

A Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Antipsychotic Drugs on the Quality of Life of Patients with Schizophrenia.

Pharmacological antipsychotic drug interventions represent the cornerstone of the management of patients with schizophrenia and other psychotic spectrum disorders. The choice of the "best" treatment should be made on the basis of several clinical domains. However, despite available treatments, the quality of life reported by patients with schizophrenia taking antipsychotics is still very poor, and this outcome is rarely taken into account in trials assessing the efficacy and effectiveness of antipsychotic treatments. Therefore, we performed a systematic review in order to assess the impact of antipsychotic treatment on patients' quality of life. In particular, we aimed to identify any differences in the improvement in quality of life according to the (a) type of formulation of antipsychotic drugs (i.e., oral vs. depot vs. long-acting injectable); (b) type of the drug (first vs. second vs. third generation); and (c) patients' clinical characteristics. One hundred and eleven papers were included in the review. The main findings were as follows: (1) quality of life is usually considered a secondary outcome in trials on the efficacy and effectiveness of drugs; (2) second-generation antipsychotics have a more positive effect on quality of life; and (3) long-acting injectable antipsychotics are associated with a more stable improvement in quality of life and with a good safety and tolerability profile. Our systematic review confirms that quality of life represents a central element for selecting the appropriate treatment for people with schizophrenia. In particular, the availability of new treatments with a better tolerability profile, a proven effectiveness on patients' cognitive and social functioning, and with a more stable blood concentration might represent the appropriate strategy for improving the quality of life of people with schizophrenia.

The Efficacy of Psychoeducational Family Intervention for Major Depression: Study Protocol of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

This study aims to assess the efficacy of a psychoeducational family intervention (PFI) to reduce the severity of depressive symptoms and to improve psychosocial functioning and to increase social contacts in a sample of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). The degree to which PFI will reduce patients' relapses, hospitalizations, and self-stigmatization and will improve their quality of life will also be assessed. Other secondary outcomes include the improvement of relatives' coping strategies, family burden, expressed emotions and quality of life. This non-profit, unfunded, national, multicentric randomized controlled trial with blinded outcome assessments will be carried out in 24 Italian university outpatient units. Families will be assessed at baseline and at 6, 12, and 24 months post-randomization. Our working hypothesis is that the PFIs will reduce the patients' severity of depressive symptoms, their relapses, and their hospitalizations, and that they will improve their psychosocial functioning and quality of life. We expect these results to be maintained after 12 and 24 months, albeit with a reduction in magnitude. The sample will consist of 384 patients randomized at a 1:1 ratio and stratified according to center, age, gender, and educational level.