Identifying dimensions of fatigue in haemodialysis important to patients, caregivers and health professionals: An international survey.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcome measures of fatigue used in research in haemodialysis vary widely in the dimensions assessed; and the importance of these dimensions to patients and health professionals is unknown. This study aimed to identify the most important dimensions of fatigue to assess in patients on haemodialysis participating in trials. METHODS: In an international survey, patients/caregivers and health professionals rated the absolute and relative importance of content and measurement dimensions to include in a core outcome measure of fatigue. A 9-point Likert scale (7-9 indicating critical importance) was used to assess absolute importance and best-worst scale was used to assess importance of each dimension compared to others. RESULTS: In total, 169 patients/caregivers and 336 health professionals from 60 countries completed the survey. Both groups (patients/caregivers and health professionals) rated life participation (7.55), tiredness (7.40), level of energy (7.37), ability to think clearly (7.15), post-dialysis fatigue (7.13), motivation (7.03) and ability to concentrate (7.03) as critically important (mean Likert score greater than 7) content dimensions to include in a core outcome measure. Compared to patients and caregivers, health professionals rated post-dialysis fatigue, memory and verbal abilities more highly. Based on the relative importance scores, life participation was ranked most highly above all content dimensions. Severity was rated and ranked the most important measurement dimension by all stakeholders. CONCLUSION: A core outcome measure of fatigue should assess impact of fatigue on life participation, tiredness and level of energy, using a severity scale. A consistent and valid measurement of fatigue will improve the value of trials in supporting decision-making based on this important outcome.

Psychiatric disorders as risk factors for adverse medical outcomes after solid organ transplantation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Given that the prevalence of psychiatric disorders in transplant candidates and recipients is substantially higher than in the general population, and that linkages between psychiatric disorders and medical outcomes for nontransplant-related diseases have been established, it is important to determine whether psychiatric disorders predict posttransplant medical outcomes. RECENT FINDINGS: Most research has focused on the association between depression (both pretransplant and posttransplant) and posttransplant mortality. Some research has examined transplant-related morbidity outcomes, such as graft rejection, posttransplant malignancies, and infection. However, methodological limitations make it difficult to compare existing studies in this literature directly. Overall, the studies presented in this review indicate that psychiatric distress occurring in the early transplant aftermath bears a stronger relationship to morbidity and mortality outcomes than psychiatric distress occurring before transplant. SUMMARY: The literature on the impact of psychiatric conditions on the morbidity and mortality of solid organ transplant recipients remains inconclusive. More research is needed in order to investigate these associations among a broader range of psychiatric predictors, morbidity outcomes, and recipient populations. Until evidence suggests otherwise, we recommend frequent monitoring of psychiatric symptoms during the first year after transplantation to aid in early identification and treatment during this critical period of adjustment.

Duloxetine and care management treatment of older adults with comorbid major depressive disorder and chronic low back pain: results of an open-label pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: In older adults, major depressive disorder (MDD) and chronic low back pain (CLBP) are common and mutually exacerbating. We predicted that duloxetine pharmacotherapy and Depression and Pain Care Management (DPCM) would result in (1) significant improvement in MDD and CLBP and (2) significant improvements in health-related quality of life, anxiety, disability, self-efficacy, and sleep quality. DESIGN AND INTERVENTION: Twelve week open-label study using duloxetine up to 120 mg/day + DPCM. SETTING: Outpatient late-life depression research clinic. PATIENTS: Thirty community-dwelling adults >60 years old. OUTCOME MEASURES: Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and McGill Pain Questionnaire-Short Form (MPQ-SF). RESULTS: 46.7% (n = 14) of the sample had a depression remission. All subjects who met criteria for the depression remission also had a pain response. 93.3% (n = 28) had a significant pain response. Of the subjects who met criteria for a low back pain response, 50% (n = 14) also met criteria for the depression remission. The mean time to depression remission was 7.6 (SE = 0.6) weeks. The mean time to pain response was 2.8 (SE = 0.5) weeks. There were significant improvements in mental health-related quality of life, anxiety, sleep quality, somatic complaints, and both self-efficacy for pain management and for coping with symptoms. Physical health-related quality of life, back pain-related disability, and self-efficacy for physical functioning did not improve. CONCLUSIONS: Serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors like duloxetine delivered with DPCM may be a good choice to treat these linked conditions in older adults. Treatments that target low self-efficacy for physical function and improving disability may further increase response rates.

Rescue pharmacotherapy with duloxetine for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor nonresponders in late-life depression: outcome and tolerability.

BACKGROUND: Up to 50% of depressed older adults either do not adequately respond to or are unable to tolerate treatment with a serotonin-specific reuptake inhibitor. On the basis of previous experience with serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, we predicted at least a 50% response rate to open-label treatment with duloxetine in subjects who were resistant to treatment with the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) escitalopram. METHOD: Community-dwelling subjects aged 65 years or older with current nonpsychotic major depressive disorder as established by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV received escitalopram under protocolized conditions between April 2004 and September 2006. Subjects who failed to meet response criteria or relapsed after achieving an initial response were subsequently switched to open treatment with duloxetine up to 120 mg/day. Side effects were assessed at every visit. RESULTS: Subjects (N = 40) switched to duloxetine had a mean (SD) age of 74.4 (7.0) years and a baseline (before escitalopram) 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17) score of 20.0 (3.5) and were predominantly female (65.0%) and white (82.5%). The mean (SD) maximum dose of duloxetine was 93.0 (27.8) mg/day. Subjects received this maximum dose for a median duration of 6.9 weeks. Fifty percent of subjects (N = 20) met criteria for full response, 17.5% (N = 7) were partial responders, and 32.5% (N = 13) did not respond. The median time to response was 12.0 weeks (95% CI = 8.4 to 14.6). Five of the subjects (12.5%) discontinued duloxetine because of intolerable side effects. DISCUSSION: These open-label data suggest that duloxetine at doses up to 120 mg/day is a well-tolerated and potentially effective treatment for older adults who fail to respond to an adequate trial of an SSRI. These results are preliminary, and future controlled studies are required to test the efficacy of rescue pharmaco-therapy with duloxetine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00177671.