The impact of a digital guideline version on schizophrenia guideline knowledge: results from a multicenter cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines are crucial for enhancing healthcare quality and patient outcomes. Yet, their implementation remains inconsistent across various professions and disciplines. Previous findings on the implementation of the German guideline for schizophrenia (2019) revealed low adherence rates among healthcare professionals. Barriers to guideline adherence are multifaceted, influenced by individual, contextual, and guideline-related factors. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of a digital guideline version compared to print/PDF formats in enhancing guideline adherence. METHODS: A multicenter, cluster-randomized controlled trial was conducted in South Bavaria, Germany, involving psychologists and physicians. Participants were divided into two groups: implementation of the guideline using a digital online version via the MAGICapp platform and the other using the traditional print/PDF version. The study included a baseline assessment and a post-intervention assessment following a 6-month intervention phase. The primary outcome was guideline knowledge, which was assessed using a guideline knowledge questionnaire. RESULTS: The study included 217 participants at baseline and 120 at post-intervention. Both groups showed significant improvements in guideline knowledge; however, no notable difference was found between both study groups regarding guideline knowledge at either time points. At baseline, 43.6% in the control group (CG) and 52.5% of the interventional group (IG) met the criterion. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome between the two groups at either time point (T0: Chi2(1) = 1.65, p = 0.199, T1: Chi2(1) = 0.34, p = 0.561). At post-intervention, both groups improved, with 58.2% in the CG and 63.5% in the IG meeting this criterion. CONCLUSIONS: While the study did not include a control group without any implementation strategy, the overall improvement in guideline knowledge following an implementation strategy, independent of the format, was confirmed. The digital guideline version, while not superior in enhancing knowledge, showed potential benefits in shared decision-making skills. However, familiarity with traditional formats and various barriers to digital application may have influenced these results. The study highlights the importance of tailored implementation strategies, especially for younger healthcare providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00028895.

ICD-11 and mental disorders: important changes, controversies, and future directions.

About a year and a half after publishing ICD-11, we aim to gather initial feedback, comments, opinions, and even recent study results from experts in the relevant fields through this collection. We hope to facilitate a preliminary summary of whether the new classification truly represents progress, and how it has changed treatment, and research of mental illnesses.

A factor analytic comparison of three commonly used depression scales (HAMD, MADRS, BDI) in a large sample of depressed inpatients.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying depression mainly relies on the use of depression scales, and understanding their factor structure is crucial for evaluating their validity. METHODS: This post-hoc analysis utilized prospectively collected data from a naturalistic study of 1014 inpatients with major depression. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were performed to test the psychometric abilities of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale, and the self-rated Beck Depression Inventory. A combined factor analysis was also conducted including all items of all scales. RESULTS: All three scales showed good to very good internal consistency. The HAMD-17 had four factors: an "anxiety" factor, a "depression" factor, an "insomnia" factor, and a "somatic" factor. The MADRS also had four factors: a "sadness" factor, a neurovegetative factor, a "detachment" factor and a "negative thoughts" factor, while the BDI had three factors: a "negative attitude towards self" factor, a "performance impairment" factor, and a "somatic" factor. The combined factor analysis suggested that self-ratings might reflect a distinct illness dimension within major depression. CONCLUSIONS: The factors obtained in this study are comparable to those found in previous research. Self and clinician ratings are complementary and not redundant, highlighting the importance of using multiple measures to quantify depression.

60 Years of Combining Tranylcypromine: A Systematic Review of Available Evidence.

BACKGROUND: Tranylcypromine is the only irreversible monoamine oxidase inhibitor that is approved in the United States and in Europe for the management of treatment-resistant major depressive disorder. Comprehensive data in the literature regarding the efficacy and tolerability of tranylcypromine (TCP) combination strategies have not been systematically investigated yet. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of available literature based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Study types considered eligible for inclusion were studies that reported information on efficacy and/or tolerability/adverse effects of pharmacological TCP add-on or coadministration strategies among people with psychiatric disorders. RESULTS: Ninety-six articles were included in qualitative analyses. A relevant body of evidence shows that TCP combined with first- and second-generation antipsychotics seems relatively safe and might have beneficial effects in some patients with depressive disorders, although caution is needed with some second-generation antipsychotics that have proserotonergic activity. Although evidence is not entirely consistent, amitriptyline as add-on agent might be efficacious and associated with a low rate of severe adverse events. Although available data from case reports are scarce, certain other agents, such as trazodone, but also lithium, seem to have a good risk-benefit profile with regard to TCP that should be further investigated in the context of high-quality studies. CONCLUSIONS: Any combination of a psychotropic with TCP should be preceded by an evaluation of drug-to-drug interaction and an informed consent process and followed by close monitoring. Before any combination strategy, doctors should reevaluate factors of pseudo-treatment resistance, such as rapid-metabolizing status, noncompliance, trauma, alternative diagnosis, or drug abuse.

Combining machine learning algorithms for prediction of antidepressant treatment response.

OBJECTIVES: Predictors for unfavorable treatment outcome in major depressive disorder (MDD) applicable for treatment selection are still lacking. The database of a longitudinal multicenter study on 1079 acutely depressed patients, performed by the German research network on depression (GRND), allows supervised and unsupervised learning to further elucidate the interplay of clinical and psycho-sociodemographic variables and their predictive impact on treatment outcome phenotypes. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES: Treatment response was defined by a change of HAM-D 17-item baseline score ≥50% and remission by the established threshold of ≤7, respectively, after up to eight weeks of inpatient treatment. After hierarchical symptom clustering and stratification by treatment subtypes (serotonin reuptake inhibitors, tricyclic antidepressants, antipsychotic, and lithium augmentation), prediction models for different outcome phenotypes were computed with random forest in a cross-center validation design. In total, 88 predictors were implemented. RESULTS: Clustering revealed four distinct HAM-D subscores related to emotional, anxious, sleep, and appetite symptoms, respectively. After feature selection, classification models reached moderate to high accuracies up to 0.85. Highest accuracies were observed for the SSRI and TCA subgroups and for sleep and appetite symptoms, while anxious symptoms showed poor predictability. CONCLUSION: Our results support a decisive role for machine learning in the management of antidepressant treatment. Treatment- and symptom-specific algorithms may increase accuracies by reducing heterogeneity. Especially, predictors related to duration of illness, baseline depression severity, anxiety and somatic symptoms, and personality traits moderate treatment success. However, prospectives application of machine learning models will be necessary to prove their value for the clinic.

What happens with schizophrenia patients after their discharge from hospital? Results on outcome and treatment from a "real-world" 2-year follow-up trial.

Aim of the study was to examine the course of schizophrenia patients within 2 years after discharge. Within a multicenter study of the German Competence Network on Schizophrenia, patients suffering from a schizophrenia spectrum disorder were examined regarding their psychopathological improvement, tolerability, and the treatment regime applied during hospitalization and a 2-year follow-up period. Response, remission, the level of everyday functioning, and relapse were furthermore evaluated during the follow-up period using established definitions for these outcome domains. The psychopharmacological treatment was specifically evaluated in terms of a potential association with relapse. 149 patients were available for analysis, with 65% of the patients being in response, 52% in symptomatic remission, and 64% having a satisfiable everyday functioning 2 years after their discharge from hospital. Despite these favorable outcome rates, 63% of the patients suffered from a relapse within the 2-year follow-up period with 86% of these patients being rehospitalized. Discharge non-responder and non-remitter were twice as likely to relapse during follow-up. A significant decrease of side-effects was observed with negligible rates of extrapyramidal side-effects, sedation, and weight gain during follow-up. Patients receiving treatment with atypical antipsychotics were found to have the lowest risk to relapse (p < 0.0001). The results highlight the natural and unsteady course of schizophrenia in most patients underlining the need to develop more specific treatment strategies ensuring ongoing stability and preventing relapse.

How Effective Is Algorithm-Guided Treatment for Depressed Inpatients? Results from the Randomized Controlled Multicenter German Algorithm Project 3 Trial.

Background: Treatment algorithms are considered as key to improve outcomes by enhancing the quality of care. This is the first randomized controlled study to evaluate the clinical effect of algorithm-guided treatment in inpatients with major depressive disorder. Methods: Inpatients, aged 18 to 70 years with major depressive disorder from 10 German psychiatric departments were randomized to 5 different treatment arms (from 2000 to 2005), 3 of which were standardized stepwise drug treatment algorithms (ALGO). The fourth arm proposed medications and provided less specific recommendations based on a computerized documentation and expert system (CDES), the fifth arm received treatment as usual (TAU). ALGO included 3 different second-step strategies: lithium augmentation (ALGO LA), antidepressant dose-escalation (ALGO DE), and switch to a different antidepressant (ALGO SW). Time to remission (21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ≤9) was the primary outcome. Results: Time to remission was significantly shorter for ALGO DE (n=91) compared with both TAU (n=84) (HR=1.67; P=.014) and CDES (n=79) (HR=1.59; P=.031) and ALGO SW (n=89) compared with both TAU (HR=1.64; P=.018) and CDES (HR=1.56; P=.038). For both ALGO LA (n=86) and ALGO DE, fewer antidepressant medications were needed to achieve remission than for CDES or TAU (P<.001). Remission rates at discharge differed across groups; ALGO DE had the highest (89.2%) and TAU the lowest rates (66.2%). Conclusions: A highly structured algorithm-guided treatment is associated with shorter times and fewer medication changes to achieve remission with depressed inpatients than treatment as usual or computerized medication choice guidance.

Validity of remission and recovery criteria for schizophrenia and major depression: comparison of the results of two one-year follow-up naturalistic studies.

The objective of the present study was the application and comparison of common remission and recovery criteria between patients with the diagnosis of schizophrenia and major depressive disorder (MDD) under inclusion of other outcome parameters. Patients with schizophrenia and MDD who were treated as inpatients at the beginning of the study were examined within two naturalistic follow-up trials from admission to discharge of an inpatient treatment period and the one-year follow-up assessment. PANSS criteria of the Remission in Schizophrenia Working Group (RSWG) for schizophrenia and HAMD criteria of the ACNP Task Force in MDD for depressive patients as well as the Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S) were applied as symptomatic outcome measures additionally to functional outcome parameters. Data of 153 schizophrenia patients and 231 patients with a MDD episode have been included in the analysis. More depressive than schizophrenia patients reached a threshold score of ≤3 on the CGI-S, indicating symptomatic remission at discharge and at the one-year follow-up. In contrast similar proportions of patients reaching symptomatic remission at discharge from inpatient treatment and at the one-year follow-up in the schizophrenia and in the MDD group were found when disease-related consensus criteria (RSWG vs. ACNP Task Force) were used. Functional remission and recovery rates were significantly lower in schizophrenia than in depressive patients at the one-year follow-up visit. Common outcome criteria for remission and recovery in schizophrenia and major depression were not directly comparable. However, our results indicated a significantly poorer outcome in schizophrenia than in depressive patients according to terms of remission and recovery.

Add-on Antidepressants in the Naturalistic Treatment of Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorder - When, Who, and How?

The aim of this study was to evaluate antidepressant add-on treatment within the acute treatment of schizophrenia spectrum disorder patients. Antidepressant add-on was evaluated in 365 patients within a naturalistic multicenter study. Patients with/without antidepressant add-on were compared regarding clinical and treatment-related variables, response and remission, and remission of depressive and negative symptoms. The efficacy of antidepressant add-on treatment was furthermore analyzed applying marginal structure models. Twenty-three percent of the patients received antidepressant add-on for a mean duration of 50.28 (33.42) days. Patients with the diagnosis of a schizoaffective disorder, multiple illness episodes, and a longer duration of their illness as well as those with significantly fewer baseline positive symptoms, more negative and depressive symptoms, more side effects, and less subjective well-being were augmented with antidepressants. At discharge no significant effect of antidepressant add-on treatment was observed in terms of a 25% improvement (p=0.2623), a 50% improvement (p=0.3946), remission (p=0.0552), or remission of depressive (p=0.6336) and negative symptoms (p=0.8756). Also, when analyzing marginal structure models considering the diagnostic subgroups, no significant effect was found. Add-on with antidepressants is common. A final recommendation in terms of this strategy's efficacy cannot be given.

Stability of remission rates in a 3-year follow-up of naturalistic treated depressed inpatients.

BACKGROUND: Remission is a common outcome of short-term trials and the main goal of acute and longterm treatment. The longitudinal stability of remission has rarely been investigated under naturalistic treatment conditions. METHODS: Naturalistic multisite follow-up study. Three-year symptomatic long-term outcome of initially hospitalized tertiary care patients (N = 784) with major depressive episodes. Remission rates as well as the switch rates between remission and non-remission were reported. RESULTS: After one, two and three years 62 %, 59 % and 69 % of the observed patients met criteria for remission. During the follow-up 88 % of all patients achieved remission. 36 % of maintained remission from discharge to 3-years, 12 % of all patients never reached remission and 52 % percent showed a fluctuating course switching from remission to non-remission and vice versa. There was considerable transition between remission and non-remission. For example, from discharge to 1 year, from 1 to 2, and from 2 to 3 years 25 %, 21 % and 11 % lost remission. CONCLUSION: Cumulative outcome rates are encouraging. Absolute rates at predefined endpoints as well as the fluctuations between these outcomes reflect the variable and chronic nature of major depression.

Three-Year long-term outcome of 458 naturalistically treated inpatients with major depressive episode: severe relapse rates and risk factors.

In randomized controlled trials, maintenance treatment for relapse prevention has been proven to be efficacious in patients responding in acute treatment, its efficacy in long-term outcome in "real-world patients" has yet to be proven. Three-year long-term data from a large naturalistic multisite follow-up were presented. Severe relapse was defined as suicide, severe suicide attempt, or rehospitalization. Next to relapse rates, possible risk factors including antidepressant medication were identified using univariate generalized log-rank tests and multivariate Cox proportional hazards model for time to severe relapse. Overall data of 458 patients were available for analysis. Of all patients, 155 (33.6%) experienced at least one severe relapse during the 3-year follow-up. The following variables were associated with a shorter time to a severe relapse in univariate and multivariate analyses: multiple hospitalizations, presence of avoidant personality disorder, continuing antipsychotic medication, and no further antidepressant treatment. In comparison with other studies, the observed rate of severe relapse during 3-year period is rather low. This is one of the first reports demonstrating a beneficial effect of long-term antidepressant medication on severe relapse rates in naturalistic patients. Concomitant antipsychotic medication may be a proxy marker for treatment resistant and psychotic depression.

Treatment of bipolar depression: clinical practice vs. adherence to guidelines-data from a Bavarian drug surveillance project.

Objectives: Pharmacotherapy of bipolar depression (BPD) is confronted with major clinical challenges, like limited evidence-based treatment options, regular cases of treatment resistance, and risk of treatment-emergent affective switches. Medical guidelines can support practitioners to make decisions based on current scientific evidence. The objective of this study is to evaluate to what extent recommendations of the 2019 German S3 guidelines "Diagnosis and Treatment of Bipolar Disorders" are reflected in clinical practice in inpatient treatment. Methods: We conducted a descriptive analysis of prescription numbers in 2,627 patients with BPD in a naturalistic inpatient setting analyzing data from the ongoing Bavarian multicenter drug safety project Pharmaco-Epidemiology and Vigilance (Pharmako-EpiVig) from the years 2014-2022. Results: Of the patients, 38% were not administered any drug explicitly recommended for treatment of BPD, that is, quetiapine, lamotrigine, carbamazepine, or olanzapine. Only 6% of the patients received monotherapy with one of those drugs. Of the patients, 34% were administered ≥4 psychotropic drugs simultaneously. Patients received 912 different therapy regimens of mono or combination therapy with mood stabilizers (MS), atypical antipsychotics (AAP), and antidepressants. Of the patients, 72% received an antidepressant and 6% without concomitant prescription of an AAP or MS. Prescription rates of venlafaxine (21% to 14%) and tricyclic antidepressants (9% to 6%) decreased significantly from the first (2014-2016) to the last (2020-2022) observed time period. Of the patients, 60% received an MS. Prescription rate of valproate (22% to 14%) decreased significantly, while lithium prescription increased significantly (29% to 35%). Of the patients, 71% were administered an AAP. Quetiapine was the most prescribed drug overall (43%). Only two patients were administered a combination of olanzapine and fluoxetine. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate a substantial gap between guideline recommendations and current clinical practice. The remarkable heterogeneity in treatment regimens, with no discernible dominant treatment approach, is in part a reflection of the complexity of bipolar disorder but also substantiates the need of comprehensive recommendations regarding combination therapies. Increase in lithium prescription is an encouraging development due to its unique efficacy in maintenance treatment. To improve the quality of clinical practice guideline implementation, more randomized controlled trials should be conducted in the future to prospectively investigate different implementation strategies.

DSM-5: a collection of psychiatrist views on the changes, controversies, and future directions.

The recent release of the fifth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) by the American Psychiatric Association has led to much debate. For this forum article, we asked BMC Medicine Editorial Board members who are experts in the field of psychiatry to discuss their personal views on how the changes in DSM-5 might affect clinical practice in their specific areas of psychiatric medicine. This article discusses the influence the DSM-5 may have on the diagnosis and treatment of autism, trauma-related and stressor-related disorders, obsessive-compulsive and related disorders, mood disorders (including major depression and bipolar disorders), and schizophrenia spectrum disorders.

No influence of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) polymorphisms on treatment response in a naturalistic sample of patients with major depression.

The role of the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) in the pathophysiology of major depressive disorder (MDD) remains to be elucidated. Recent post hoc analyses indicated a potential association of three polymorphisms in the BDNF gene with worse treatment outcome in patients with the subtype of melancholic depression. We aimed at replicating these findings in a German naturalistic multicenter follow-up. Three polymorphisms in the BDNF gene (rs7103411, rs6265 (Val66Met) and rs7124442) were genotyped in 324 patients with MDD and 470 healthy controls. We applied univariate tests and logistic regression models stratifying for depression subtype and gender. The three polymorphisms were not associated with MDD as diagnosis. Further, no associations were found in univariate tests. With logistic regression, we only found a tendency towards an association of the rs6265 (Val66Met) polymorphism with overall response to treatment (response rates: GG (val/val) < GA (val/met) < AA (met/met); p = 0.0129) and some gender differences for the rs6265 (Val66Met) and rs7103411 polymorphisms. Treatment outcome stratified for subtypes of depression did not differ significantly between the investigated polymorphisms or using haplotype analyses. However, results showed a tendency towards significance. At this stage, we cannot support an influence of these three polymorphisms. Further studies in larger patient samples to increase sample sizes of subgroups are warranted.

Is the efficacy of psychopharmacological drugs comparable to the efficacy of general medicine medication?

There is an ongoing debate concerning the risk benefit ratio of psychopharmacologic compounds. With respect to the benefit, recent reports and meta-analyses note only small effect sizes with comparably high placebo response rates in the psychiatric field. These reports together with others lead to a wider, general critique on psychotropic drugs in the scientific community and in the lay press. In a recently published article, Leucht and his colleagues compare the efficacy of psychotropic drugs with the efficacy of common general medicine drugs in different indications according to results from reviewed meta-analyses. The authors conclude that, overall, the psychiatric drugs were generally not less effective than most other medical drugs. This article will highlight some of the results of this systematic review and discuss the limitations and the impact of this important approach on the above mentioned debate.

Mirroring everyday clinical practice in clinical trial design: a new concept to improve the external validity of randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trials in the pharmacological treatment of major depression.

BACKGROUND: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials constitute the gold standard in clinical research when testing the efficacy of new psychopharmacological interventions in the treatment of major depression. However, the blinded use of placebo has been found to influence clinical trial outcomes and may bias patient selection. DISCUSSION: To improve clinical trial design in major depression so as to reflect clinical practice more closely we propose to present patients with a balanced view of the benefits of study participation irrespective of their assignment to placebo or active treatment. In addition every participant should be given the option to finally receive the active medication. A research agenda is outlined to evaluate the impact of the proposed changes on the efficacy of the drug to be evaluated and on the demographic and clinical characteristics of the enrollment fraction with regard to its representativeness of the eligible population. SUMMARY: We propose a list of measures to be taken to improve the external validity of double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in major depression. The recommended changes to clinical trial design may also be relevant for other psychiatric as well as medical disorders in which expectations regarding treatment outcome may affect the outcome itself.

Akathisia and suicidal ideation in first-episode schizophrenia.

Patients with first-episode schizophrenia (FES) are known to be notably sensitive for developing extrapyramidal adverse effects, but the relation of akathisia and suicidal ideation has rarely been studied. The current report is an ongoing analysis of an 8-week double-blind randomized controlled multicenter trial in 289 FES, comparing risperidone and haloperidol. Assessments were conducted weekly and included the Hillside Akathisia Scale and 21-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale ratings. Suicidal ideation was significantly associated with clinician observed akathisia, depressed mood, younger age, and use of propranolol. The allocated treatment, anxiety, and nervousness had no influence. The present findings suggest a promoting effect of akathisia on suicidal ideation can not be ruled out in patients with FES.

Biological indicators of suicide risk in youth with mood disorders: what do we know so far?

Suicidal behaviour in youth is a major public health concern worldwide, and youth in the early stages of a primary mood disorder are an identifiable high-risk population. Neurobiological research in youth at risk for suicidality has sought to investigate the most promising parameters from research in adults. The present paper provides an overview of the current findings of neurobiological research in children and adolescents with mood disorders and suicidality including genetic/epigenetic findings, neuro-hormonal and immunological investigations. Longitudinal research in high-risk youth is a powerful way to investigate the influences and their pathways in determining suicidal risk in the context of a developing mood disorder. In the meantime, there are clear clinical indicators of risk to help identify youth who would benefit from close surveillance and early intervention.

Evaluating depressive symptoms in schizophrenia: a psychometric comparison of the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare two measures of depression in patients with schizophrenia and schizophrenia spectrum disorder, including patients with delusional and schizoaffective disorder, to conclude implications for their application. SAMPLING AND METHODS: A total of 278 patients were assessed using the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17). The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) was also applied. At admission and discharge, a principal component analysis was performed with each depression scale. The two depression rating scales were furthermore compared using correlation and regression analyses. RESULTS: Three factors were revealed for the CDSS and HAMD-17 factor component analysis. A very similar item loading was found for the CDSS at admission and discharge, whereas results of the loadings of the HAMD-17 items were less stable. The first two factors of the CDSS revealed correlations with positive, negative and general psychopathology. In contrast, multiple significant correlations were found for the HAMD-17 factors and the PANSS subscores. Multiple regression analyses demonstrated that the HAMD-17 accounted more for the positive and negative symptom domains than the CDSS. CONCLUSIONS: The present results suggest that compared to the HAMD-17, the CDSS is a more specific instrument to measure depressive symptoms in schizophrenia and schizophrenia spectrum disorder, especially in acutely ill patients.

Remission and recovery and their predictors in schizophrenia spectrum disorder: results from a 1-year follow-up naturalistic trial.

Remission and recovery are major outcome goals in schizophrenia yet their predictors have not been studied in detail. Therefore, 186 patients were examined regarding remission and recovery including their potential sociodemographic and clinical predictors 1 year after discharge. Remission was defined according to the consensus remission criteria and recovery following the definition by Liberman et al. (2002). Of the 186 patients 54% achieved remission and 26% recovery at the 1-year follow-up. The remission status at discharge was found to significantly influence remission and recovery at follow-up. A higher SOFAS score (P = 0.0002) as well as a positive attitude towards treatment at discharge (P = 0.0038) were identified to be significant predictors of remission at 1-year follow-up. Having a job (P = <0.0001) and being without pharmacological treatment at follow-up (P = 0.0113) were found to be significantly predictive of recovery. Our results underline the need to implement more specific treatment strategies to improve long-term outcome.