Vagus nerve stimulation: Potential for treating chronic wounds.

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has been approved as a treatment for various conditions, including drug-resistant epilepsy, migraines, chronic cluster headaches and treatment-resistant depression. It is known to have anti-inflammatory, anti-nociceptive and anti-adrenergic effects, and its therapeutic potential for diverse pathologies is being investigated. VNS can be achieved through invasive (iVNS) or non-invasive (niVNS) means, targeting different branches of the vagus nerve. iVNS devices require surgical implantation and have associated risks, while niVNS devices are generally better tolerated and have a better safety profile. Studies have shown that both iVNS and niVNS can reduce inflammation and pain perception in patients with acute and chronic conditions. VNS devices, such as the VNS Therapy System and MicroTransponder Vivistim, have received Food and Drug Administration approval for specific indications. Other niVNS devices, like NEMOS and gammaCore, have shown effectiveness in managing epilepsy, pain and migraines. VNS has also demonstrated potential in autoimmune disorders, such as rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn's disease, as well as neurological disorders like epilepsy and migraines. In addition, VNS has been explored in cardiovascular disorders, including post-operative atrial fibrillation and myocardial ischemia-reperfusion injury, and has shown positive outcomes. The mechanisms behind VNS's effects include the cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathway, modulation of cytokines and activation of specialised pro-resolving mediators. The modulation of inflammation by VNS presents a promising avenue for investigating its potential to improve the healing of chronic wounds. However, more research is needed to understand the specific mechanisms and optimise the use of VNS in wound healing. Ongoing clinical trials may support the use of this modality as an adjunct to improve healing.

Understanding treatment non-responders: A qualitative study of depressed adolescents' experiences of 'unsuccessful' psychotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: This paper aimed to explore the experiences of depressed adolescents who completed but did not 'respond' to standard psychotherapy, based on a lack of improvement in pre-post symptoms scores. DESIGN: This was a qualitative study employing interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA). METHOD: Seventy-seven adolescents with moderate to severe depression were interviewed as part of a qualitative arm of a randomised controlled trial. Five adolescents' post-treatment interviews were purposively sampled, based on lack of improvement on pre-post symptom scores, and adolescents still scoring above the clinical threshold for depression. The interviews were analysed using IPA. RESULTS: Adolescents made sense of their depression as part of their identity and held negative expectations of therapy. Some aspects of therapy brought up intolerable feelings that contributed to disengagement in the therapeutic process and culminated in disappointing and hopeless endings. On the other hand, where a stronger therapeutic relationship was developed, some participants experienced certain improvements. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight how actively exploring the adolescent's therapy expectations, developing a strong early therapeutic relationship and being mindful of the potential impact of endings are important in therapeutic work with adolescents with depression, especially where they may have a strong sense of hopelessness and self-criticism. Moreover, the finding that adolescents experienced improvements in other domains despite a lack of symptom reduction highlights the need to review how treatment outcomes are currently defined. Integrating individual perspectives of therapy with quantitative outcome measures can provide a more nuanced insight of treatment effects.