Four Decades of Military Posttraumatic Stress: Protocol for a Meta-analysis and Systematic Review of Treatment Approaches and Efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Over 85% of active members of the Canadian Armed Forces have been exposed to potentially traumatic events linked to the development of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). At the time of transition to civilian life, as high as 1 in 8 veterans may be diagnosed with PTSD. Given the high prevalence of PTSD in military and veteran populations, the provision of effective treatment considering their unique challenges and experiences is critical for mental health support and the well-being of these populations. OBJECTIVE: This paper presents the protocol for a meta-analysis and systematic review that will examine the effectiveness of treatment approaches for military-related PTSD. METHODS: This PROSPERO-preregistered meta-analysis is being conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and Cochrane guidelines. A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted using the databases PsycInfo, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and ProQuest Dissertation & Theses. Effect sizes will be computed based on changes in PTSD symptom scores over time across studies using validated PTSD scales. A multilevel meta-analysis will examine the overall effects, between-study effects, and within-study effects of available evidence for PTSD treatments in military populations. Effect sizes will be compared between pharmacotherapeutic, psychotherapeutic, and alternative/emerging treatment interventions. Finally, meta-regression and subgroup analyses will explore the moderating roles of clinical characteristics (eg, PTSD symptom clusters), treatment approaches (eg, therapeutic orientations in psychotherapy and alternative therapies and classifications of drugs in pharmacotherapy), as well as treatment characteristics (eg, length of intervention) on treatment outcomes. RESULTS: The literature search was completed on April 14, 2021. After the removal of duplicates, a total of 12,002 studies were screened for inclusion. As of July 2021, title and abstract screening has been completed, with 1469 out of 12,002 (12.23%) studies included for full-text review. Full review is expected to be completed in the summer of 2021, with initial results expected for publication by early winter of 2021. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis will provide information on the current state of evidence on the efficacy and effectiveness of various treatment approaches for military-related PTSD and identify factors that may influence treatment outcomes. The results will inform clinical decision-making for service providers and service users. Finally, the findings will provide insights into future treatment development and practice recommendations to better support the well-being of military and veteran populations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021245754; https://tinyurl.com/y9u57c59. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/33151.

Direct health care costs of treating seasonal affective disorder: a comparison of light therapy and fluoxetine.

Objective. To compare the direct mental health care costs between individuals with Seasonal Affective Disorder randomized to either fluoxetine or light therapy. Methods. Data from the CANSAD study was used. CANSAD was an 8-week multicentre double-blind study that randomized participants to receive either light therapy plus placebo capsules or placebo light therapy plus fluoxetine. Participants were aged 18-65 who met criteria for major depressive episodes with a seasonal (winter) pattern. Mental health care service use was collected for each subject for 4 weeks prior to the start of treatment and for 4 weeks prior to the end of treatment. All direct mental health care services costs were analysed, including inpatient and outpatient services, investigations, and medications. Results. The difference in mental health costs was significantly higher after treatment for the light therapy group compared to the medication group-a difference of $111.25 (z = -3.77, P = 0.000). However, when the amortized cost of the light box was taken into the account, the groups were switched with the fluoxetine group incurring greater direct care costs-a difference of $75.41 (z = -2.635, P = 0.008). Conclusion. The results suggest that individuals treated with medication had significantly less mental health care cost after-treatment compared to those treated with light therapy.

Quality of life as an outcome indicator in patients with seasonal affective disorder: results from the Can-SAD study.

BACKGROUND: Although a host of studies have now examined the relationship between quality of life (QoL) and non-seasonal depression, few have measured QoL in seasonal affective disorder (SAD). We report here on results from the Can-SAD trial, which assessed the impact of treatment with either antidepressant medication or light therapy upon QoL in patients diagnosed with SAD. METHOD: This Canadian double-blind, multicentre, randomized controlled trial included 96 patients who met strict diagnostic criteria for SAD. Eligible patients were randomized to 8 weeks of treatment with either: (1) 10000 lux light treatment and a placebo capsule or (2) 100 lux light treatment (placebo light) and 20 mg fluoxetine. QoL was measured with the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q) and the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Short-Form General Health Survey (SF-20) at baseline and 8 weeks. RESULTS: Both intervention groups showed significant improvement in QoL over time with no significant differences being detected by treatment condition. Q-LES-Q scores increased significantly in seven of eight domains, with the average scores rising from 48 x 0 (S.D.=10 x 7) at baseline to 69 x 1 (S.D.=15 x 6) at week 8. Treatment-related improvement in QoL was strongly associated with improvement in depression symptoms. DISCUSSION: Patients with SAD report markedly impaired QoL during the winter months. Treatment with light therapy or antidepressant medication is associated with equivalent marked improvement in perceived QoL. Studies of treatment interventions for SAD should routinely include broader indices of patient outcome, such as the assessment of psychosocial functioning or life quality.

Personality and seasonal affective disorder: results from the CAN-SAD study.

BACKGROUND: Personality factors have been implicated in seasonal affective disorder (SAD). The present study investigated the relationship between the five-factor model of personality (neuroticism, extraversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness) and SAD. METHODS: Ninety-five patients with SAD completed personality measures before and after treatment in a clinical trial and during the summer months. The personality scores of the SAD patients were compared with a matched group of non-seasonal depressed patients and published normative data. Stability and change in personality scores with changes in mood state were assessed. Personality dimensions were evaluated as possible predictors of treatment outcome. RESULTS: SAD patients showed elevated openness scores relative to both non-seasonal depressed patients and norms. Their neuroticism scores were lower than non-seasonal depressed patients, but higher than norms. All personality dimensions showed large and highly significant test-retest correlations but several personality dimensions, particularly neuroticism and extraversion, also showed considerable change with changing mood state. None of the personality dimensions were significantly associated with treatment outcome. LIMITATIONS: Personality assessment relied on self-report. CONCLUSIONS: The personality profile of SAD patients differs from both non-seasonal depressed patients and norms. Elevated openness scores appear to be a unique feature of patients with SAD. Since mood state has a significant impact on personality scores, assessment of personality in SAD patients should ideally be conducted when they are in remission. Further investigation of the relationship between personality and SAD, especially the potential significance of elevated openness scores, is warranted.

The Can-SAD study: a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of light therapy and fluoxetine in patients with winter seasonal affective disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Light therapy and antidepressants have shown comparable efficacy in separate studies of seasonal affective disorder treatment, but few studies have directly compared the two treatments. This study compared the effectiveness of light therapy and an antidepressant within a single trial. METHOD: This double-blind, randomized, controlled trial was conducted in four Canadian centers over three winter seasons. Patients met DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder with a seasonal (winter) pattern and had scores > or = 23 on the 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. After a baseline observation week, eligible patients were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with either 1) 10,000-lux light treatment and a placebo capsule, or 2) 100-lux light treatment (placebo light) and fluoxetine, 20 mg/day. Light treatment was applied for 30 minutes/day in the morning with a fluorescent white-light box; placebo light boxes used neutral density filters. RESULTS: A total of 96 patients were randomly assigned to a treatment condition. Intent-to-treat analysis showed overall improvement with time, with no differences between treatments. There were also no differences between the light and fluoxetine treatment groups in clinical response rates (67% for each group) or remission rates (50% and 54%, respectively). Post hoc testing found that light-treated patients had greater improvement at 1 week but not at other time points. Fluoxetine was associated with greater treatment-emergent adverse events (agitation, sleep disturbance, palpitations), but both treatments were generally well-tolerated with no differences in overall number of adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Light treatment showed earlier response onset and lower rate of some adverse events relative to fluoxetine, but there were no other significant differences in outcome between light therapy and antidepressant medication. Although limited by lack of a double-placebo condition, this study supports the effectiveness and tolerability of both treatments for seasonal affective disorder and suggests that other clinical factors, including patient preference, should guide selection of first-line treatment.

O sweet spot where art thou? Light treatment of Seasonal Affective Disorder and the circadian time of sleep.

This study investigated Lewy's Phase Shift Hypothesis (PSH) for winter Seasonal Affective Disorder, which asserts that the phase angle difference (PAD) between circadian and sleep rhythms is critical in the mechanism of light's therapeutic action. Specifically, we sought to test whether a euthymic "sweet spot" could be identified at a PAD (between temperature minimum and wake time) of circa 3 h. After a baseline week, symptomatic SAD patients (N = 43) received 8 weeks of morning light treatment. Analyses were based on SIGH-SAD ratings made at baseline and posttreatment. Also estimated pre- and posttreatment were T(min) (calculated from an algorithm based on Morningness-Eveningness self-report scores), and the phase of the sleep-wake rhythm (as assessed by daily sleep logs). It was predicted that a quadratic relationship would exist between PAD and depression ratings at baseline and posttreatment, with lowest levels around PAD = 3 h. It was further predicted that shift towards PAD = 3 h with treatment would be associated with decreases in depression with treatment. Although trends were in the expected direction, none of the three predictions were supported. Findings are discussed in terms of the study's limitations and the experimental challenge of parsing independent and interacting contributions of sleep and circadian phase.