Efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability of all available treatments for insomnia in the elderly: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Symptoms of insomnia are highly prevalent in the elderly. A significant number of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions exist, but, up-to-date, their comparative efficacy and safety has not been sufficiently assessed. METHODS: We integrated the randomized evidence from every available treatment for insomnia in the elderly (>65 years) by performing a network meta-analysis. Several electronic databases were searched up to May 25, 2019. The two primary outcomes were total sleep time and sleep quality. Data for other 6 efficacy and 8 safety outcomes were also analyzed. RESULTS: Fifty-three RCTs with 6832 participants (75 years old on average) were included, 43 of which examined the efficacy of one or more drugs. Ten RCTs examined the efficacy of non-pharmacological interventions and were evaluated only with pairwise meta-analyses because they were disconnected from the network. The overall confidence in the evidence was very low primarily due to the small amount of data per comparison and their sparse connectedness. Several benzodiazepines, antidepressants, and z-drugs performed better in both primary outcomes, but few comparisons had data from more than one trial. The limited evidence on non-pharmacological interventions suggested that acupressure, auricular acupuncture, mindfulness-based stress reduction program, and tart cherry juice were better than their control interventions. Regarding safety, no clear differences were detected among interventions due to large uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: Insufficient evidence exists on which intervention is more efficacious for elderly patients with insomnia. More RCTs, with longer duration, making more direct interventions among active treatments and presenting more outcomes are urgently needed.

[Meta-analysis of effectiveness and tolerability of treatment of mild to moderate depression with St. John's Wort]. / Meta-Analyse zu Wirksamkeit und Verträglichkeit der Behandlung der leichten und mittelschweren Depression mit Johanniskraut.

After anxiety, depression is one of the most common psychiatric diseases, showing a lifetime prevalence of 4.4 - 18 %. St. John's Wort is a herbal antidepressant combining a long tradition of use with well-proven medical research. We conducted a meta-analysis to review St. John's Wort's place in the treatment of depression. A comprehensive literature search was conducted for studies comparing effectiveness and tolerability of St. John's Wort with either placebo or synthetic antidepressant. Thirty studies met the inclusion as well as the quality criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Four studies consisted of all three arms and were thus included in both analyses. Our results demonstrated a significant advantage for St. John's Wort compared to placebo (n = 2129, RR = 0.66, 95 % CI 0.57 - 0.78, p < 0.00001, NNT = 4.2 95 % CI 3.0 - 6.6, mean response: 53.3 vs. 32.7 %). Compared to synthetic antidepressants St. John's Wort demonstrated similar effectiveness (n = 2231, RR = 0.96, 95 % CI 0.85 - 1.08, p = 0.5, mean response: 53.2 % vs. 51.3 %). In the sub-group of mild to moderate depression, corresponding with the indication for St. John's Wort assigned by the German health authority, the herbal antidepressant showed better results against the synthetic antidepressants (n = 1166, RR = 0.85, 95 % CI 0.75 - 0.97, p = 0.01, NNT = 14.3, 95 % CI 8.3 - 100, mean response 59.5 vs. 52.9 %). This result viewed together with St. John's Wort's favourable side-effects profile, leading to a lower rate of drop-outs, suggests treatment with St. John's Wort should be attempted for milder forms of depression. Funnel plot analysis suggested publication bias could exist for the comparison with placebo. To put this in a perspective the fail-safe-N-test calculated that 423 studies with no effect would be needed to negate the presented result for placebo studies.

Valproate for schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Many people with schizophrenia do not achieve a satisfactory treatment response with ordinary antipsychotic drug treatment. In these cases, various add-on medications are used, among them valproate. OBJECTIVES: To review the effects of valproate for the treatment of schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses. SEARCH STRATEGY: The reviewers searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register (July 2002). This register is compiled of methodical searches of BIOSIS, CINAHL, Dissertation abstracts, EMBASE, LILACS, MEDLINE, PSYNDEX, PsycINFO, RUSSMED, Sociofile, supplemented with hand searching of relevant journals and numerous conference proceedings. We also contacted a pharmaceutical company and authors of relevant studies in order to identify further trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials comparing valproate to antipsychotics or to placebo (or no intervention), whether as the sole agent or as an adjunct to antipsychotic medication for the treatment of schizophrenia and/or schizophrenia-like psychoses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Citations and, where possible, abstracts were independently inspected by reviewers, papers ordered, re-inspected and quality assessed. Data were extracted independently by at least two reviewers. Dichotomous data were analysed using relative risks (RR) and the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Continuous data were analysed using weighted mean differences. Where possible the number needed to treat (NNT) or number needed to harm statistics were calculated. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies with a total of 379 participants were included. All trials examined the effectiveness of valproate as an adjunct to antipsychotics. With one exception the studies were small, short-term and incompletely reported. Adding valproate was as acceptable as adding placebo to antipsychotic drugs (n=130, RR leaving the study early 1.6 CI 0.8 to 3.1). No significant effect of using valproate as an adjunct to antipsychotic medication on the participants' global state or general mental state at the endpoint studies was evident. However, one study showed a quicker onset of action in the combination group. Participants receiving valproate more frequently experienced sedation than those in the placebo group. The effects of valproate on important subgroups such as those with schizophrenia and aggressive behaviour or those with schizoaffective disorder are unknown. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Based on randomised trial-derived evidence which is currently available, there are no data to support or to refute the use of valproate as a sole agent for schizophrenia. There is some evidence for a more rapid improvement with valproate augmentation, but this effect vanished over time. Given this limited evidence, further large, simple well-designed and reported trials are necessary. These might focus on people with schizophrenia and violent episodes, on those with treatment resistant forms of the disorder and on people with schizoaffective disorders.