RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Previous systematic reviews suggest that nurse-led interventions improve short-term blood pressure (BP) control for people with hypertension. However, the long-term effects, adverse events, and appropriate target BP level are unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of nurse-led interventions. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and CINAHL, as well as three Japanese article databases, as relevant randomized controlled trials from the oldest possible to March 2021. This search was conducted on 17 April 2021. We did an update search on 17 October 2023. We included studies on adults aged 18 years or older with hypertension. The treatments of interest were community-based nurse-led BP control interventions in addition to primary physician-provided care as usual. The comparator was usual care only. Primary outcomes were long-term achievement of BP control goals and serious adverse events (range: 27 weeks to 3 years). Secondary outcomes were short-term achievement of BP control goals and serious adverse events (range: 4 to 26 weeks), change of systolic and diastolic BP from baseline, medication adherence, incidence of hypertensive complications, and total mortality. RESULTS: We included 35 studies. Nurse-led interventions improved long-term BP control (RR 1.10, 95%CI 1.03 to 1.18). However, no significant differences were found in the short-term effects of nurse-led intervention compared to usual care about BP targets. Little information on serious adverse events was available. There was no difference in mortality at both terms between the two groups. Establishing the appropriate target BP from the extant trials was impossible. CONCLUSIONS: Nurse-led interventions may be more effective than usual care for achieving BP control at long-term follow-up. It is important to continue lifestyle modification for people with hypertension. We must pay attention to adverse events, and more studies examining appropriate BP targets are needed. Nurse-led care represents an important complement to primary physician-led usual care.
Asunto(s)
Hipertensión , Atención Primaria de Salud , Humanos , Hipertensión/enfermería , Hipertensión/tratamiento farmacológico , Presión Sanguínea/efectos de los fármacos , Antihipertensivos/uso terapéutico , Pautas de la Práctica en EnfermeríaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: A panic attack is a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset and reaches a peak within 10 minutes. The main symptoms involve bodily systems, such as racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, churning stomach, faintness and breathlessness. Other recognised panic attack symptoms involve fearful cognitions, such as the fear of collapse, going mad or dying, and derealisation (the sensation that the world is unreal). Panic disorder is common in the general population with a prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions, including antidepressants and benzodiazepines. OBJECTIVES: To compare, via network meta-analysis, individual drugs (antidepressants and benzodiazepines) or placebo in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia. To rank individual active drugs for panic disorder (antidepressants, benzodiazepines and placebo) according to their effectiveness and acceptability. To rank drug classes for panic disorder (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), mono-amine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and benzodiazepines (BDZs) and placebo) according to their effectiveness and acceptability. To explore heterogeneity and inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence in a network meta-analysis. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, CENTRAL, CDSR, MEDLINE, Ovid Embase and PsycINFO to 26 May 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people aged 18 years or older of either sex and any ethnicity with clinically diagnosed panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia. We included trials that compared the effectiveness of antidepressants and benzodiazepines with each other or with a placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We analysed dichotomous data and continuous data as risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD): response to treatment (i.e. substantial improvement from baseline as defined by the original investigators: dichotomous outcome), total number of dropouts due to any reason (as a proxy measure of treatment acceptability: dichotomous outcome), remission (i.e. satisfactory end state as defined by global judgement of the original investigators: dichotomous outcome), panic symptom scales and global judgement (continuous outcome), frequency of panic attacks (as recorded, for example, by a panic diary; continuous outcome), agoraphobia (dichotomous outcome). We assessed the certainty of evidence using threshold analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Overall, we included 70 trials in this review. Sample sizes ranged between 5 and 445 participants in each arm, and the total sample size per study ranged from 10 to 1168. Thirty-five studies included sample sizes of over 100 participants. There is evidence from 48 RCTs (N = 10,118) that most medications are more effective in the response outcome than placebo. In particular, diazepam, alprazolam, clonazepam, paroxetine, venlafaxine, clomipramine, fluoxetine and adinazolam showed the strongest effect, with diazepam, alprazolam and clonazepam ranking as the most effective. We found heterogeneity in most of the comparisons, but our threshold analyses suggest that this is unlikely to impact the findings of the network meta-analysis. Results from 64 RCTs (N = 12,310) suggest that most medications are associated with either a reduced or similar risk of dropouts to placebo. Alprazolam and diazepam were associated with a lower dropout rate compared to placebo and were ranked as the most tolerated of all the medications examined. Thirty-two RCTs (N = 8569) were included in the remission outcome. Most medications were more effective than placebo, namely desipramine, fluoxetine, clonazepam, diazepam, fluvoxamine, imipramine, venlafaxine and paroxetine, and their effects were clinically meaningful. Amongst these medications, desipramine and alprazolam were ranked highest. Thirty-five RCTs (N = 8826) are included in the continuous outcome reduction in panic scale scores. Brofaromine, clonazepam and reboxetine had the strongest reductions in panic symptoms compared to placebo, but results were based on either one trial or very small trials. Forty-one RCTs (N = 7853) are included in the frequency of panic attack outcome. Only clonazepam and alprazolam showed a strong reduction in the frequency of panic attacks compared to placebo, and were ranked highest. Twenty-six RCTs (N = 7044) provided data for agoraphobia. The strongest reductions in agoraphobia symptoms were found for citalopram, reboxetine, escitalopram, clomipramine and diazepam, compared to placebo. For the pooled intervention classes, we examined the two primary outcomes (response and dropout). The classes of medication were: SSRIs, SNRIs, TCAs, MAOIs and BDZs. For the response outcome, all classes of medications examined were more effective than placebo. TCAs as a class ranked as the most effective, followed by BDZs and MAOIs. SSRIs as a class ranked fifth on average, while SNRIs were ranked lowest. When we compared classes of medication with each other for the response outcome, we found no difference between classes. Comparisons between MAOIs and TCAs and between BDZs and TCAs also suggested no differences between these medications, but the results were imprecise. For the dropout outcome, BDZs were the only class associated with a lower dropout compared to placebo and were ranked first in terms of tolerability. The other classes did not show any difference in dropouts compared to placebo. In terms of ranking, TCAs are on average second to BDZs, followed by SNRIs, then by SSRIs and lastly by MAOIs. BDZs were associated with lower dropout rates compared to SSRIs, SNRIs and TCAs. The quality of the studies comparing antidepressants with placebo was moderate, while the quality of the studies comparing BDZs with placebo and antidepressants was low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In terms of efficacy, SSRIs, SNRIs (venlafaxine), TCAs, MAOIs and BDZs may be effective, with little difference between classes. However, it is important to note that the reliability of these findings may be limited due to the overall low quality of the studies, with all having unclear or high risk of bias across multiple domains. Within classes, some differences emerged. For example, amongst the SSRIs paroxetine and fluoxetine seem to have stronger evidence of efficacy than sertraline. Benzodiazepines appear to have a small but significant advantage in terms of tolerability (incidence of dropouts) over other classes.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno de Pánico , Inhibidores de Captación de Serotonina y Norepinefrina , Adulto , Humanos , Trastorno de Pánico/tratamiento farmacológico , Trastorno de Pánico/complicaciones , Inhibidores Selectivos de la Recaptación de Serotonina/uso terapéutico , Paroxetina/uso terapéutico , Fluoxetina/uso terapéutico , Clorhidrato de Venlafaxina/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de Captación de Serotonina y Norepinefrina/uso terapéutico , Alprazolam/uso terapéutico , Clomipramina/uso terapéutico , Reboxetina/uso terapéutico , Clonazepam/uso terapéutico , Desipramina/uso terapéutico , Metaanálisis en Red , Antidepresivos/uso terapéutico , Antidepresivos Tricíclicos/uso terapéutico , Benzodiazepinas/uso terapéutico , Diazepam/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Background: Despite the anticipated efficacy of escitalopram in treating depression and anxiety in individuals with preexisting cardiovascular conditions, persistent concerns regarding its adverse effects have emerged. In this systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the cardiovascular safety profile of escitalopram compared with that of placebo in patients with underlying cardiovascular disease. Methods: We used a predefined search strategy in PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify studies evaluating adverse cardiovascular reactions to escitalopram in patients with underlying cardiovascular disease. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that provided results on cardiovascular safety outcomes were included. Two independent reviewers screened the abstracts and full texts of the individual studies. The risk of bias was assessed using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Results: The primary outcomes were the frequency of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), QTc prolongation, and discontinuation of study medication. We identified 5 RCTs with 773 participants who met the inclusion criteria. Escitalopram was not associated with significantly increased risk of MACE (risk ratio [RR] = 1.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80 to 4.26; I2 0%; 5 RCTs; n = 773, moderate certainty of evidence), discontinuation of study medication (RR = 1.03; 95% CI 0.84-1.26; I2 0%; 5 RCTs; n = 773, low certainty of evidence), and QTc prolongation (RR = 1.20; 95% CI 0.76-1.90; I2 0%; 4 RCTs; n = 646, low certainty of evidence). Conclusion: Escitalopram does not significantly increase the risk of cardiovascular adverse reactions compared with placebo in patients with underlying cardiovascular disease. However, the presence of wide CIs and the limited number of included studies highlight the need for further studies with larger sample sizes to enhance the precision and reliability of these findings.Systematic review registration: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews [CRD42022298181].
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Healthcare workers who are exposed to coronavirus disease 2019 are psychologically distressed. This study aimed to evaluate the mental health outcomes of hospital workers 2 years after the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 and to identify changes in the stress of hospital workers and predicted risk factors. METHODS: This survey was conducted 2 years after the initial evaluation performed under the first emergency declaration of the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic among hospital workers at the same hospital in an ordinance-designated city in Japan from June to July 2022. Sociodemographic data, 19 stress-related question responses, the Impact of Event Scale-Revised, and the Maslach burnout inventory-general survey were collected. Multiple regression models were used to identify factors associated with each of the mental health outcomes 2 years after the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak. RESULTS: We received 719 valid responses. Between 2020 and 2022, hospital workers' anxiety about infection decreased, whereas their exhaustion and workload increased. Multiple regression analysis revealed that 2 years after the coronavirus disease 2019 outbreak, nurses and young people were at a higher risk of experiencing stress and burnout due to emotional exhaustion, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine the long-term stress of hospital workers measured in Japan. Exhaustion and workload were worsened 2 years into the pandemic. Therefore, health and medical institutions should continuously monitor the physical and psychological health of staff members.
Asunto(s)
Agotamiento Profesional , COVID-19 , Humanos , Adolescente , COVID-19/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Personal de Hospital , Personal de Salud/psicología , Brotes de Enfermedades , Agotamiento Profesional/epidemiología , Agotamiento Profesional/psicología , HospitalesRESUMEN
Aim: Pandemics of life-threatening viruses have detrimental impacts on the motivation of healthcare workers to work. However, no study has examined this impact during different pandemics with the same setting and design. This study aimed to reveal similarities and differences in factors associated with willingness and hesitation to work between two recent pandemics, H1N1 influenza and COVID-19, in the same hospital, using the same questionnaire. Methods: Healthcare workers in one hospital in Japan completed a questionnaire on basic characteristics and stress-related questions during the H1N1 influenza (n = 1061) and the COVID-19 (n = 1111) pandemics. Logistic regressions were performed to ascertain the effect of personal characteristics and stress-related questions on the likelihood that employees showed strong or weak motivation or hesitation to work. Results: The feeling of being protected by the hospital was the only factor that significantly decreased hesitation and increased motivation to work, and females felt significantly more hesitation to work than males did in both pandemics. Conclusions: Hospital managers and government officers should focus on increasing organizational support and caring for female workers to maintain healthcare workers' motivation to work during future pandemics.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To what extent the COVID-19 pandemic and its containment measures influenced mental health in the general population is still unclear. PURPOSE: To assess the trajectory of mental health symptoms during the first year of the pandemic and examine dose-response relations with characteristics of the pandemic and its containment. DATA SOURCES: Relevant articles were identified from the living evidence database of the COVID-19 Open Access Project, which indexes COVID-19-related publications from MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase via Ovid, and PsycInfo. Preprint publications were not considered. STUDY SELECTION: Longitudinal studies that reported data on the general population's mental health using validated scales and that were published before 31 March 2021 were eligible. DATA EXTRACTION: An international crowd of 109 trained reviewers screened references and extracted study characteristics, participant characteristics, and symptom scores at each timepoint. Data were also included for the following country-specific variables: days since the first case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the stringency of governmental containment measures, and the cumulative numbers of cases and deaths. DATA SYNTHESIS: In a total of 43 studies (331 628 participants), changes in symptoms of psychological distress, sleep disturbances, and mental well-being varied substantially across studies. On average, depression and anxiety symptoms worsened in the first 2 months of the pandemic (standardized mean difference at 60 days, -0.39 [95% credible interval, -0.76 to -0.03]); thereafter, the trajectories were heterogeneous. There was a linear association of worsening depression and anxiety with increasing numbers of reported cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection and increasing stringency in governmental measures. Gender, age, country, deprivation, inequalities, risk of bias, and study design did not modify these associations. LIMITATIONS: The certainty of the evidence was low because of the high risk of bias in included studies and the large amount of heterogeneity. Stringency measures and surges in cases were strongly correlated and changed over time. The observed associations should not be interpreted as causal relationships. CONCLUSION: Although an initial increase in average symptoms of depression and anxiety and an association between higher numbers of reported cases and more stringent measures were found, changes in mental health symptoms varied substantially across studies after the first 2 months of the pandemic. This suggests that different populations responded differently to the psychological stress generated by the pandemic and its containment measures. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Swiss National Science Foundation. (PROSPERO: CRD42020180049).
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Ansiedad/epidemiología , Ansiedad/psicología , COVID-19/epidemiología , Depresión/psicología , Salud Mental , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
AIM: This systematic review is aimed to update and reintegrate the pharmacotherapy of social anxiety disorder (SAD), including the Japanese medical database. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of pharmacotherapy of SAD according to the Medical Information Distribution Service. We used data from a most recent systematic review, and updated search were conducted using MEDLINE, PubMed, CENTRAL, ICTRP, and ICHUSHI from August 1st, 2017 to January 31st, 2022. The outcome were response rates assessed by Clinical Global Impressions Improvement, efficacy assessed by the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS), and dropout rates. We performed a random effect of meta-analysis to obtain the differences in each outcome between active medication and placebo. We used RevMan version 5.3 for analyses. RESULTS: We identified 5 studies through update search and performed meta-analysis for 33 studies on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) and 6 studies on serotonin noradrenalin reuptake inhibitor (SNRI). The response rate (RR = 1.62) and the LSAS score reduction (mean difference = -9.65) of SSRI, and the response rate (RR = 1.57) and the LSAS score reduction (mean difference = -11.72) of SNRI were significantly different from placebo. The dropout rates of SSRI or SNRI were not significant. The response rates of SSRIs in both Japanese studies (RR = 1.44) and countries other than Japan (RR = 1.67) were significant. Most findings were based on low quality of evidence. CONCLUSION: SSRIs are valid option for pharmacotherapy of SAD including Japanese patients. SNRIs are another effective option. However, the results should be interpreted cautiously due to several risk of bias.
Asunto(s)
Fobia Social , Inhibidores de Captación de Serotonina y Norepinefrina , Humanos , Inhibidores Selectivos de la Recaptación de Serotonina/uso terapéutico , Fobia Social/tratamiento farmacológico , Antidepresivos/uso terapéutico , JapónRESUMEN
AIM: To clarify older adults' preferences for and actual situations of artificial hydration and nutrition (AHN) in end-of-life care in a care home. METHODS: Participants were residents of a care home who had completed advance directives regarding preferred methods of AHN from 2009 to 2018. Advance directives alone were available from April 2009 to June 2016 (Wave 1), and advance care planning for AHN including advance directives was introduced in July 2016 (Wave 2). AHN preferences included (i) intensive methods (percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy, nasogastric tube feeding and total parenteral nutrition), (ii) drip infusion, and (iii) oral intake only. Participants were followed until the end of 2020, and we checked whether decisions about AHN were based on older adults' preferences. RESULTS: In total, 272 participants had completed advance directives. Most participants preferred "oral intake only" (59.5%), followed by drip infusion (32.0%) and intensive methods (8.5%) in advance directives. Ninety of the 272 participants completed advance directives twice; 83.3% did not change their AHN preferences from Wave 1 to Wave 2. By the end of 2020, 93 of the 272 participants died in the care home. AHN was provided according to older adults' preferences in 48.9% (oral intake only), in 51.4% (drip infusion) and in 55.6% (intensive methods) of cases respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Most participants preferred oral intake only, and their preferences were reflected in decisions about actual situations of AHN in end-of-life care. To prepare for advanced dementia and senility, early advance care planning for AHN should be promoted. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2022; 22: 581-587.
Asunto(s)
Planificación Anticipada de Atención , Cuidado Terminal , Directivas Anticipadas , Anciano , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Intubación GastrointestinalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Computer-assisted treatment may reduce therapist contact and costs and promote client participation. This meta-analysis examined the efficacy and acceptability of an unguided computer-assisted therapy in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) compared with a waiting list or attention placebo. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and adherence of computer-assisted self-help treatment without human contact in patients with OCD using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials with participants primarily diagnosed with OCD by health professionals with clinically significant OCD symptoms as measured with validated scales were included. The interventions included self-help treatment through the internet, computers, and smartphones. We excluded interventions that used human contact. We conducted a search on PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov, as well as the reference lists of the included studies. The risk of bias was evaluated using version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. We calculated the standardized mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes. The primary outcomes were short-term improvement of OCD symptoms measured by validated scales and dropout for any reason. RESULTS: We included 11 randomized controlled trials with a total of 983 participants. The results indicated that unguided computer-assisted self-help therapy was significantly more effective than a waiting list or psychological placebo (standard mean difference -0.47, 95% CI -0.73 to -0.22). Unguided computer-assisted self-help therapy had more dropouts for any reason than waiting list or psychological placebo (risk ratio 1.98, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.23). However, the quality of evidence was very low because of the risk of bias and inconsistent results among the included studies. The subgroup analysis showed that exposure response and prevention and an intervention duration of more than 4 weeks strengthen the efficacy without worsening acceptability. Only a few studies have examined the interaction between participants and systems, and no study has used gamification. Most researchers only used text-based interventions, and no study has used a mobile device. The overall risk of bias of the included studies was high and the heterogeneity of results was moderate to considerable. CONCLUSIONS: Unguided computer-assisted self-help therapy for OCD is effective compared with waiting lists or psychological placebo. An exposure response and prevention component and intervention duration of more than 4 weeks may strengthen the efficacy without worsening the acceptability of the therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) CRD42021264644; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=264644.
Asunto(s)
Terapia Cognitivo-Conductual , Trastorno Obsesivo Compulsivo , Sesgo , Terapia Cognitivo-Conductual/métodos , Conductas Relacionadas con la Salud , Humanos , Trastorno Obsesivo Compulsivo/terapia , Listas de EsperaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Despite the recent global mental health movement of the transition from hospital-centred to integrated community-based services, comprehensive evidence of psychosocial interventions focusing on community-dwelling individuals with schizophrenia is still lacking. To overcome this gap in the current knowledge, we will conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of all types of psychosocial interventions for community-dwelling (non-hospitalised) individuals with schizophrenia when compared with non-active control conditions (eg, treatment as usual). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study protocol has been developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines. By March 2022, the following sources will have been searched, without restrictions for language or publication period: Embase, PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We will also try to identify other potentially eligible studies by searching the reference lists of included studies, other relevant systematic reviews and grey literature. All relevant randomised controlled trials from both high-income and low-income to middle-income countries will be allowed. Two independent reviewers will conduct the selection/screening of studies, data extraction and methodological quality assessment of included studies. The primary outcomes are quality of life and psychiatric hospital admission. Standard pairwise meta-analyses with a random-effects model will be conducted. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed to assess the robustness of the findings. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Revised Cochrane Risk-of-Bias Tool for Randomised Trials. The Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach will be used to assess the quality of evidence. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required for this study. The study findings will be disseminated through conference presentations as well as peer-reviewed publications. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021266187.
Asunto(s)
Intervención Psicosocial , Esquizofrenia , Humanos , Vida Independiente , Metaanálisis como Asunto , Calidad de Vida , Esquizofrenia/terapia , Revisiones Sistemáticas como AsuntoRESUMEN
Aim: Many health-care workers exposed to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are psychologically distressed. This study aimed to investigate the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospital workers under the emergency declaration in Japan. Methods: This cross-sectional, survey-based study collected sociodemographic data and responses to 19 stress-related questions and the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), which measures post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, from all 3217 staff members at Kobe City Medical Center General Hospital from April 16, 2020 to June 8, 2020. Exploratory factor analysis was applied to the 19 stress-related questions. Multiple regression models were used to evaluate the association of personal characteristics with each score of the four factors and the IES-R. Results: We received 951 valid responses; 640 of these were by females, and 311 were by respondents aged in their 20s. Nurses accounted for the largest percentage of the job category. Women, those aged in their 30s-50s, nurses, and frontline workers had a high risk of experiencing stress. The prevalence of stress (IES-R ≥ 25) was 16.7%. The psychological impact was significantly greater for those aged in their 30s-50s and those who were not medical doctors. Conclusions: This is the first study to examine the stress of hospital workers, as measured by the IES-R, under the emergency declaration in Japan. It showed that women, those aged in their 30s-50s, nurses, and frontline workers have a high risk of experiencing stress. Health and medical institutions should pay particular attention to the physical and psychological health of these staff members.
RESUMEN
Major depression is often a relapsing disorder. It is therefore important to start its treatment with therapies that maximize the chance of not only getting the patients well but also keeping them well. We examined the associations between initial treatments and sustained response by conducting a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which adult patients with major depression were randomized to acute treatment with a psychotherapy (PSY), a protocolized antidepressant pharmacotherapy (PHA), their combination (COM), standard treatment in primary or secondary care (STD), or pill placebo, and were then followed up through a maintenance phase. By design, acute phase treatment could be continued into the maintenance phase, switched to another treatment or followed by discretionary treatment. We included 81 RCTs, with 13,722 participants. Sustained response was defined as responding to the acute treatment and subsequently having no depressive relapse through the maintenance phase (mean duration: 42.2±16.2 weeks, range 24-104 weeks). We extracted the data reported at the time point closest to 12 months. COM resulted in more sustained response than PHA, both when these treatments were continued into the maintenance phase (OR=2.52, 95% CI: 1.66-3.85) and when they were followed by discretionary treatment (OR=1.80, 95% CI: 1.21-2.67). The same applied to COM in comparison with STD (OR=2.90, 95% CI: 1.68-5.01 when COM was continued into the maintenance phase; OR=1.97, 95% CI: 1.51-2.58 when COM was followed by discretionary treatment). PSY also kept the patients well more often than PHA, both when these treatments were continued into the maintenance phase (OR=1.53, 95% CI: 1.00-2.35) and when they were followed by discretionary treatment (OR=1.66, 95% CI: 1.13-2.44). The same applied to PSY compared with STD (OR=1.76, 95% CI: 0.97-3.21 when PSY was continued into the maintenance phase; OR=1.83, 95% CI: 1.20-2.78 when PSY was followed by discretionary treatment). Given the average sustained response rate of 29% on STD, the advantages of PSY or COM over PHA or STD translated into risk differences ranging from 12 to 16 percentage points. We conclude that PSY and COM have more enduring effects than PHA. Clinical guidelines on the initial treatment choice for depression may need to be updated accordingly.
RESUMEN
Objective: To investigate the impact of masks and plastic partitions on patient-doctor communication and subjective anxiety for infection in patients with psychiatric disorders.Methods: Subjects were patients who visited a psychiatric clinic in Japan from April 27 to August 31, 2020. Anxiety of being infected and the psychological barrier to communication were evaluated on a 5-point scale.Results: The final analysis included 425 patients. Most participants answered that there was no change with regard to communication when the doctor was wearing a mask (n = 353, 91.0%) or using a plastic partition (n = 318, 82.8%). Most participants responded that anxiety for being infected was very mild, a little mild, or not changed by the doctor wearing a mask and using a plastic partition. Most participants felt significantly less anxiety with the doctor wearing a mask/using a plastic partition before than after the state of emergency declaration (P = .005 for mask and P < .001 for plastic partition). Participants in the older age range felt significantly higher anxiety compared to those in the younger and middle age range groups from doctors wearing masks (P < .001) and compared to those in the middle age range group from plastic partitions (P = .001).Conclusions: Use of masks and plastic partitions in psychiatric practice is recommended, as it may result in reduction of anxiety for infection without affecting patient-doctor communication in patients with psychiatric disorders. The generalizability of the results of the present study should be tested.
Asunto(s)
Ansiedad/psicología , Actitud Frente a la Salud , COVID-19/prevención & control , Control de Enfermedades Transmisibles , Máscaras , Enfermos Mentales/psicología , Relaciones Médico-Paciente , Equipos de Seguridad , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Femenino , Hospitales Psiquiátricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Servicio Ambulatorio en Hospital , Adulto JovenAsunto(s)
Ansiedad/psicología , COVID-19 , Trastornos Mentales/psicología , Pacientes Ambulatorios/psicología , Adulto , Anciano , Instituciones de Atención Ambulatoria , Trastornos de Ansiedad/psicología , Femenino , Humanos , Japón , Masculino , Trastornos Mentales/terapia , Persona de Mediana Edad , Trastornos del Humor/psicología , Percepción , Psiquiatría , Trastornos Psicóticos/psicología , Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2 , EsquizofreniaRESUMEN
A significant clinical issue encountered after a successful acute major depressive disorder (MDD) treatment is the relapse of depressive symptoms. Although continuing maintenance therapy with antidepressants is generally recommended, there is no established protocol on whether or not it is necessary to prescribe the antidepressant used to achieve remission. In this meta-analysis, the risk of relapse and treatment failure when either continuing with the same drug used to achieved remission or switching to a placebo was assessed in several clinically significant subgroups. The pooled odds ratio (OR) (±95% confidence intervals (CI)) was calculated using a random effects model. Across 40 studies (n = 8890), the relapse rate was significantly lower in the antidepressant group than the placebo group by about 20% (OR = 0.38, CI: 0.33-0.43, p < 0.00001; 20.9% vs 39.7%). The difference in the relapse rate between the antidepressant and placebo groups was greater for tricyclics (25.3%; OR = 0.30, CI: 0.17-0.50, p < 0.00001), SSRIs (21.8%; OR = 0.33, CI: 0.28-0.38, p < 0.00001), and other newer agents (16.0%; OR = 0.44, CI: 0.36-0.54, p < 0.00001) in that order, while the effect size of acceptability was greater for SSRIs than for other antidepressants. A flexible dose schedule (OR = 0.30, CI: 0.23-0.48, p < 0.00001) had a greater effect size than a fixed dose (OR = 0.41, CI: 0.36-0.48, p < 0.00001) in comparison to placebo. Even in studies assigned after continuous treatment for more than 6 months after remission, the continued use of antidepressants had a lower relapse rate than the use of a placebo (OR = 0.40, CI: 0.29-0.55, p < 0.00001; 20.2% vs 37.2%). The difference in relapse rate was similar from a maintenance period of 6 months (OR = 0.41, CI: 0.35-0.48, p < 0.00001; 19.6% vs 37.6%) to over 1 year (OR = 0.35, CI: 0.29-0.41, p < 0.00001; 19.9% vs 39.8%). The all-cause dropout of antidepressant and placebo groups was 43% and 58%, respectively, (OR = 0.47, CI: 0.40-0.55, p < 0.00001). The tolerability rate was ~4% for both groups. The rate of relapse (OR = 0.32, CI: 0.18-0.64, p = 0.0010, 41.0% vs 66.7%) and all-cause dropout among adolescents was higher than in adults. To prevent relapse and treatment failure, maintenance therapy, and careful attention for at least 6 months after remission is recommended. SSRIs are well-balanced agents, and flexible dose adjustments are more effective for relapse prevention.
Asunto(s)
Antidepresivos/administración & dosificación , Antidepresivos/uso terapéutico , Trastorno Depresivo Mayor/tratamiento farmacológico , Inducción de Remisión , Antidepresivos Tricíclicos/administración & dosificación , Antidepresivos Tricíclicos/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados como Asunto , Depresión/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Inhibidores Selectivos de la Recaptación de Serotonina/administración & dosificación , Inhibidores Selectivos de la Recaptación de Serotonina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
It is sometimes clinically believed that major depression with melancholic features is more responsive to antidepressants than non-melancholic depression. Proper analysis and, therefore, valid evidence to support or refute this common clinical lore is lacking. The sample was taken from three placebo-controlled randomized trials of duloxetine, escitalopram and paroxetine (n = 1219). We conducted a two-step individual participant data meta-analysis to combine linear mixed-effects regressions modeling melancholic features as prognostic factor (variable that predicts overall response regardless of the treatments) and as effect modifier (variable that predict differential response to drug over placebo). Melancholic features represented a statistically significant prognostic factor for greater reduction in depression severity both on antidepressants and on placebo, especially after 4 weeks of treatment. However, they were not an effect modifier of the antidepressant treatment through the acute phase treatment: in other words. The superiority of antidepressants over placebo was not influenced by the melancholic features. The treatment decision-making as to the benefits of antidepressant treatment for patients with major depression should not be influenced by the presence or absence of melancholic features.
Asunto(s)
Antidepresivos de Segunda Generación/farmacología , Trastorno Depresivo Mayor/tratamiento farmacológico , Trastorno Depresivo Mayor/fisiopatología , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Adulto , Citalopram/farmacología , Clorhidrato de Duloxetina/farmacología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Paroxetina/farmacología , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Meta-analysis of individual patient data (IPD) is increasingly used to synthesize data from multiple trials. IPD meta-analysis offers several advantages over meta-analyzing aggregate data, including the capacity to individualize treatment recommendations. Trials usually collect information on many patient characteristics. Some of these covariates may strongly interact with treatment (and thus be associated with treatment effect modification) while others may have little effect. It is currently unclear whether a systematic approach to the selection of treatment-covariate interactions in an IPD meta-analysis can lead to better estimates of patient-specific treatment effects. We aimed to answer this question by comparing in simulations the standard approach to IPD meta-analysis (no variable selection, all treatment-covariate interactions included in the model) with six alternative methods: stepwise regression, and five regression methods that perform shrinkage on treatment-covariate interactions, that is, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), ridge, adaptive LASSO, Bayesian LASSO, and stochastic search variable selection. Exploring a range of scenarios, we found that shrinkage methods performed well for both continuous and dichotomous outcomes, for a variety of settings. In most scenarios, these methods gave lower mean squared error of the patient-specific treatment effect as compared with the standard approach and stepwise regression. We illustrate the application of these methods in two datasets from cardiology and psychiatry. We recommend that future IPD meta-analysis that aim to estimate patient-specific treatment effects using multiple effect modifiers should use shrinkage methods, whereas stepwise regression should be avoided.
Asunto(s)
Teorema de Bayes , Humanos , Análisis de RegresiónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common and progressive disease characterised by chronic cough, airflow limitation and recurrent exacerbations. Since COPD exacerbations are linked to rising mortality and reduced quality of life, the condition poses a substantial burden on individuals, society and the healthcare system. Effective management of COPD exacerbations that includes treatment of related conditions in people with COPD is thus recognised as a relevant clinical question and an important research topic. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a known comorbidity of COPD, and pulmonary microaspiration of gastric acid is thought to be a possible cause of COPD exacerbations. Therefore, reducing gastric acid secretion may lead to a reduction in COPD exacerbations. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are one of the most commonly prescribed medications and are recommended as first-line therapy for people with GERD because of their inhibitory effects on gastric acid secretion. Treatment with PPIs may present a viable treatment option for people with COPD. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of PPI administration for people with COPD, focusing on COPD-specific outcomes. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Register of Trials and conventional clinical trial registers from inception to 22 May 2020. We also screened bibliographies of relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Parallel-group and cluster-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared oral PPIs versus placebo, usual care or low-dose PPIs in adults with COPD were eligible for inclusion. We excluded cross-over RCTs, as well as studies with a duration of less than two months. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent review authors screened search results, selected studies for inclusion, extracted study characteristics and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias according to standard Cochrane methodology. We resolved discrepancies by involving a third review author. Primary outcomes of interest were COPD exacerbations, pneumonia and other serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were quality of life, lung function test indices, acute respiratory infections and disease-specific adverse events. We extracted data on these outcome measures and entered into them into Review Manager software for analysis. MAIN RESULTS: The search identified 99 records, and we included one multicentre RCT that randomised 103 adults with COPD. The 12-month RCT compared an oral PPI (lansoprazole) and usual care versus usual care alone. It was conducted at one tertiary care hospital and three secondary care hospitals in Japan. This study recruited participants with a mean age of 75 years, and excluded people with symptoms or history of GERD. No placebo was used in the usual care arm. Among the primary and secondary outcomes of this review, the study only reported data on COPD exacerbations and acute respiratory infections (the common cold). As we only included one study, we could not conduct a meta-analysis. The included study reported that 12 of the 50 people on lansoprazole had at least one exacerbation over a year, compared to 26 out of 50 on usual care (risk ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.81). The frequency of COPD exacerbations per person in a year was also lower in the PPI plus usual care group than in the usual care alone groupï¼0.34 ± 0.72 vs 1.18 ± 1.40; P < 0.001). The number of people with at least one cold over the year was similar in both groups: 26 people on lansoprazole and 27 people in the usual care group. We judged the evidence to be of low to very low certainty, according to GRADE criteria. The study reported no data on pneumonia and other serious adverse events, quality of life, lung function test indices or disease-specific adverse events. The risk of bias was largely low or unclear for the majority of domains, though the performance bias was a high risk, as the study was not blinded. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Evidence identified by this review is insufficient to determine whether treatment with PPIs is a potential option for COPD. The sample size of the included trial is small, and the evidence is low to very low-certainty. The efficacy and safety profile of PPIs for people with COPD remains uncertain. Future large-scale, high-quality studies are warranted, which investigate major clinical outcomes such as COPD exacerbation rate, serious adverse events and quality of life.
Asunto(s)
Progresión de la Enfermedad , Lansoprazol/uso terapéutico , Inhibidores de la Bomba de Protones/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico , Anciano , Humanos , Enfermedad Pulmonar Obstructiva Crónica/prevención & control , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pathological social withdrawal, named "Hikikomori," is a Japanese culture-bound syndrome and a serious social problem in Japan. The number of Hikikomori cases in Japan was estimated at about 563,000 in 2016 according to governmental surveys. However, no studies have reported how many people with Hikikomori have access to community-based psychiatry clinics, and how different they are from non-Hikikomori patients regarding their baseline characteristics and outcomes. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the baseline characteristics, clinical attendance, and social functioning of community psychiatric clinic patients treated for social withdrawal at one-year follow-up. METHOD: Participants (n = 304) were all patients (aged under 65) of a psychiatric clinic in a one-year period. Baseline patient characteristics were compared among "current" Hikikomori patients, "past" Hikikomori," and "other" patients. Logistic regression analysis of clinic attendance status and social functioning at one-year follow-up was used to assess patient outcomes. Independent variables were age, gender, Hikikomori status, and support from clinical staff. RESULTS: Numbers of "current", "past" Hikikomori, and "other" patients were 60 (19.7%), 81 (26.6%), and 163 (53.6%), respectively. The percentage of "current" Hikikomori who attended in person (56.7%) was significantly smaller than for "past" (92.6%) and "other" (92.6) (p < .001). The age distribution of "current" Hikikomori patients was bimodal, peaking at 20 and 40-45 years. The "current" state predicted significantly fewer regular visits (OR = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.22-0.83; p = .012); support from psychiatric social workers increased visits (OR = 2.35; 95% CI = 1.14-4.86; p = .021). Among the "current" Hikikomori patients, first visit attendance in person predicted regular attendance; no factor consistently predicted working/schooling status. CONCLUSION: A sizable percentage of community clinic patients experienced Hikikomori. The "current" Hikikomori state corresponded with low clinic attendance and social function; "support from clinical staff" may increase visit regularity; no factors consistently improved social functioning. Further multi-site study is warranted to examine the generalizability of the findings from the current single-center study.