Trajectories of suicidal ideation during rTMS for treatment-resistant depression.

BACKGROUND: rTMS is a safe and effective intervention for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). However, there is limited data on its specific impact on suicidal ideation (SI), and the trajectory of SI over the treatment course. OBJECTIVE: This open-label clinical trial investigated SI outcomes and trajectories in patients with TRD receiving low-frequency rTMS (LFR) to the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC; N = 55). METHODS: A latent class mixed-effect model was used to identify response trajectories for SI as well as core mood symptoms. Logistic regression analyses investigated risk factors associated with identified trajectories. RESULTS: For each symptom domain, we identified two distinct trajectories during LFR, one tracking improvement (SI: n = 35, 60 %; mood: n = 29, 53 %) and the other tracking no improvement (SI: n = 20, 40 %; mood: n = 26, 47 %). Male sex, higher baseline anxiety, and higher baseline SI were risk factors for no improvement of SI; while higher baseline anxiety and benzodiazepine use were risk factors for no improvement of mood. Mediation analyses showed that anxiety was a risk factor for no improvement of SI and mood independent of benzodiazepine treatment. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to investigate trajectories of response to LFR to the right DLPFC. SI and mood improved with LFR in most patients but the severity of anxiety symptoms was a factor of poor prognosis for both. Nuanced characterization of SI response to rTMS may lead to critical insights for individualized targeting strategies.

Co-learning commentary: a patient partner perspective in mental health care research.

BACKGROUND: Although including patients as full, active members of research teams is becoming more common, there are few accounts about how to do so successfully, and almost none of these are written by patient partners themselves. Three patient partners contributed their lived experience to a three-year, multi-component mental health research project in British Columbia, Canada. As patient partners, we contributed to innovative co-learning in this project, resulting in mutual respect and wide-ranging benefits. To guide future patient partners and researchers seeking patient engagement, we outline the processes that helped our research team 'get it right'. MAIN BODY: From the outset, we were integrated into components of the project that we chose: thematically coding a rapid review, developing questions and engagement processes for focus groups, and shaping an economic model. Our level of engagement in each component was determined by us. Additionally, we catalyzed the use of surveys to evaluate our engagement and the perceptions of patient engagement from the wider team. At our request, we had a standing place on each monthly meeting agenda. Importantly, we broke new ground when we moved the team from using previously accepted psychiatric terminology that no longer fit the reality of patients' experiences. We worked diligently with the team to represent the reality that was appropriate for all parties. The approach taken in this project led to meaningful and successfully integrated patient experiences, fostered a shared understanding, which positively impacted team development and cohesion. The resulting 'lessons learned' included engaging early, often, and with respect; carving out and creating a safe place, free from stigma; building trust within the research team; drawing on lived experience; co-creating acceptable terminology; and cultivating inclusivity throughout the entire study. CONCLUSION: We believe that lived experience can and should go hand-in-hand with research, to ensure study outcomes reflect the knowledge of patients themselves. We were willing to share the truth of our lived experience. We were treated as co-researchers. Successful engagement came from the 'lessons learned' that can be used by other teams who wish to engage patient partners in health research.

Although including patients as members of research teams is becoming more common, there is little information about how to do this successfully. There are even fewer accounts written by patient partners themselves. We argue that successful patient engagement accepts and celebrates the patient partner experience. In this article, we reflect on and share our experiences as patient partners in a Canadian mental health research project. Early on in the project, we were asked to choose which streams of work we would like to work on. In addition, we helped develop surveys about patient engagement in the project. We also had time set aside at each meeting for patient updates. Importantly, we steered the team towards using different mental health terms because they had less stigma and better fit patients' experiences. We offer the following 'lessons learned' about how to engage patients successfully in mental health research, but they are also likely to apply to most health research studies: (1) Engage Early, Often, and with Respect; (2) Carve out and Create a Safe Place; (3) Draw on Lived Experience; (4) Build Trust in the Research Team; (5) Listen, Learn, then Find a New Language; and (6) Cultivate Inclusion Throughout the Project. We believe that the lived experience of patients can and should go hand-in-hand with research. This helps to make sure that the research findings reflect the actual experiences and knowledge of patients. We hope that this article will be a useful guide to other patients and researchers.

Pharmacogenomic Testing for Major Depression: A Qualitative Study of the Perceptions of People with Lived Experience and Professional Stakeholders.

OBJECTIVES: With increasing evidence for the clinical utility of pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing for depression, there is a growing need to consider issues related to the clinical implementation of this testing. The perspectives of key stakeholders (both people with lived experience [PWLE] and providers) are critical, but not frequently explored. The purpose of this study was to understand how PWLE and healthcare providers/policy experts (P/HCPs) perceive PGx testing for depression, to inform the consideration of clinical implementation within the healthcare system in British Columbia (BC), Canada. METHODS: We recruited two cohorts of participants to complete individual 1-h, semi-structured interviews: (a) PWLE, recruited from patient and research engagement networks and organizations and (b) P/HCPs, recruited via targeted invitation. Interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, de-identified, and analysed using interpretive description. RESULTS: Seventeen interviews were completed with PWLE (7 with experience of PGx testing for depression; 10 without); 15 interviews were completed with P/HCPs (family physicians, psychiatrists, nurses, pharmacists, genetic counsellors, medical geneticists, lab technologists, program directors, and insurers). Visual models of PWLE's and P/HCP's perceptions of and attitudes towards PGx testing were developed separately, but both were heavily influenced by participants' prior professional and/or personal experiences with depression and/or PGx testing. Both groups expressed a need for evidence and numerous considerations for the implementation of PGx testing in BC, including the requirement for conclusive economic analyses, patient and provider education, technological and clinical support, local testing facilities, and measures to ensure equitable access to testing. CONCLUSIONS: While hopeful about the potential for therapeutic benefit from PGx testing, PWLE and P/HCPs see the need for robust evidence of utility, and BC-wide infrastructure and policies to ensure equitable and effective access to PGx testing. Further research into the accessibility, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of various implementation strategies is needed to inform PGx testing use in BC.

Home-based and community-based activities that can improve mental wellness: a protocol for an umbrella review.

INTRODUCTION: Mental disorders affect about 13% of the world's population. While evidence-based mental health treatments are available, a significant number of persons with mental illnesses are untreated or do not receive adequate mental healthcare due to various reasons, including costs, stigma and the desire to self-manage symptoms. In the past few years, there has been an increase in the body of evidence regarding leisure activities and mental wellness. However, there is currently no published overview of the state of the evidence on these activities and their potential preventive and therapeutic effects on mental health. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) review guidelines, an umbrella review will be undertaken to synthesise findings from systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the mental health benefits of home-based and community-based activities. MEDLINE, PsycInfo, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, Epistemonikos, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports will be searched for potentially relevant systematic reviews and meta-analyses published from January 1991 to present. Title/abstract screening, full-text review, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality will each be performed independently by two reviewers. A third review author will be available to resolve discrepancies in any of the review tasks. To assess the quality of potentially eligible reviews, the JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses will be used. Findings will be presented in table form and will be summarised by study population, type of home-based or community-based activity or intervention, and type of mental health outcomes. Overall assessment of the strength of existing evidence from eligible systematic reviews will be provided following the grading of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval is required. Results of this umbrella review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021266989.

A patient-oriented analysis of pain side effect: A step to improve the patient's experience during rTMS?

BACKGROUND: Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an efficacious and well-tolerated intervention for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). A novel rTMS protocol, intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) has been recently implemented in clinical practice, and it is essential to characterize the factors associated to pain and the trajectory of pain of iTBS compared to standard rTMS protocols. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to characterize the side effect profile and the pain trajectories of High-Frequency Left (HFL) and iTBS in TRD patients in the THREE-D trial. We also investigated factors associated to pain and the relationship between pain and clinical outcomes. METHODS: 414 patients were randomized to either HFL or iTBS. Severity of pain was measured after every treatment. General Estimating Equation was used to investigate factors associated with pain. Latent class linear mixed model was used to investigate latent classes of pain trajectories over the course of rTMS. RESULTS: Higher level of pain was associated with older age, higher stimulation intensity, higher anxiety, female, and non-response. The severity of pain significantly declined over the course of treatments with a steeper decrease early on in the course of the treatment in both protocols, and four latent pain trajectories were identified. The less favorable pain trajectories were associated with non-response and higher stimulation intensity. CONCLUSIONS: HFL and iTBS were associated with similar factors and pain trajectories, although iTBS was more uncomfortable. Response to rTMS was associated with less pain and more favorable pain trajectories furthering the evince base of overlapping neurobiological underpinnings of mood and pain. We translated these results into patient-oriented information to aid in the decision-making process when considering rTMS.

Patient oriented research in mental health: matching laboratory to life and beyond in Canada.

As patient-oriented research gains popularity in clinical research, the lack of patient input in foundational science grows more evident. Research has shown great utility in active partnerships between patient partners and scientists, yet many researchers are still hesitant about listening to the voices of those with lived experience guide and shape their experiments. Mental health has been a leading area for patient movements such as survivor-led research, however the stigma experienced by these patients creates difficulties not present in other health disciplines. The emergence of COVID-19 has also created unique circumstances that need to be addressed. Through this lens, we have taken experiences from our patient partners, students, and primary investigator to create recommendations for the better facilitation of patient-oriented research in foundational science in Canada. With these guidelines, from initial recruitment and leading to sustaining meaningful partnerships, we hope to encourage other researchers that patient-oriented research is necessary for the future of mental health research and foundational science.