Development, acceptability and efficacy of a standardized healthy lifestyle intervention in recurrent depression.

BACKGROUND: Research evidence on the effects of integrated multifaceted lifestyle interventions for depression is scanty. The aim of the present study is to report on the development, acceptability and efficacy of a standardized healthy lifestyle intervention, including exercise, eating habits, sleep hygiene and smoking cessation in preventing relapses. METHODS: One hundred-sixty outpatients with recurrent unipolar depression or bipolar disorder were recruited after achieving full remission or recovery from the most recent depressive episode. Patients were randomized to 3-months of usual care or to an intervention aimed at promoting a healthy lifestyle (HLI), as an augmentation of pharmacological maintenance treatment. Usual care consisted of clinical management visits. At the end of the intervention, follow-up visits were scheduled at 3,6,9 and 12 months. RESULTS: During the intervention phase, 1 relapse occurred in the HLI group and 4 in the control group. Over the 12 months of follow-up, relapses were 5 in the HLI group and 16 in control group. Using an intent-to-treat approach, the overall percentage of relapses was 6/81 (7.4%) in the HLI group vs. 20/79 (25.3%) in the control group.. In a Kaplan-Meier survival analysis the risk of relapse was significantly lower in patients receiving the HLI intervention (log-rank test, p=0.003) over the 60 weeks of observation. The majority of patients assigned to HLI adhered to the program, and were highly motivated throughout the intervention. LIMITATIONS: The retention rate was low because patients were recruited during the maintenance phase and the 1-year follow-up was relatively short to detect a long-term effect of HLI. CONCLUSIONS: The HLI program proved to be efficacious in preventing relapses. Given the absence of contraindications and its cost-effectiveness in routine practice, the use of HLI should be encouraged to promote the well-being of patients with recurrent depression.

Aripiprazole and ropinirole treatment for cocaine dependence: evidence from a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no specific pharmacological therapy with established efficacy for the treatment of cocaine dependence. The aim of this study was to determine the safety, tolerability and the effects of aripiprazole and ropinirole in patients with cocaine dependence. METHODS: This randomized clinical trial of 12-week duration was carried out on 28 consecutive patients with cocaine dependence presenting for treatment. The diagnostic assessment was performed using ICD-9-CM criteria and Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview. The Clinical Global Impression Scale, a Visual Analogue Scale to assess craving and a self-report questionnaire on the use of cocaine were administered at baseline and then weekly throughout the study. Urinalyses were carried out three times per weeks to search for benzoylecgonine. RESULTS: Of the 28 study participants, 14 completed the protocol. Treatment discontinuation was unrelated with side effects. One patient required a dosage reduction of ropinirole because of sleepiness and one patient assigned to aripiprazole who reported moderate akathysia had the dosage reduced to 5 mg/day. Routine blood works did not show significant changes from baseline and the overall proportion of positive urinalyses for benzoylecgnonine did not differ significantly between treatments. Using linear mixed-effect models a significant decrease in craving was found in the overall sample (p<0.001). The mean number of cocaine administrations exhibited a faster decrease with aripiprazole compared with ropinirole (p=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Our pilot study indicates that cocaine craving decreases with both aripiprazole and ropinirole treatment but aripiprazole is more efficacious in reducing cocaine use.

Predictors and moderators of time to remission of major depression with interpersonal psychotherapy and SSRI pharmacotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Although many studies suggest that, on average, depression-specific psychotherapy and antidepressant pharmacotherapy are efficacious, we know relatively little about which patients are more likely to respond to one versus the other. We sought to determine whether measures of spectrum psychopathology are useful in deciding which patients with unipolar depression should receive pharmacotherapy versus depression-specific psychotherapy. METHOD: A total of 318 adult out-patients with major depression were randomly assigned to escitalopram pharmacotherapy or interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) at academic medical centers at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Pisa, Italy. Our main focus was on predictors and moderators of time to remission on monotherapy at 12 weeks. RESULTS: Participants with higher scores on the need for medical reassurance factor of the Panic-Agoraphobic Spectrum Self-Report (PAS-SR) had more rapid remission with IPT and those with lower scores on the psychomotor activation factor of the Mood Spectrum Self-Report (MOODS-SR) experienced more rapid remission with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) pharmacotherapy. Non-specific predictors of longer time to remission with monotherapy included several panic spectrum and mood spectrum factors and the Social Phobia Spectrum (SHY) total score. Higher baseline scores on the 17- and 25-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scales (HAMD-17 and HAMD-25) and the Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS) also predicted a longer time to remission, whereas being married predicted a shorter time to remission. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study identified several non-specific predictors but few moderators of psychotherapy versus pharmacotherapy outcome. It offers useful indicators of the characteristics of patients that are generally difficult to treat, but only limited guidance as to who benefits from IPT versus SSRI pharmacotherapy.

Comparative outcomes among the problem areas of interpersonal psychotherapy for depression.

BACKGROUND: Although interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) is an efficacious treatment for acute depression, the relative efficacy of treatment in each of the four IPT problem areas (grief, role transitions, role disputes, interpersonal deficits) has received little attention. We evaluated the specificity of IPT by comparing treatment success among patients whose psychotherapy focused on each problem area. Moreover, we sought to understand how the patient characteristics and interpersonal problems most closely linked to the onset of a patient's current depression contributed to IPT success. METHODS: Patients meeting DSM-IV criteria for an episode of major depressive disorder (n=182) were treated with weekly IPT. Remission was defined as an average Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression 17-item score of 7 or below over 3 weeks. Personality disorders were diagnosed using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Personality Disorders. RESULTS: Contrary to our prediction that patients whose treatment was focused on interpersonal deficits would take longer to remit, survival analyses indicated that patients receiving treatment focused on each of the four problem areas did not differ in their times to remission. Nor were patients in the interpersonal deficits group more likely to have an Axis II diagnosis. Patients whose treatment focused on role transitions remitted faster than those whose treatment focused on role disputes, after controlling for covariates. CONCLUSION: With skillful use of IPT strategies and tactics and with careful medication management where appropriate, patients in this study whose treatment focused on each problem area were treated with equal success by trained IPT clinicians.