Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists professional practice guidelines for the administration of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation.

OBJECTIVES: To provide guidance for the optimal administration of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, based on scientific evidence and supplemented by expert clinical consensus. METHODS: Articles and information were sourced from existing guidelines and published literature. The findings were then formulated into consensus-based recommendations and guidance by the authors. The guidelines were subjected to rigorous successive consultation within the RANZCP, involving the Section of ECT and Neurostimulation (SEN) Committee, its broader membership and expert committees. RESULTS: The RANZCP professional practice guidelines (PPG) for the administration of rTMS provide up-to-date advice regarding the use of rTMS in clinical practice. The guidelines are intended for use by psychiatrists and non-psychiatrists engaged in the administration of rTMS to facilitate best practice to optimise outcomes for patients. The guidelines strive to find the appropriate balance between promoting best evidence-based practice and acknowledging that evidence for rTMS use is a continually evolving. CONCLUSION: The guidelines provide up-to-date advice for psychiatrists and non-psychiatrists to promote optimal standards of rTMS practice.

Electroconvulsive Therapy Credentialing for Psychiatrists-Review of Required Standards Across States and Territories in Australia.

ABSTRACT: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a complex medical procedure, the delivery of which requires specialist knowledge and skills. We reviewed the standards required for ECT credentialing in different jurisdictions in Australia. We reviewed the Chief Psychiatrist guidelines and statewide policy standards on ECT and focused on standards required for initial credentialing and ongoing privileging in ECT. We compared the credentialing requirements within these documents with the standards specified in the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists professional practice guideline for ECT. Most of the jurisdictions had specific standards for initial credentialing and maintenance of this credentialing; however, there was significant variance in the credentialing process and standards required. It would be useful to have a minimum standard for credentialing for ECT psychiatrists and prescribers. This standard would be relevant for practice of ECT internationally. States and territories would have the responsibility for implementation of these standards. Appropriate training and establishing good clinical governance processes are essential to the provision of high quality ECT.

Prescribing electroconvulsive therapy for depression: Not as simple as it used to be.

In the last century, prescribing electroconvulsive therapy usually involved considering the relative merits of unilateral versus bilateral electroconvulsive therapy, with most other parameters fixed. However, research over the last 30 years has discovered that several parameters of the electroconvulsive therapy stimulus can have a significant impact on efficacy and cognitive side effects. The stimulus dose relative to seizure threshold was shown to significantly affect efficacy, especially for right unilateral electroconvulsive therapy, where suprathreshold doses in the vicinity of 5-6 times seizure threshold were far more efficacious than doses closer to threshold. However, this did not hold for bitemporal electroconvulsive therapy, where near-threshold stimuli were equally effective as suprathreshold stimuli. Then, changes in stimulus pulse width were found to also have a significant impact on both efficacy and side effects, with ultrabrief pulse widths of 0.3 ms having significantly fewer cognitive side effects in unilateral electroconvulsive therapy than standard brief pulse widths of 1.0 ms, with only slightly reduced efficacy. Therefore, choosing the optimum electroconvulsive therapy prescription for an individual patient now requires consideration of placement, pulse width and stimulus dose relative to seizure threshold, and how these three interact with each other. This viewpoint aims to raise awareness of these issues for psychiatrists involved in electroconvulsive therapy practice.

Treatment of refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder with nutraceuticals (TRON): a 20-week, open label pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is often challenging to treat and resistant to psychological interventions and prescribed medications. The adjunctive use of nutraceuticals with potential neuromodulatory effects on underpinning pathways such as the glutamatergic and serotonergic systems is one novel approach. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of a purpose-formulated combination of nutraceuticals in treating OCD: N-acetyl cysteine, L-theanine, zinc, magnesium, pyridoxal-5' phosphate, and selenium. METHODS: A 20-week open label proof-of-concept study was undertaken involving 28 participants with treatment-resistant DSM-5-diagnosed OCD, during 2017 to 2020. The primary outcome measure was the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (YBOCS), administered every 4 weeks. RESULTS: An intention-to-treat analysis revealed an estimated mean reduction across time (baseline to week-20) on the YBOCS total score of -7.13 (95% confidence interval = -9.24, -5.01), with a mean reduction of -1.21 points per post-baseline visit (P ≤ .001). At 20-weeks, 23% of the participants were considered "responders" (YBOCS ≥35% reduction and "very much" or "much improved" on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale). Statistically significant improvements were also revealed on all secondary outcomes (eg, mood, anxiety, and quality of life). Notably, treatment response on OCD outcome scales (eg, YBOCS) was greatest in those with lower baseline symptom levels, while response was limited in those with relatively more severe OCD. CONCLUSIONS: While this pilot study lacks placebo-control, the significant time effect in this treatment-resistant OCD population is encouraging and suggests potential utility especially for those with lower symptom levels. Our findings need to be confirmed or refuted via a follow-up placebo-controlled study.

Revisiting the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression, again.

Following on from the publication of the Royal Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry Mood Disorder Clinical Practice Guidelines (2020) and criticisms of how these aberrantly addressed repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment of depression, questions have continued to be raised in the journal about this treatment by a small group of authors, whose views we contend do not reflect the broad acceptance of this treatment nationally and internationally. In fact, the evidence supporting the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression is unambiguous and substantial, consisting of an extensive series of clinical trials supported by multiple meta-analyses, network meta-analysis and umbrella reviews. Importantly, the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression has also been subject to a series of health economic analyses. These indicate that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is a cost-effective therapy and have been used in some jurisdictions, including Australia, in support of public funding. An argument has been made that offering repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment may delay potentially effective pharmacotherapy. In fact, there is considerably greater danger of the opposite happening. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is as, if not more effective, than antidepressant medication after two unsuccessful medication trials and should be a consideration for all patients under these circumstances where available. There is no meaningful ongoing debate about the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression - it is a safe, effective and cost-effective treatment.

The place of non-invasive brain stimulation in the RANZCP clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders.

Clinical practice guidelines are important documents as they have the capacity to significantly influence and shape clinical practice in important areas of therapeutics. As such, they need to be developed informed by comprehensive and quality-based systematic reviews, involve consensus deliberations representative of the appropriate experts in the field and be subject to thorough critical review. A revised clinical practice guideline for the management of patients with mood disorders was recently published under the auspices of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists. However, this clinical practice guideline was not developed in a manner that reflects the appropriate standards that should apply to clinical practice guideline development and it has critical flaws, especially as it pertains to the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment for patients with depression. The revision of the college clinical practice guideline has explicitly removed clear and unequivocal evidence-based recommendations that were found in a previous version of the clinical practice guideline and replaced these with consensus-based recommendations. However, the consensus-based recommendations were developed without consultation of the appropriate expert body within the college and contradict the scientific literature. There is substantive and unequivocal evidence supporting the antidepressant use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of patients with depression and its use after a patient with depression has failed a limited number (typically around two) of antidepressant medication trials. Readers should refer to the college Professional Practice Guidelines for repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation published in 2018 for thorough information about the use of this important new treatment.

Kava for generalised anxiety disorder: A 16-week double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: Previous randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies have shown that Kava (a South Pacific medicinal plant) reduced anxiety during short-term administration. The objective of this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was to perform a larger, longer-term trial assessing the efficacy and safety of Kava in the treatment of generalised anxiety disorder and to determine whether gamma-aminobutyric acid transporter (SLC6A1) single-nucleotide polymorphisms were moderators of response. METHODS: The trial was a phase III, multi-site, two-arm, 16-week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigating an aqueous extract of dried Kava root administered twice per day in tablet form (standardised to 120 mg of kavalactones twice/day) in 171 currently non-medicated anxious participants with diagnosed generalised anxiety disorder. The trial took place in Australia. RESULTS: An analysis of 171 participants revealed a non-significant difference in anxiety reduction between the Kava and placebo groups (a relative reduction favouring placebo of 1.37 points; p = 0.25). At the conclusion of the controlled phase, 17.4% of the Kava group were classified as remitted (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale score < 7) compared to 23.8% of the placebo group (p = 0.46). No SLC6A1 polymorphisms were associated with treatment response, while carriers of the rs2601126 T allele preferentially respond to placebo (p = 0.006). Kava was well tolerated aside from poorer memory (Kava = 36 vs placebo = 23; p = 0.044) and tremor/shakiness (Kava = 36 vs placebo = 23; p = 0.024) occurring more frequently in the Kava group. Liver function test abnormalities were significantly more frequent in the Kava group, although no participant met criteria for herb-induced hepatic injury. CONCLUSION: While research has generally supported Kava in non-clinical populations (potentially for more 'situational' anxiety as a short-term anxiolytic), this particular extract was not effective for diagnosed generalised anxiety disorder.

N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) augmentation in the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder: A phase III, 20-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Preliminary evidence has suggested that adjunctive N-acetylcysteine (NAC), an antioxidant precursor to glutathione, may reduce symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). We conducted a 20-week, multi-site, randomized controlled trial to investigate the safety and efficacy of the adjunctive use of NAC in OCD. METHODS: The study was a phase III, 20-week, double-blind, randomized controlled trial across multiple sites in Australia investigating 2 g to 4 g per day of NAC (titrated according to response) in 98 participants with DSM-5 diagnosed OCD. Data were analysed using linear mixed effects models for the 89 participants who attended at least one follow-up visit. RESULTS: A modified intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome found no evidence that NAC reduced symptoms of OCD measured on the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale, relative to placebo (mean difference at week 20 = 0.53, 95% compatibility interval = -2.18, 3.23; p = 0.70; favouring placebo). There was also no evidence that NAC, compared to placebo, improved outcomes on the secondary measures including anxiety, depression, quality of life, functioning, or clinician/participant impression. NAC was well-tolerated with only mild gastrointestinal adverse events associated with the treatment. CONCLUSION: We found no evidence supporting the efficacy of the adjunctive use of NAC in OCD.

S-Adenosylmethionine (SAMe) monotherapy for depression: an 8-week double-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

RATIONALE: Dysregulation of the one carbon cycle is documented in depression. Thereby, S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe), a one-carbon cycle nutraceutical compound with a favourable side effect profile, has a theoretical rationale for efficacy. However, further controlled studies are required to confirm SAMe's efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To test the efficacy of SAMe versus placebo in unmedicated DSM-5 diagnosed (major depressive disorder) (MDD) patients with mild-to-moderate levels of depressive symptoms. METHODS: We conducted an 8-week, double-blind, randomised controlled trial testing 800 mg/day of SAMe monotherapy versus placebo in 49 patients with MDD (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] score 14-25) who were not currently taking antidepressants. One-carbon cycle biomarkers, brain-derived neurotropic factor (BDNF), and relevant single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were analysed as potential treatment moderators. RESULTS: A clinically relevant differential reduction from baseline to week 8 of 3.76 points occurred on the primary outcome (MADRS) in favour of SAMe. This however was not significant (p = 0.13) on an adjusted linear mixed model, notwithstanding a medium to large effect size of 0.72. A high placebo response rate of 53% occurred (> 50% reduction on MADRS). Exploratory analyses showed that SAMe was however effective in reducing depression amongst participants with milder depression severity (MADRS ≤ 22, p = 0.045). Response was not moderated by BDNF, SNPs, or one-carbon cycle biomarkers, although increased folate concentrations were correlated with improved symptoms in the SAMe group (r = - 0.57, p = 0.026). The treatment was safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Although a differential reduction in depression symptoms between groups was observed in favour of SAMe, the results of this pilot study were not statistically significant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR-Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; No.: ACTRN12613001299796; URL: https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=364900.

Nutraceuticals for major depressive disorder- more is not merrier: An 8-week double-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: One of the most pressing questions in "Nutritional Psychiatry" is whether using combinations of different nutraceuticals with putative antidepressant activity may provide an enhanced synergistic antidepressant effect. METHODS: A phase II/III, Australian multi-site, 8-week, double-blind, RCT involving 158 outpatients with a DSM-5 diagnosis of MDD. The intervention consisted of a nutraceutical combination: S-adenosyl methionine; Folinic acid; Omega-3 fatty acids; 5-HTP, Zinc picolinate, and relevant co-factors versus placebo. The primary outcome was change in MADRS score. Hypothesis-driven analyses of potential moderators of response involving key SNPs, and BDNF were also conducted. RESULTS: Placebo was superior to the nutraceutical combination in reducing MADRS score (differential reduction -1.75 points), however a mixed linear model revealed a non-significant Group X Time interaction (p = 0.33). Response rates were 40% for the active intervention and 51% for the placebo; remission rates were 34% and 43% for active and placebo groups, respectively. No significant differences were found between groups on any other secondary depression, anxiety, psychosocial, or sleep outcome measures. Key SNPs and BDNF did not significantly moderate response. No significant differences occurred between groups for total adverse effects, aside from more nausea in the active group. LIMITATIONS: Very high placebo response rates suggest a placebo run-in design may have been valuable. INTERPRETATION: The adoption of a nutraceutical 'shotgun' approach to treating MDD was not supported, and appeared to be less effective than adding placebo to treatment as usual.

Adjunctive S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe) in treating non-remittent major depressive disorder: An 8-week double-blind, randomized, controlled trial.

There has been increasing interest in nutraceutical augmentation strategies to boost the efficacy of antidepressants. This study assessed whether S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe), a methyl donor that occurs naturally in the body, may be of such benefit. We conducted an 8-week, double-blind RCT in which 107 treatment non-remittent outpatients with DSM-5 diagnosed Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) were randomized to either SAMe or placebo adjunctively to antidepressants. One-carbon cycle nutrients, pertinent single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), and BDNF were also analysed as potential moderators of response. A linear mixed-effects model revealed a significant overall reduction in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score across time, however there was no significant between-group difference observed (p = 0.51). Response rates at Week 8 were 54.3% in the SAMe group and 50.0% in the placebo group, with remission rates 43.5% for SAMe and 38.3% for placebo (all results NS). No effect of SAMe was found on any secondary outcome. Differential response to SAMe was not modified by a range of key genotypes (e.g. COMT), nor reflected in a change of homocysteine, red cell folate, or BDNF. Use of SAMe elicited no significant adverse effects beyond placebo, however it was implicated in one case of serotonin syndrome-like symptoms. This study concludes that 800 mg/day of SAMe is not an effective adjunctive treatment in MDD, and no obvious biomarker reflected any differential response to treatment. Due to such a distinctly high placebo-response (despite rigorous screening), future studies should employ a placebo run-in period and other strategies to minimize placebo response.

A preliminary study of factors affecting adherence to medication in clinic children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

BACKGROUND: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common and chronic condition requiring long-term management. However, nonadherence to treatment and its reasons have not been studied in Indian children with ADHD. OBJECTIVE: To identify the factors affecting adherence to medication in clinic children and adolescents with ADHD. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-four children and adolescents newly diagnosed with ADHD on Kiddie schedule for affective disorders and schizophrenia - present and lifetime - were prescribed medication on an outpatient basis and followed-up to check their adherence to medication. Information regarding adherence was obtained from the parents on a proforma to assess the factors affecting the adherence to medication. RESULTS: Twenty (83.3%) subjects were nonadherent within the first month. The most common reasons as given by the parents for nonadherence to treatment were side-effects of medication in 13 (65%), lack of effectiveness of medication in 10 (50%), problems in hospital, like long waiting time and procedural delay, in 10 (50%), fear that the child will become addicted to medication in nine (45%), problems in accessing medication in eight (40%), careless attitude of caregivers in eight (40%) and high cost of medication in eight (40%). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of adherence to medication in this short-term follow-up of newly diagnosed children with ADHD was very low. Other than the commonly reported reasons in Western countries, there were some sociocultural and local reasons for nonadherence to treatment in our country. Efforts are needed to improve adherence to medication in children with ADHD.