Search

Backgrounds: Antidepressants are widely used to treat major depressive disorder. First-line treatments with antidepressants are only successful in one-third of patients; however, evidence from randomized controlled trials on second-line treatments is limited. Moreover, recently acceptability is suggested to be a good indicator of overall treatment success.Methods: This is a multi-center two-arm, three-phased randomized controlled trial performed in Japan from December 2013 to March 2017 comparing the acceptability of escitalopram and duloxetine as a second-line drug. Patients, who failed to respond to antidepressants such as sertraline, paroxetine, fluvoxamine, milnacipran or mirtazapine for at least 3 weeks, were randomized to either escitalopram (Group A) or duloxetine (Group B) in Step 1 (8 weeks). In Step 2 (8 weeks), the drug was switched to the other if the first drug failed. The discontinuation rate at the end of Step 1 was the primary endpoint and non-inferiority of escitalopram vs duloxetine was tested. In addition, change in clinical measures from baseline were also assessed at the end of Step 1, 2 and up to 52 weeks.Results: At the end of Step 1, Group A (n = 82) was significantly superior to Group B (n = 78) in discontinuation rate (4.9% to 19.2%, P = 0.007). The change in clinical indices from baseline were not different between the groups at either timepoint.Limitations: As the major reason for discontinuation in Group B was the "withdrawal of consent" the concrete reason could not be verified.Conclusions: As a second-line treatment drug, escitalopram was suggested to be non-inferior to duloxetine in acceptability.Trial Registration: UMINCTR(UMIN000012367), registered on December 1st, 2013 and last updated on April 4th, 2017. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Self-harm is an important risk factor for subsequent suicide and repetition of self-harm, and a common cause of emergency department presentations. However, there still remains limited evidence on intervention in emergency department settings for individuals who self-harm.Methods: This multicentre, randomised controlled trial was conducted at 17 general hospitals in Japan. In total, 914 adult patients admitted to emergency departments for a suicide attempt and had a DSM-IV-TR axis I disorder were randomly assigned to two groups, to receive either assertive case management (intervention) or enhanced usual care (control). Assertive case management was introduced by the case manager during emergency department admissions for suicide attempts, and continued after discharge. Interventions were provided until the end of the study period (for at least 18 months and up to 5 years).Results: The number of overall self-harm episodes per person-year was significantly lower in the intervention group (adjusted incidence risk ratio (IRR) 0.88, 95%CI 0.80-0.96, p=0.0031). Subgroup analysis showed a greater reduction of overall self-harm episodes among patients with no previous suicide attempt at baseline (adjusted IRR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-0.98, p=0.037).Limitations: Patients younger than 20 years and patients who self-harmed but were not admitted to an emergency department were excluded.Conclusions: The present study showed that assertive case management following emergency admission for a suicide attempt reduced the incident rate of repeat overall self-harm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]