Search

The duration of untreated depression (DUD) might have a substantial impact on the clinical outcomes; however, there are important knowledge gaps including the effects on disability and potential differences between first-episode and recurrent episodes of depression.We recruited 121 outpatients with first episode and recurrent major depression, and conducted prospective clinical assessments over six months. Clinical outcomes included response to antidepressant therapy, remission and changes in disability.Patients with a DUD of six months or shorter were more frequently young, unemployed and had higher levels of physical illnesses than those with a longer DUD (all p0.05). A shorter DUD was associated with significantly higher odds of response at 12 weeks (adjusted odds ratio 2.8; 95% CI: 1.2-6.8) and remission at 24 weeks (4.1; 95% CI: 1.6-10.5) after adjusting for relevant confounders. Changes in disability ratings were analyzed with growth curve analysis and showed steeper declines among those with a shorter DUD. The associations of DUD on clinical outcomes were evident both in patients with first-episode and recurrent depression.Naturalistic design. Self-rated assessment of disability. Findings from subgroup analyses should be replicated in larger sample size.A shorter duration of untreated depression is associated with more favorable outcomes for major depression, including depression-related disability. This association seems to work both at the first and recurrent episodes, which might have direct implications for both primary and secondary prevention.

This article reports the data of the Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire (MSPQ) administered to a sample of 143 immigrants accessing an outpatient clinic or the general practitioners offices in Genoa (Italy) compared with 186 Italian patients. For further details and for the interpretation of the data, the reader is referred to the original publication “Somatic perception, cultural differences and immigration: results from administration of the Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire (MSPQ) to a sample of immigrants” by Bragazzi et al. (2014) [1] .

Aim: To carry out an in-depth survey into the method of providing early intervention in schizophrenia in Italy and to evaluate the process of development of early psychosis clinical services following the pilot programme ‘Programma 2000’ and the publishing of Italian National Guidelines. Methods: Topic-specific national and international clinical and research programmes, alongside national guidelines, were taken into consideration in order to create an ad hoc questionnaire. A telephone survey using this questionnaire was carried out. A randomized sample of 152 mental health centres (MHCs) were involved, equal to 21.5% of all Italian MHCs. Results: The process of nationwide diffusion of early psychosis clinical services in Italy is frustratingly slow. Italian MHCs, including a specialized service for early interventions in schizophrenia, are estimated at being between 20% and 30%. Most services adopt a generalist approach and more frequently follow guidelines drawn up within the centres than Italian National Guidelines, involve few patients and provide a high variability of treatment options. The distribution of these services in Italy is not homogenous and influenced by demographic factors. Conclusion: Our data are consistent with worldwide literature showing a slow and variable implementation of early psychosis services in all nations. The main efforts to make these services diffused should be addressed to favour the process of localized adaptation to the guidelines, to demand possible and realistic implementation of the standard method, to stimulate policy endorsement and resources' allocation, and to particularly support the rural and the poorer zones.

BACKGROUND: Patient recruitment is the universal rate-limiting factor for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in all medical specialties. This study examined the opinions on perceived inclusion barriers and beliefs about antipsychotics of a group of psychiatrists participating in a pragmatic RCT on antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia (the GiSAS trial). METHODS: A survey of all clinicians working in the trial recruiting centers was performed exploring factors associated to the respondents’ opinions. RESULTS: Of 465 clinicians, 278 (59.8%) responded to the questionnaire. Respondents (n=278) were mainly influenced by clinical and trial-related barriers (89%). Factors such as work setting and antipsychotic prescription choices appeared to be related to perceived inclusion barriers. Most respondents believed in the superiority of SGAs (62.9%), one-third indicating drug company representatives as the most important source of information; this was related to further optimism towards SGAs. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents were affected mainly by system-related barriers, whereas personal barriers were given less weight. The influence of industry-mediated information could have affected opinions on SGAs and the lack of uncertainty about antipsychotics attitudes towards trial participation.

Background To systematically review evidence of the effects of the duration of untreated depression on the clinical outcomes of patients suffering from Unipolar Major Depression. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence of duration of untreated depression and the effect it has on clinical outcomes in Unipolar Major Depression. Data used to this purpose were obtained from a literature search of the MEDLINE, Psychoinfo and Embase databases. Comparable data extracted from studies were entered and analysed using Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager software Version 5.2. Results Ten studies were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. Only three studies reported comparable data and were consequently used for the meta-analysis. Pooled data indicates the overall positive effect of shorter duration of untreated illness both in a patient's response to treatment (RR 1.70) and remission (RR 1.65). Other studies which were not included in the meta-analysis confirmed the importance of reducing delays in the treatment of depression in order to prevent the risk of worse outcomes and chronicity, in particular in patients presenting with a first episode of depression. Data regarding the association between the duration of untreated episode in recurrent depression and clinical outcomes are less evident. Limitations The heterogeneity of the selected studies was cause for limitations with regard to the carrying out of adequate meta-analysis. Conclusions There is evidence highlighting the importance of a reduced no-treatment interval for patients suffering Unipolar Depression. In particular, there is emphasis on the first episode of depression corresponding to the notion of reducing the duration of untreated illness.

Mood disorders are common and often under-recognised in older people whereby, together with the general ageing of the population, they are becoming a significant and growing public health problem worldwide. However, the need to address the problem of late life mood disorders in a real-world setting is met with a surprising lack of strong evidence in this field. Randomised clinical trials which focus on elderly mood disorders are not very common and the majority of them focus on pharmacological treatment of major depression. The aim of this study was to review first the main unmet needs and research challenges in late-life mood disorders as a basis to then review the state of the art evidence resulting from randomised clinical trials and the main critical aspects of their implementation. Comorbidity as well as polypharmacy, cognitive decline, unpredictable placebo response, and uncertainty on optimal duration of trials are some of the challenges the investigator has to address. Moreover, some methodological limitations of randomised clinical trials reduce the applicability of the results of such studies to common clinical practices and have encouraged some authors to investigate the existence of possible alternative research designs such as pragmatic randomised clinical trials.

Recent studies based on psychotropic drug use give rise to growing concern about the trend towards psychotropic and antipsychotic polypharmacy, delineating prescriptive practices contrary to treatment recommendations drawn up in international guidelines. An increase in the number of psychotropic medications, in particular antipsychotics, prescribed over the course of years has been noted in all psychiatric settings.

Frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is often misdiagnosed early in the clinical course and may be confused with primary psychiatric disorders. This is especially true when patients have a psychiatric history. In this report, we describe a case that illustrates the diagnostic challenge of FTD in a patient with a history of obsessive–compulsive disorder.

Patients with psychotic major depression suffer prolonged duration and greater severity of illness, including an increased likelihood of recurrent episodes and resistance to conventional pharmacotherapies. They do not respond to placebo and respond poorly to antidepressant or antipsychotic monotherapy. On the other hand, as has been demonstrated, they do respond well to antidepressant and antipsychotic combination therapies. Different combinations of drugs were studied, but little is known up to now with regard to the combination of venlafaxine and olanzapine. The following paper presents three separate case studies of female patients suffering from psychotic unipolar major depression, all of whom were admitted to a psychiatric ward and successfully treated with a combination of venlafaxine and olanzapine.