Search

Objective: To investigate the efficacy, safety, and clinical benefit of a once-daily formulation of trazodone (Trazodone Contramid(R) OAD) in the treatment of major depressive disorder. Design/Participants: In this double-blind study, 412 patients with major depressive disorder (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria) were randomized 1:1 to receive either Trazodone Contramid OAD (150 to 375mg) or placebo. Treatment was titrated over two weeks to each individual optimal dose. Patients then continued six weeks of treatment; further dose adjustments were allowed based on efficacy and tolerability. Measurements: The primary end point was change in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale total score from baseline to last study visit. Secondary end points included Hamilton Depression Rating Scale responders/remitters, change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, Clinician and Patient Global Improvement Scales, and quality of sleep. Results: From the end of titration to the end of the six-week treatment period, the mean maximum daily dose of the intent-to-treat population was 310mg for the active group and 355mg for the placebo group. There was a statistically significant difference between trazodone and placebo on the mean HAMD-17 score (-11.4 vs. -9.3, P=0.012). A significant difference was present as early as Week 1 and was maintained at all subsequent study visits. Many secondary end points supported these findings, including improvements in quality of sleep. The most frequent adverse events were the same for both the treatment and placebo groups: headache and somnolence. There were no serious adverse events that were considered related to treatment. There were no clinically significant electrocardiogram or laboratory abnormalities. Conclusions: The trazodone Contramid formulation was more effective than placebo in major depressive disorder and was well tolerated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Antidepressant-associated sexual dysfunction is a common adverse effect that frequently results in premature medication treatment discontinuation and for which no treatment has demonstrated efficacy in women.Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of sildenafil for sexual dysfunction associated with selective and nonselective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs) in women.Design, Setting, and Participants: An 8-week prospective, parallel-group, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial conducted between September 1, 2003, and January 1, 2007, at 7 US research centers that included 98 previously sexually functioning, premenopausal women (mean [SD] age 37.1 [6] years) whose major depression was remitted by SRIs but who were also experiencing sexual dysfunction.Intervention: Forty-nine patients were randomly assigned to take sildenafil or placebo at a flexible dose starting at 50 mg adjustable to 100 mg before sexual activity.Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was the mean difference in change from baseline to study end (ie, lower ordinal score) on the Clinical Global Impression sexual function scale. Secondary measures included the Female Sexual Function Questionnaire, the Arizona Sexual Experience scale-female version, the University of New Mexico Sexual Function Inventory-female version, a sexual activity event log, and the Hamilton Depression Rating scale. Hormone levels were also assessed.Results: In an intention-to-treat analysis, women treated with sildenafil had a mean Clinical Global Impression-sexual function score of 1.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-2.3) compared with those taking placebo (1.1; 95% CI, 0.8-1.5), with a mean end point difference of 0.8 (95% CI, 0.6-1.0; P = .001). Assigning baseline values carried forward to the 22% of patients who prematurely discontinued resulted in a mean end point in the sexual function score of 1.5 (95% CI, 1.1-1.9) among women taking sildenafil compared with 0.9 (95% CI, 0.6-1.3) among women taking placebo with a mean end point difference of 0.6 (95% CI, 0.3-0.8; P = .03). Baseline endocrine levels were within normal limits and did not differ between groups. The mean (SD) Hamilton scores for depression remained consistent with remission in both groups (4.0 [3.6]; P = .90). Headache, flushing, and dyspepsia were reported frequently during treatment, but no patients withdrew because of serious adverse effects.Conclusion: In this study population, sildenafil treatment of sexual dysfunction in women taking SRIs was associated with a reduction in adverse sexual effects.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00375297. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The US Surgeon General's Report on Bone Health suggests America's bone-health is in jeopardy and issued a "call to action" to develop bone-health plans that: (1) improve nutrition, (2) increase health literacy and, (3) increase physical activity. This study is a response to this call to action. Methods After signing an informed consent, 158 adults agreed to follow an open-label bone-health plan for six months after taking a DXA test of bone density, a 43-chemistry blood test panel and a quality of life inventory (AlgaeCal 1). Two weeks after the last subject completed, a second group of 58 was enrolled and followed the identical plan, but with a different bone-health supplement (AlgaeCal 2). Results There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline bone mineral density (BMD) or in variables related to BMD (age, sex, weight, percent body fat, fat mass, or fat-free mass). In both groups, no significant differences in BMD or related variables were found between volunteers and non-volunteers or between those who completed per protocol and those who were lost to attrition. Both groups experienced a significant positive mean annualized percent change (MAPC) in BMD compared to expectation [AlgaeCal 1: 1.15%, p = 0.001; AlgaeCal 2: 2.79%, p = 0.001]. Both groups experienced a positive MAPC compared to baseline, but only AlgaeCal 2 experienced a significant change [AlgaeCal 1: 0.48%, p = 0.14; AlgaeCal 2: 2.18%, p < 0.001]. The MAPC in AlgaeCal 2 was significantly greater than that in AlgaeCal 1 (p = 0.005). The MAPC contrast between compliant and partially compliant subjects was significant for both plans (p = 0.001 and p = 0.003 respectively). No clinically significant changes in a 43-panel blood chemistry test were found nor were there any changes in self-reported quality of life in either group. Conclusions Following The Plan for six months with either version of the bone health supplement was associated with significant increases in BMD as compared to expected and, in AlgaeCal 2, the increase from baseline was significantly greater than the increase from baseline in AlgaeCal 1. Increased compliance was associated with greater increases in BMD in both groups. No adverse effects were reported in either group. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01114685

Background: Communication is a common element in all medical consultations, affecting a range of outcomes for doctors and patients. The increasing demand for medical students to be trained to communicate effectively has seen the emergence of interpersonal communication skills as core graduate competencies in medical training around the world. Medical schools have adopted a range of approaches to develop and evaluate these competencies., Objectives: To assess the effects of interventions for medical students that aim to improve interpersonal communication in medical consultations., Search Methods: We searched five electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and ERIC (Educational Resource Information Centre) in September 2020, with no language, date, or publication status restrictions. We also screened reference lists of relevant articles and contacted authors of included studies., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs (C-RCTs), and non-randomised controlled trials (quasi-RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of interventions delivered to students in undergraduate or graduate-entry medical programmes. We included studies of interventions aiming to improve medical students' interpersonal communication during medical consultations. Included interventions targeted communication skills associated with empathy, relationship building, gathering information, and explanation and planning, as well as specific communication tasks such as listening, appropriate structure, and question style., Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently reviewed all search results, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias of included studies, and rated the quality of evidence using GRADE., Main Results: We found 91 publications relating to 76 separate studies (involving 10,124 students): 55 RCTs, 9 quasi-RCTs, 7 C-RCTs, and 5 quasi-C-RCTs. We performed meta-analysis according to comparison and outcome. Among both effectiveness and comparative effectiveness analyses, we separated outcomes reporting on overall communication skills, empathy, rapport or relationship building, patient perceptions/satisfaction, information gathering, and explanation and planning. Overall communication skills and empathy were further divided as examiner- or simulated patient-assessed. The overall quality of evidence ranged from moderate to very low, and there was high, unexplained heterogeneity. Overall, interventions had positive effects on most outcomes, but generally small effect sizes and evidence quality limit the conclusions that can be drawn. Communication skills interventions in comparison to usual curricula or control may improve both overall communication skills (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 1.31; 18 studies, 1356 participants; I² = 90%; low-quality evidence) and empathy (SMD 0.64, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.05; 6 studies, 831 participants; I² = 86%; low-quality evidence) when assessed by experts, but not by simulated patients. Students' skills in information gathering probably also improve with educational intervention (SMD 1.07, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.54; 5 studies, 405 participants; I² = 78%; moderate-quality evidence), but there may be little to no effect on students' rapport (SMD 0.18, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.51; 9 studies, 834 participants; I² = 81%; low-quality evidence), and effects on information giving skills are uncertain (very low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether experiential interventions improve overall communication skills in comparison to didactic approaches (SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.19; 4 studies, 1578 participants; I² = 4%; very low-quality evidence). Electronic learning approaches may have little to no effect on students' empathy scores (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.68 to 0.43; 3 studies, 421 participants; I² = 82%; low-quality evidence) or on rapport (SMD 0.02, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.38; 3 studies, 176 participants; I² = 19%; moderate-quality evidence) compared to face-to-face approaches. There may be small negative effects of electronic interventions on information giving skills (low-quality evidence), and effects on information gathering skills are uncertain (very low-quality evidence).  Personalised/specific feedback probably improves overall communication skills to a small degree in comparison to generic or no feedback (SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.87; 6 studies, 502 participants; I² = 56%; moderate-quality evidence). There may be small positive effects of personalised feedback on empathy and information gathering skills (low quality), but effects on rapport are uncertain (very low quality), and we found no evidence on information giving skills. We are uncertain whether role-play with simulated patients outperforms peer role-play in improving students' overall communication skills (SMD 0.17, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.67; 4 studies, 637 participants; I² = 87%; very low-quality evidence). There may be little to no difference between effects of simulated patient and peer role-play on students' empathy (low-quality evidence) with no evidence on other outcomes for this comparison. Descriptive syntheses of results that could not be included in meta-analyses across outcomes and comparisons were mixed, as were effects of different interventions and comparisons on specific communication skills assessed by the included trials. Quality of evidence was downgraded due to methodological limitations across several risk of bias domains, high unexplained heterogeneity, and imprecision of results. In general, results remain consistent in sensitivity analysis based on risk of bias and adjustment for clustering. No adverse effects were reported.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review represents a substantial body of evidence from which to draw, but further research is needed to strengthen the quality of the evidence base, to consider the long-term effects of interventions on students' behaviour as they progress through training and into practice, and to assess effects of interventions on patient outcomes. Efforts to standardise assessment and evaluation of interpersonal skills will strengthen future research efforts., (Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Background: Depression is often associated with sexual dysfunction, and pharmacologic treatment for hypoactive sexual desire disorder can be considered in women receiving treatment for depression., Aim: To evaluate the safety of flibanserin in women treated for depression with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors., Methods: In this double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, women with remitted or mild depression treated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors who were not postmenopausal and were experiencing symptoms of hypoactive sexual desire disorder (ie, decreased sexual desire and related distress) received flibanserin 50 mg at bedtime (qhs) for 2 weeks and up-titrated to 100 mg qhs, flibanserin 100 mg qhs for the entire treatment period, or placebo for up to 12 weeks., Outcomes: Safety assessment included adverse events and symptoms of depression and anxiety., Results: 73 patients were randomly assigned to flibanserin (both dose groups combined) and 38 to placebo. The sponsor terminated the study early at discontinuation of the development of flibanserin. Treatment duration was at least 8 weeks for 84.9% and 94.7% of patients in the flibanserin and placebo groups, respectively. The most common adverse events (incidence ≥ 2% in the flibanserin group and higher than that in the placebo group) included dry mouth (5.5% for flibanserin vs 2.6% for placebo), insomnia (5.5% vs 2.6%), back pain (4.1% vs 2.6%), and dizziness (4.1% vs 0.0%). There were no serious adverse events and no instances of suicidal ideation or behavior. The proportions of patients with symptom worsening in the flibanserin and placebo groups, respectively, were 6.9% and 21.6% for depression and 1.4% and 2.7% for anxiety. Remission of depression at study end point, as measured by the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report, was experienced by 19.4% of flibanserin-treated patients and 10.8% of patients receiving placebo; remission of anxiety based on the Beck Anxiety Inventory was noted in 16.4% and 2.7% of patients, respectively., Clinical Implications: The results of this study support the safety of flibanserin in premenopausal women being treated with a serotonergic antidepressant. No increased risks were observed when adding flibanserin to a stable selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor treatment regimen., Strengths and Limitations: This was a well-designed, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. The primary limitation was the early study discontinuation by the sponsor, which decreased the sample size and duration of treatment., Conclusion: In this small trial, flibanserin 100 mg qhs was generally safe and well tolerated in premenopausal women with mild or remitted depression taking a serotonergic antidepressant. Clayton AH, Croft HA, Yuan J, et al. Safety of Flibanserin in Women Treated With Antidepressants: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study. J Sex Med 2018;15:43-51., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The neurobiology of sexual response is driven in part by dopamine and serotonin-the former modulating excitatory pathways and the latter regulating inhibitory pathways. Neurobiological underpinnings of hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) are seemingly related to overactive serotonin activity that results in underactive dopamine activity. As such, pharmacologic agents that decrease serotonin, increase dopamine, or some combination thereof, have therapeutic potential for HSDD., Aim: To review the role of serotonin in female sexual function and the effects of pharmacologic interventions that target the serotonin system in the treatment of HSDD., Methods: Searches of the Medline database for articles on serotonin and female sexual function., Outcomes: Relevant articles from the peer-reviewed literature were included., Results: Female sexual response is regulated not only by the sex hormones but also by several neurotransmitters. It is postulated that dopamine, norepinephrine, oxytocin, and melanocortins serve as key neuromodulators for the excitatory pathways, whereas serotonin, opioids, and endocannabinoids serve as key neuromodulators for the inhibitory pathways. Serotonin appears to be a key inhibitory modulator of sexual desire, because it decreases the ability of excitatory systems to be activated by sexual cues. Centrally acting drugs that modulate the excitatory and inhibitory pathways involved in sexual desire (eg, bremelanotide, bupropion, buspirone, flibanserin) have been investigated as treatment options for HSDD. However, only flibanserin, a multifunctional serotonin agonist and antagonist (5-hydroxytryptamine [5-HT] 1A receptor agonist and 5-HT 2A receptor antagonist), is currently approved for the treatment of HSDD., Clinical Implications: The central serotonin system is 1 biochemical target for medications intended to treat HSDD., Strengths and Limitations: This narrative review integrates findings from preclinical studies and clinical trials to elucidate neurobiological underpinnings of HSDD but is limited to 1 neurotransmitter system (serotonin)., Conclusion: Serotonin overactivity is a putative cause of sexual dysfunction in patients with HSDD. The unique pharmacologic profile of flibanserin tones down inhibitory serotonergic function and restores dopaminergic and noradrenergic function. Croft HA. Understanding the Role of Serotonin in Female Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder and Treatment Options. J Sex Med 2017;14:1575-1584., (Copyright © 2017 International Society for Sexual Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Vilazodone is a potent serotonin (5-HT) reuptake inhibitor and 5-HT₁A receptor partial agonist approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults. This study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of vilazodone in the treatment of MDD., Method: This 8-week, randomized (1:1), double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, fixed-dose study conducted from January 2012 to February 2013 compared vilazodone 40 mg/d with placebo in outpatients with DSM-IV-TR-diagnosed MDD. The primary efficacy measure was Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score change from baseline to week 8 analyzed by a mixed-effects model for repeated measures on the intent-to-treat population (placebo = 252, vilazodone = 253). Secondary efficacy outcomes were Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) Scale score change from baseline and MADRS sustained response rate (total score ≤ 12 for at least the last 2 consecutive double-blind visits)., Results: Approximately 83% of patients completed the study. Least squares mean differences (95% CI) were statistically significant for vilazodone versus placebo on MADRS (-5.117 [-6.886 to -3.347], P < .00001) and CGI-S (-0.622 [-0.845 to -0.399], P < .00001) change from baseline; statistically significant improvements versus placebo occurred at week 2 and persisted for the study duration. The MADRS sustained response rate was 17% for placebo and 27% for vilazodone (P < .01). Patients taking vilazodone versus placebo had higher rates of diarrhea and nausea; most incidences were mild in severity. Weight increase and sexual dysfunction adverse events were low in both groups., Conclusions: A large and significant treatment effect on the MADRS and statistically significant improvement on the CGI-S demonstrated meaningful depressive symptom improvements. Vilazodone was generally well tolerated., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01473394., (© Copyright 2014 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Introduction: Depression is one of the more prevalent mental disorders in the United States, with estimates as high as 6.7% of Americans affected annually. Consequently, antidepressant use in the United States is also widespread. Both depression and its treatments are associated with sexual dysfunction (SD) in men and women, including orgasm and arousal problems, hypoactive sexual desire, premature ejaculation, erectile difficulties, and dyspareunia. Sexual dysfunction is frequently cited as a reason for nonadherence or discontinuation of treatment for depression., Aim: The objective of our review is to aid physicians, including primary care physicians, psychiatrists, and urologists/gynecologists, in the multidisciplinary approach to treating patients with SD and depression., Methods: Our review focuses on articles published within the last 10 years on SD and depression in adults, with an emphasis on the relationship of treatments for depression on SD., Summary: Different classes of antidepressants vary in their ability to cause sexual side effects., Results: Treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) is associated with SD. Use of other antidepressants, such as bupropion, mirtazapine, nefazodone, and vilazodone, have been associated with less SD compared with SSRIs; furthermore, some of the mentioned antidepressants have been used in the treatment of SD induced by SSRIs and SNRIs.

Objective: Vilazodone is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and 5-HT 1A receptor partial agonist approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). This report summarizes the safety and tolerability of vilazodone 40 mg/day during short- and long-term treatment of adult MDD., Methods: Pooled data from two 8-week, double-blind studies of vilazodone (n = 436) vs placebo (n = 433) and data from one 52-week, open-label study (n = 616, vilazodone only) were analyzed. Patients aged 18-70 with DSM-IV-TR-defined MDD received vilazodone or placebo (8-week studies only) once daily, with food, titrated to 40 mg/day over 2 weeks. Safety and tolerability assessments included adverse events (AEs), laboratory tests, vital signs, electrocardiograms, and weight., Results: The most common AEs in all studies were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. Vilazodone-associated AEs in the two 8-week studies, defined as an incidence rate of ≥5% in the vilazodone group and at least twice that for placebo, were diarrhea (28.0% vs 9.2%), nausea (23.4% vs 5.1%), and insomnia (6.0% vs 2.1%), with the majority reported as mild to moderate and <5% of those patients requiring concomitant (directed) treatment for these conditions. Discontinuation rates due to AEs were 7.1% (vilazodone) and 3.2% (placebo) in the 8-week studies and 20.7% in the 52-week study. Vilazodone had no clinically significant effects on vital signs, laboratory tests, or electrocardiograms., Conclusion: Vilazodone 40 mg/day was well tolerated during short- and long-term MDD treatment in these trials. Safety profiles associated with 8- and 52-week exposure were consistent.

Background: The US Surgeon General's Report on Bone Health suggests America's bone-health is in jeopardy and issued a "call to action" to develop bone-health plans that: (1) improve nutrition, (2) increase health literacy and, (3) increase physical activity. This study is a response to this call to action., Methods: After signing an informed consent, 158 adults agreed to follow an open-label bone-health plan for six months after taking a DXA test of bone density, a 43-chemistry blood test panel and a quality of life inventory (AlgaeCal 1). Two weeks after the last subject completed, a second group of 58 was enrolled and followed the identical plan, but with a different bone-health supplement (AlgaeCal 2)., Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline bone mineral density (BMD) or in variables related to BMD (age, sex, weight, percent body fat, fat mass, or fat-free mass). In both groups, no significant differences in BMD or related variables were found between volunteers and non-volunteers or between those who completed per protocol and those who were lost to attrition.Both groups experienced a significant positive mean annualized percent change (MAPC) in BMD compared to expectation [AlgaeCal 1: 1.15%, p = 0.001; AlgaeCal 2: 2.79%, p = 0.001]. Both groups experienced a positive MAPC compared to baseline, but only AlgaeCal 2 experienced a significant change [AlgaeCal 1: 0.48%, p = 0.14; AlgaeCal 2: 2.18%, p < 0.001]. The MAPC in AlgaeCal 2 was significantly greater than that in AlgaeCal 1 (p = 0.005). The MAPC contrast between compliant and partially compliant subjects was significant for both plans (p = 0.001 and p = 0.003 respectively). No clinically significant changes in a 43-panel blood chemistry test were found nor were there any changes in self-reported quality of life in either group., Conclusions: Following The Plan for six months with either version of the bone health supplement was associated with significant increases in BMD as compared to expected and, in AlgaeCal 2, the increase from baseline was significantly greater than the increase from baseline in AlgaeCal 1. Increased compliance was associated with greater increases in BMD in both groups. No adverse effects were reported in either group., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01114685.

Background: The US Surgeon General's Report on Bone Health suggests America's bone-health is in jeopardy and issued a "call to action" to develop bone-health plans incorporating components of (1) improved nutrition, (2) increased health literacy, and (3) increased physical activity., Objective: To conduct a Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) study comparing changes in bone mineral density in healthy women over-40 with above-average compliance when following one of three bone health Plans incorporating the SG's three components., Methods: Using an open-label sequential design, 414 females over 40 years of age were tested, 176 of whom agreed to participate and follow one of three different bone-health programs. One Plan contained a bone-health supplement with 1,000 IUs of vitamin D(3 )and 750 mg of a plant-sourced form of calcium for one year. The other two Plans contained the same plant form of calcium, but with differing amounts of vitamin D(3) and other added bone health ingredients along with components designed to increase physical activity and health literacy. Each group completed the same baseline and ending DXA bone density scans, 43-chemistry blood test panels, and 84-item Quality of Life Inventory (QOL). Changes for all subjects were annualized as percent change in BMD from baseline. Using self-reports of adherence, subjects were rank-ordered and dichotomized as "compliant" or "partially compliant" based on the median rating. Comparisons were also made between the treatment groups and two theoretical age-adjusted expected groups: a non-intervention group and a group derived from a review of previously published studies on non-plant sources of calcium., Results: There were no significant differences in baseline BMD between those who volunteered versus those who did not and between those who completed per protocol (PP) and those who were lost to attrition. Among subjects completing per protocol, there were no significant differences between the three groups on baseline measurements of BMD, weight, age, body fat and fat-free mass suggesting that the treatment groups were statistically similar at baseline. In all three treatment groups subjects with above average compliance had significantly greater increases in BMD as compared to the two expected-change reference groups. The group following the most nutritionally comprehensive Plan outperformed the other two groups. For all three groups, there were no statistically significant differences between baseline and ending blood chemistry tests or the QOL self-reports., Conclusions: The increases in BMD found in all three treatment groups in this CER stand in marked contrast to previous studies reporting that interventions with calcium and vitamin D(3) reduce age-related losses of BMD, but do not increase BMD. Increased compliance resulted in increased BMD levels. No adverse effects were found in the blood chemistry tests, self-reported quality of life and daily tracking reports. The Plans tested suggest a significant improvement over the traditional calcium and vitamin D(3) standard of care.

Good medical practices can significantly reduce the possibility of diversion and misuse of the stimulants commonly prescribed to treat ADHD. While the problems of misuse and abuse are real, they should not become a barrier to appropriate use of these medicines, which are safe and effective for the large majority of patients with ADHD using them. With appropriate care, physicians treating patients with ADHD can be confident that their treatments are safe, not only for the patients they treat, but also for the communities in which they live.

Objective: To compare the effects on sexual functioning and the antidepressant efficacy of once-daily bupropion extended release (XL) and escitalopram in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD)., Method: Adult outpatients with moderate to severe DSM-IV-defined MDD and normal sexual functioning were randomly assigned to receive bupropion XL (300-450 mg/day; N = 276), escitalopram (10-20 mg/day; N = 281), or placebo (N = 273) for up to 8 weeks in 2 identically designed, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group studies (study 1 conducted from February 6, 2003, to June 10, 2004; study 2 conducted from January 21, 2003, to June 15, 2004). Data were analyzed prospectively for each study individually, and pooled data were analyzed retrospectively., Results: In both the individual studies and the pooled dataset, the incidence of orgasm dysfunction at week 8 (primary endpoint) and the incidence of worsened sexual functioning at the end of the treatment period were statistically significantly lower with bupropion XL than with escitalopram (p < .05), not statistically different between bupropion XL and placebo (p > or = .067), and statistically significantly higher with escitalopram than with placebo (p < or = .001). The percentages of patients with orgasm dysfunction at week 8 in study 1, study 2, and the pooled dataset, respectively, were 13%, 16%, and 15% with bupropion XL; 32%, 29%, and 30% with escitalopram; and 11%, 8%, and 9% with placebo. The respective percentages of patients with worsened sexual functioning at the end of the treatment period were 18%, 22%, and 20% with bupropion XL; 37%, 34%, and 36% with escitalopram; and 14%, 16%, and 15% with placebo. Mean changes in Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire scores for all domains at week 8 were statistically significantly worse for escitalopram compared with bupropion XL (p < or = .05). Separation from placebo could not be established at a statistical .05 level for bupropion on 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17) total score. However, escitalopram showed statistical superiority to placebo on HAM-D-17 total score in one of the 2 studies and in the pooled data. Bupropion XL did not statistically differ from escitalopram with respect to mean change in HAM-D-17 total score, HAM-D-17 response or remission rates, percentage of patients much or very much improved on Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale scores, or mean changes in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale total score or Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale score at week 8., Conclusions: Bupropion XL had a sexual tolerability profile significantly better than that of escitalopram with similar HAM-D-17 remission rates and HAD total scores in patients with MDD.

The ideal antidepressant would control depression with no adverse effect on sexual function. Erectile dysfunction and other sexual dysfunction associated with antidepressant medication treatment are problems with many antidepressants and can lead to patient dissatisfaction and decreased compliance with treatment. A computerized MEDLINE search (English language, 1966-2003) was performed using the terms antidepressive agents, erectile dysfunction, and sexual dysfunction. Emphasis was placed on studies with specific sexual function measurements taken before and after treatment and placebo control. Mixed mediator, nonserotonergic antidepressants that block postsynaptic serotonin type 2 receptors (nefazodone, mirtazapine) or that primarily increase dopamine or norepinephrine levels (bupropion) were thought to be good choices for avoiding antidepressant-associated sexual dysfunction or for switching patients in whom antidepressant-associated sexual dysfunction emerged. Comparisons with serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SRIs) have revealed less desire and orgasm dysfunction with nonserotonergic bupropion, less orgasm dysfunction with nefazodone, and superior overall satisfaction with sexual functioning with bupropion or nefazodone. However, most of these studies have design flaws that make evidence-based claims of efficacy difficult to substantiate. Agents proposed for antidote use in antidepressant-associated sexual dysfunction have either not been studied in men or not proved efficacious in randomized placebo-controlled trials. Switching to and augmentation with bupropion or nefazodone have also not clearly shown efficacy in controlled trials and require care and monitoring to avoid SRI discontinuation symptoms and loss of antidepressant efficacy. Few proposed treatment options, apart from avoidance, have proved effective for antidepressant-associated sexual dysfunction, which can have negative consequences on depression management.

Background: Sexual dysfunction commonly occurs during antidepressant treatment. However, the reported rates of sexual dysfunction vary across antidepressants and are typically underreported in product literature. The objectives of this study were (1) to estimate the prevalence of sexual dysfunction among patients taking newer antidepressants (bupropion immediate release [IR], bupropion sustained release [SR], citalopram, fluoxetine, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine, and venlafaxine extended release [XR]) and (2) to compare physician-perceived with patient-reported prevalence rates of antidepressant-associated sexual dysfunction., Method: This cross-sectional, observational study was conducted in 1101 U.S. primary care clinics. Adult outpatients (4534 women and 1763 men) receiving antidepressant monotherapy were enrolled. The prevalence of sexual dysfunction was measured using the Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire., Results: In the overall population, bupropion IR (22%) and SR (25%) and nefazodone (28%) were associated with the lowest risk for sexual dysfunction, whereas selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants, mirtazapine, and venlafaxine XR were associated with higher rates (36%-43%). In a prospectively defined subpopulation unlikely to have predisposing factors for sexual dysfunction, the prevalence of sexual dysfunction ranged from 7% to 30%, with the odds of having sexual dysfunction 4 to 6 times greater with SSRIs or venlafaxine XR than with bupropion SR. Physicians consistently underestimated the prevalence of antidepressant-associated sexual dysfunction., Conclusion: Ours is the first study to assess sexual dysfunction across the newer antidepressants using consistent methodology and a validated rating scale. Overall, SSRIs and venlafaxine XR were associated with higher rates of sexual dysfunction than bupropion or nefazodone. Because antidepressant-associated sexual dysfunction is considerably underestimated by physicians, greater recognition and education are imperative when prescribing antidepressant treatment.

Sexual problems can be classified as related to (1) desire, (2) arousal and penetration, (3) orgasm, and (4) subjective assessment. The usual cause of sexual dysfunction is psychosocial, eg, past conditioning, inadequate communication and cooperation between sexual partners. Possible organic or psychiatric causes should be ruled out, however.

A physical examination utilized as part of a program designed for the short-term treatment of couples with sexual dysfunction is described. This technique is known as the "Sexual Information Examination." Its usefulness in the treatment of sexual dysfunction and education of couples as a part of sexual counseling is discussed.