Search

The authors sought to determine whether a greater frequency of interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) sessions during maintenance treatment has a greater prophylactic effect than a previously validated once-a-month treatment.A total of 233 women 20-60 years of age with recurrent unipolar depression were treated in an outpatient research clinic. After participants had achieved remission with weekly IPT or, if required, with weekly IPT plus antidepressant pharmacotherapy, they were randomly assigned to weekly, twice-monthly, or monthly maintenance IPT monotherapy for 2 years or until a recurrence of their depression occurred.Among participants who remitted with IPT alone and entered maintenance treatment (N=99), 19 (26%) of the 74 who remained in the study throughout the 2-year maintenance phase experienced a recurrence of depression. Among participants who required the addition of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor to achieve remission (N=90), 32 (36%) sustained that remission through continuation treatment and drug discontinuation and began maintenance treatment; of these, 13 (50%) of the 26 who remained in the study throughout the maintenance phase experienced a recurrence. Survival analysis of time to recurrence by randomized treatment frequency showed no effect on recurrence-free survival in either treatment subgroup.These results suggest that maintenance IPT, even at a frequency of only one visit per month, is a good method of prophylaxis for women who can achieve remission with IPT alone. In contrast, among those who require the addition of pharmacotherapy, IPT monotherapy represents a significantly less efficacious approach to maintenance treatment.

Introduction: Combination treatment, rather than monotherapy, is prevalent in the treatment of subjects with bipolar disorder, probably due to the complex and phasic nature of the illness. In general, prescription patterns may be influenced by the demographic characteristics of patients as well. We evaluated prescription patterns and the influence of demographic variables on these patterns in a voluntary registry of subjects with bipolar disorder. Methods: A subset of data from a larger voluntary registry was extracted for demographic variables and psychotropic medication use that had been reported in the month prior to registration by ambulatory, non-hospitalized subjects with bipolar I disorder in 1995/96 (n=457). Results: Among the thymoleptic agents, lithium was prescribed in over 50% of subjects, valproate in approximately 40%, and carbamazepine in 11% of subjects. Eighteen percent of subjects had no prescription for thymoleptic agents. Nearly one-third of all subjects were receiving antipsychotic agents, of whom two-thirds were receiving the traditional neuroleptic agents. More than half of all subjects were receiving concomitant antidepressants, of whom nearly 50% received the SSRI antidepressants and nearly 25% received buproprion. Approximately 40% of subjects received benzodiazepines. Only 18% of subjects received monotherapy, and nearly 50% received three or more psychotropic agents. In general, no associations were noted between demographic parameters including age, gender, marital or educational status, and psychotropic prescriptions. Conclusion: Consistent with the anecdotal reports, these data confirm that combination treatment is far more common than monotherapy. Demography appears to have a minimal impact on cross-sectional prescription patterns in subjects with bipolar disorder. Given that combination treatments are the rule rather than the exception, we should strive to achieve rational, yet pragmatic, treatment guidelines and algorithms to minimize the risks while maximizing the benefits of these combination treatments for patients with bipolar disorder.

Background Few data are available to guide treatment selection in major depression. With increasing pressure to maximize the efficiency and minimize the costs of treatment, it is important to have information that could guide treatment selection or point to treatment strategies that have a high probability of success. Method We used a successive cohort approach to compare 2 highly similar groups of women with recurrent unipolar disorder (DSM-III-R or DSM-IV): one in which the combination of interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) and pharmacotherapy was initiated at the outset of treatment and a second in which IPT alone was provided first and only those who did not remit with IPT alone were offered the combination treatment. Results In the group in which the combination was initiated at the outset of treatment (N = 180), the remission rate was 66%, comparable to the remission rate observed in most outpatient treatment studies of major depression. In contrast, among the women in the second cohort who were first treated with IPT alone and only those who did not remit were given combination therapy (N = 159), the remission rate was 79%, significantly greater than that observed in the group that received combination treatment from the outset (chi2 = 6.55, p = .02). Conclusion These results suggest that the strategy of offering IPT to women with recurrent unipolar disorder and, in the absence of remission, adding antidepressant pharmacotherapy can be a highly effective treatment, one that may be particularly attractive to women in the childbearing years. Although slower in its onset of action, this sequential strategy is likely to enable the clear majority of such women to achieve a full remission of depressive symptoms.

Objective: Primary insomnia and insomnia related to mental disorders are the two most common DSM-IV insomnia diagnoses, but distinguishing between them is difficult in clinical practice. This analysis was performed to identify clinical factors used by sleep specialists to distinguish primary insomnia from insomnia related to mental disorders. Method: Clinicians evaluated 216 patients referred for insomnia at five clinical sites, rated a list of clinical factors judged to contribute to each patient’s presentation, and assigned diagnoses. Analysis of variance was performed, with contributing factors as the dependent variable and diagnostic group and clinic location as independent variables. Results: Sleep specialists rated a psychiatric disorder as a stronger factor for insomnia related to mental disorders and rated negative conditioning and sleep hygiene as stronger factors for primary insomnia. However, a psychiatric disorder was rated as a contributing factor for 77% of patients who received a first diagnosis of primary insomnia. Conclusions: While neither sleep hygiene nor negative conditioning is a diagnostic criterion in DSM-IV, these results support the face validity of these clinical factors distinguishing between primary insomnia and insomnia related to mental disorders. The use of a psychiatric disorder as an inclusion criterion for insomnia related to mental disorders and an exclusion criterion for primary insomnia reinforces a categorical distinction between the two diagnoses, but the contribution of psychiatric symptoms in primary insomnia appears to be a clinically relevant one. These findings suggest the need for studies on the validity of negative conditioning and sleep hygiene in the etiology of primary insomnia, as well as on the significance of psychiatric disorders, especially depression, in primary insomnia. (Am J Psychiatry 1997; 154:1412‐1416)

We examined whether fluoxetine treatment has persistent effects on electroencephalographic sleep after drug discontinuation in patients with recurrent major depression. Age-matched groups of 23 women were treated with interpersonal psychotherapy alone (IPT) or fluoxetine plus interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT + FLU). Sleep studies were conducted when patients were depressed, and again at remission, at least four weeks after fluoxetine discontinuation. The groups did not differ in depression ratings pre- to post-treatment. Significant group*time interaction effects were noted for REM sleep (p = .04) and slow wave sleep (p = .02). REM percentage and phasic REM activity increased in the IPT + FLU group but decreased in the IPT group. The effects of fluoxetine treatment on electroencephalographic sleep can be observed for at least four weeks after drug discontinuation and appear to represent both drug discontinuation and neuroadaptation effects.

The objective of this study was to determine whether sleep specialists and nonspecialists recommend different treatments for different insomnia diagnoses according to two different diagnostic classifications. Two hundred sixteen patients with chronic insomnia at five sites were each interviewed by two clinicians: one sleep specialist and one nonsleep specialist. All interviewers indicated diagnoses using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition (DSM-IV); sleep specialists also indicated diagnoses according to the International Classification for Sleep Disorders (ICSD). Interviewers then indicated how strongly they would recommend each item in a standard list of treatment and diagnostic interventions for each patient. We examined differences in treatment recommendations among the six most common DSM-IV diagnoses assigned by sleep specialists at different sites (n = 192), among the six most common ICSD diagnoses assigned by sleep specialists at different sites (n = 153), and among the six most common DSM-IV diagnoses assigned by nonspecialists at different sites (n = 186). In each analysis, specific treatment and polysomnography recommendations differed significantly for different diagnoses, using either DSM-IV or ICSD criteria. Conversely, different diagnoses were associated with different rank orderings of specific treatment and diagnostic recommendations. Sleep specialist and nonspecialist interviewers each distinguished treatment recommendations among different diagnoses, but in general, nonspecialists more strongly recommended medications and relaxation treatments. Significant site-related differences in treatment recommendations also emerged. Differences in treatment recommendations support the distinction between different DSM-IV and ICSD diagnoses, although they do not provide formal validation. Site-related differences suggest a lack of consensus in how these disorders are conceptualized and treated.