School intervention to improve mental health of students in Santiago, Chile: a randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Depression can have devastating effects unless prevented or treated early and effectively. Schools offer an excellent opportunity to intervene with adolescents presenting emotional problems. There are very few universal school-based depression interventions conducted in low- and middle-income countries. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of a school-based, universal psychological intervention to reduce depressive symptoms among adolescents from low-income families. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A 2-arm, parallel, cluster, randomized clinical trial was conducted in secondary schools in deprived socioeconomic areas of Santiago, Chile. Almost all students registered in the selected schools consented to take part in the study. A total of 2512 secondary school students from 22 schools and 66 classes participated. INTERVENTIONS: Students in the intervention arm attended 11 one-hour weekly and 2 booster classroom sessions of an intervention based on cognitive-behavioral models. The intervention was delivered by trained nonspecialists. Schools in the control arm received the standard school curriculum. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Scores on the self-administered Beck Depression Inventory-II at 3 months (primary) and 12 months (secondary) after completing the intervention. RESULTS: There were 1291 participants in the control arm and 1221 in the intervention arm. Primary outcome data were available for 82.1% of the participants. There was no evidence of any clinically important difference in mean depression scores between the groups (adjusted difference in mean, -0.19; 95% CI, -1.22 to 0.84) or for any of the other outcomes 3 months after completion of the intervention. No significant differences were found in any of the outcomes at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A well-designed and implemented school-based intervention did not reduce depressive symptoms among socioeconomically deprived adolescents in Santiago, Chile. There is growing evidence that universal school interventions may not be sufficiently effective to reduce or prevent depressive symptoms. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN19466209

School-based intervention to improve the mental health of low-income, secondary school students in Santiago, Chile (YPSA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Depression is common and can have devastating effects on the life of adolescents. Psychological interventions are the first-line for treating or preventing depression among adolescents. This proposal aims to evaluate a school-based, universal psychological intervention to reduce depressive symptoms among student's aged 13-14 attending municipal state secondary schools in Santiago, Chile.</p> <p>Study design</p> <p>This is a cluster randomised controlled trial with schools as the main clusters. We compared this intervention with a control group in a study involving 22 schools, 66 classes and approximately 2,600 students. Students in the active schools attended 11 weekly and 3 booster sessions of an intervention based on cognitive-behavioural models. The control schools received their usual but enhanced counselling sessions currently included in their curriculum. Mean depression scores and indicators of levels of functioning were assessed at 3 and 12 months after the completion of the intervention in order to assess the effectiveness of the intervention. Direct and indirect costs were measured in both groups to assess the cost-effectiveness of this intervention.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>As far as we are aware this is the first cluster randomised controlled trial of a school intervention for depression among adolescents outside the Western world.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN19466209">ISRCTN19466209</a></p

The koukopoulos mixed depression rating scale (KMDRS): an international mood network (IMN) validation study of a new mixed mood rating scale

BACKGROUND: It has been proposed that the broad major depressive disorder (MDD) construct is heterogenous. Koukopoulos has provided diagnostic criteria for an important subtype within that construct, "mixed depression" (MxD), which encompasses clinical pictures characterized by marked psychomotor or inner excitation and rage/anger, along with severe depression. This study provides psychometric validation for the first rating scale specifically designed to assess MxD symptoms cross-sectionally, the Koukopoulos Mixed Depression Rating Scale (KMDRS). METHODS: 350 patients from the international mood network (IMN) completed three rating scales: the KMDRS, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). KMDRS' psychometric properties assessed included Cronbach's alpha, inter-rater reliability, factor analysis, predictive validity, and Receiver Operator Curve analysis. RESULTS: Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.76; 95% CI 0.57, 0.94) and interrater reliability (kappa = 0.73) were adequate. Confirmatory factor analysis identified 2 components: anger and psychomotor excitation (80% of total variance). Good predictive validity was seen (C-statistic = 0.82 95% CI 0.68, 0.93). Severity cut-off scores identified were as follows: none (0-4), possible (5-9), mild (10-15), moderate (16-20) and severe (> 21) MxD. LIMITATIONS: Non DSM-based diagnosis of MxD may pose some difficulties in the initial use and interpretation of the scoring of the scale. Moreover, the cross-sectional nature of the evaluation does not verify the long-term stability of the scale. CONCLUSIONS: KMDRS was a reliable and valid instrument to assess MxD symptoms

Citalopram for Acute and Preventive Efficacy in Bipolar Depression (CAPE-BD): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of citalopram in the acute and maintenance phases of bipolar depression in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.METHODS: Between 2007 and 2014, 119 subjects with acute major depressive episodes diagnosed with DSM-IV bipolar disorder, type I or type II, were randomized blindly to citalopram or placebo, added to standard mood stabilizers. They were followed for 6 weeks for acute efficacy (primary outcome) and up to 1 year for maintenance efficacy (secondary outcome) using scores on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Mania Rating Scale of the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (MRS-SADS). The study was powered for a clinically meaningful effect size.RESULTS: Mean \ub1 SD MADRS scores changed from a baseline value of 27.4 \ub1 9.1 to 13.1 \ub1 8.4 at the end of the acute phase for citalopram versus a change from 27.4 \ub1 7.3 to 15.2 \ub1 9.9 for placebo, a clinically and statistically nonsignificant difference. Maintenance efficacy also was not better with citalopram than with placebo. Acute manic/hypomanic episodes were similar in both groups, and subjects with type II illness did not have better outcomes than subjects with type I illness. In maintenance treatment, MRS-SADS scores were greater overall, especially in subjects with a rapid-cycling illness course, with citalopram versus placebo.CONCLUSIONS: Citalopram, added to standard mood stabilizers, did not have clinically meaningful benefit versus placebo for either acute or maintenance treatment of bipolar depression. Acute mania did not worsen with citalopram, but maintenance treatment led to worsened manic symptoms, especially in subjects with a rapid-cycling course.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00562861

Polypharmacy as maintenance treatment in bipolar illness: A systematic review

Objectives: Polypharmacy is common in maintenance treatment of bipolar illness, but proof of greater efficacy compared to monotherapy is assumed rather than well known. We systematically reviewed the evidence from the literature to provide recommendations for clinical management and future research. Method: A systematic review was conducted on the use of polypharmacy in bipolar prophylaxis. Relevant papers published in English through 31 December 2019 were identified searching the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library. Results: Twelve studies matched inclusion criteria, including 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The best drug combination in prevention is represented by lithium + valproic acid which showed a significant effect on time to mood relapses (HR = 0.57) compared to valproic acid monotherapy, especially for manic episodes (HR = 0.51). The effect was significant in terms of time to new drug treatment (HR = 0.51) and time to hospitalization (HR = 0.57). A significant reduction in the frequency of mood relapses was also reported for lithium + valproic acid vs. lithium monotherapy (RR=0.12); however, the trial had a small sample size. Lamotrigine + valproic acid reported significant efficacy in prevention of depressive episodes compared to lamotrigine alone. Conclusions: The literature to support a generally greater efficacy with polypharmacy in bipolar illness is scant and heterogeneous. Within that limited evidence base, the best drug combination in bipolar prevention is represented by lithium + valproic acid for manic, but not depressive episodes. Clinical practice should focus more on adequate monotherapy before considering polypharmacy

Polypharmacy as maintenance treatment in bipolar illness: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES: Polypharmacy is common in maintenance treatment of bipolar illness, but proof of greater efficacy compared to monotherapy is assumed rather than well known. We systematically reviewed the evidence from the literature to provide recommendations for clinical management and future research. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted on the use of polypharmacy in bipolar prophylaxis. Relevant papers published in English through 31 December 2019 were identified searching the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library. RESULTS: Twelve studies matched inclusion criteria, including 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The best drug combination in prevention is represented by lithium + valproic acid which showed a significant effect on time to mood relapses (HR = 0.57) compared to valproic acid monotherapy, especially for manic episodes (HR = 0.51). The effect was significant in terms of time to new drug treatment (HR = 0.51) and time to hospitalization (HR = 0.57). A significant reduction in the frequency of mood relapses was also reported for lithium + valproic acid vs. lithium monotherapy (RR=0.12); however, the trial had a small sample size. Lamotrigine + valproic acid reported significant efficacy in prevention of depressive episodes compared to lamotrigine alone. CONCLUSIONS: The literature to support a generally greater efficacy with polypharmacy in bipolar illness is scant and heterogeneous. Within that limited evidence base, the best drug combination in bipolar prevention is represented by lithium + valproic acid for manic, but not depressive episodes. Clinical practice should focus more on adequate monotherapy before considering polypharmacy

The International Mood Network (IMN) Nosology Project: differentiating borderline personality from bipolar illness

ObjectiveThe differential diagnosis of bipolar illness vs. borderline personality is controversial. Both conditions manifest impulsive behavior, unstable interpersonal relationships, and mood symptoms. This study examines whether and which mood clinical features can differentiate between both conditions. MethodA total of 260 patients (mean standard deviation age 41 13 years, 68% female) attending to a mood clinic were examined for diagnosis of bipolar illness and borderline personality disorder using SCID-I, SCID-II, and clinical mood criteria extracted from Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ). They were analyzed using diagnoses as dependent variables. Predictors of bipolar and borderline diagnoses were identified by multivariable logistic regressions, and predictive validity of models was assessed using ROC curve analysis. ResultsBipolar illness was strongly predicted by elevated mood (OR = 4.02, 95% CI: 1.80-9.15), increased goal-directed activities (OR = 3.90, 95% CI: 1.73-8.96), and episodicity of mood symptoms (OR = 3.48, 95% CI 1.49-8.39). This triad model predicted bipolar illness with 88.7% sensitivity, 81.4% specificity, and obtained an auROC of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.76-0.96) and a positive predictive value of 85.1%. For borderline personality disorder, only female gender was a statistically significant predictor (OR = 3.41, 95% CI: 1.29-13.7), and the predictive model obtained an auROC of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.53-0.74). ConclusionIn a mood disorder clinic setting, manic criteria and episodic mood course distinguished bipolar illness from borderline personality disorder

Detecting mood disorder in resource-limited primary care settings: Comparison of a self-administered screening tool to general practitioner assessment

Objectives: Although efficacious treatments for mood disorders are available in primary care, under-diagnosis is associated with under-treatment and poorer outcomes. This study compares the accuracy of self-administered screening tests with routine general practitioner (GP) assessment for detection of current mood disorder. Methods: 197 consecutive patients attending primary care centres in Santiago, Chile enrolled in this cross-sectional study, filling out the Patients Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) for depression and the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) for bipolar disorder, after routine GP assessment. Diagnostic accuracy of these self-administered tools was compared with GP assessment, with gold standard diagnosis established by a structured diagnostic interview with trained clinicians (SCID-I). Results: The sample was 75% female, with a mean age of 48.5 (SD 16.8); 37% had a current mood disorder (positive SCID-I result for depression or bipolar disorder). Sensitivity of the scre