Maintenance N-acetyl cysteine treatment for bipolar disorder : a double-blind randomised placebo controlled trial

Background N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) is a glutathione precursor that has been shown to have antidepressant efficacy in a placebo-controlled trial. The current study aimed to investigate the maintenance effects of NAC following eight weeks of open-label treatment for bipolar disorder.Method The efficacy of a double blind randomized placebo controlled trial of 2 g/day NAC as adjunct maintenance treatment for bipolar disorder was examined. Participants (n = 149) had a Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Score of [greater than or equal to]12 at trial entry and, after eight weeks of open-label NAC treatment, were randomized to adjunctive NAC or placebo, in addition to treatment as usual. Participants (primarily outpatients) were recruited through public and private services and through newspaper advertisements. Time to intervention for a mood episode was the primary endpoint of the study, and changes in mood symptoms, functionality and quality of life measures were secondary outcomes.Results There was a substantial decrease in symptoms during the eight-week open-label NAC treatment phase. During the subsequent double-blind phase, there was minimal further change in outcome measures with scores remaining low. Consequently, from this low plateau, between-group differences did not emerge on recurrence, clinical functioning or quality of life measures.Conclusions There were no significant between-group differences in recurrence or symptomatic outcomes during the maintenance phase of the trial; however, these findings may be confounded by limitations. Trial Registration The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12607000074493)

COVID-19 vaccination acceptance and hesitancy among healthcare workers in germany

Vaccination hesitancy is a threat to herd immunity. Healthcare workers (HCWs) play a key role in promoting Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination in the general population. We therefore aimed to provide data on COVID-19 vaccination acceptance/hesitancy among German HCWs. For this exploratory, cross-sectional study, an online survey was conducted in February 2021. The survey included 54 items on demographics; previous vaccination behavior; trust in vaccines, physicians, the pharmaceutical industry and health politics; fear of adverse effects; assumptions regarding the consequences of COVID-19; knowledge about vaccines; and information seeking behavior. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated and chi-square tests were performed. Four thousand five hundred surveys were analyzed. The overall vaccination acceptance was 91.7%. The age group ≤20 years showed the lowest vaccination acceptance. Factors associated with vaccination hesitancy were lack of trust in authorities and pharmaceutical companies. Attitudes among acquaintances were associated with vaccination hesitancy too. Participants with vaccination hesitancy more often obtained information about COVID-19 vaccines via messenger services or online video platforms and underperformed in the knowledge test. We found high acceptance amongst German HCWs. Several factors associated with vaccination hesitancy were identified which could be targeted in HCW vaccination campaigns

The efficacy of adjunctive N-Acetylcysteine in major depressive disorder: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Objective: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is one of the most common psychiatric disorders, conferring considerable individual, family, and community burden. To date, treatments for MDD have been derived from the monoamine hypothesis, and there is a paucity of emerging antidepressants, especially with novel mechanisms of action and treatment targets. N-acetylcysteine (NAC) is a redox-active glutathione precursor that decreases inflammatory cytokines, modulates glutamate, promotes neurogenesis, and decreases apoptosis, all of which contribute to the neurobiology of depression. Method: Participants with a current episode of MDD diagnosed according to DSM-IV-TR criteria (N = 252) were treated with NAC or placebo in addition to treatment as usual for 12 weeks and were followed to 16 weeks. Data were collected between 2007 and 2011. Results: The omnibus interaction between group and visit for the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the primary outcome measure, was not significant (F₁,₅₂₀.₉ = 1.98, P = .067), and the groups did not separate at week 12 (t₃₆₀.₃ = -1.12, P = .265). However, at week 12, the scores on the Longitudinal Interval Follow-Up Evaluation-Range of Impaired Functioning Tool (LIFE-RIFT) differed from placebo (P = .03). Among participants with a MADRS score >/- 25, NAC separated from placebo at weeks 6, 8, 12, and 16 (P < .05). Additionally, the rate of change between baseline and week 16 was significant (t₂₂₁.₀₃ = -2.11, P = .036). NAC treatment was superior to placebo at week 16 for secondary readouts of function and clinical impression. Remission and response were greater in the NAC group at week 16, but not at week 12. The NAC group had a greater rate of gastrointestinal and musculoskeletal adverse events. Conclusions: Being negative at the week 12 end point, and with some positive secondary signals, the study provides only limited support for the role of NAC as a novel adjunctive therapy for MDD. These data implicate the pathways influenced by NAC in depression pathogenesis, principally oxidative and inflammatory stress and glutamate, although definitive confirmation remains necessary.Michael Berk, Olivia M. Dean, Sue M.Cotton, Susan Jeavons, Michelle Tanious, Kristy Kohlmann, Karen Hewitt, Kirsteen Moss, Christine Allwang, Ian Schapkaitz, Jenny Robbins, Heidi Cobb, Felicity Ng, Seetal Dodd, Ashley I. Bush, Gin S. Malh

Depression screening using patient-targeted feedback in general practices: study protocol of the German multicentre GET.FEEDBACK.GP randomised controlled trial

Introduction Approximately one out of six patients in primary care suffers from depression, which often remains undetected. Evidence regarding the efficacy of depression screening in primary care, however, is inconsistent. A previous single-centre randomised controlled trial (RCT) in cardiac patients, the DEPSCREEN-INFO trial, provided the first evidence that written feedback to patients following a positive depression screening reduces depression severity and leads to more comprehensive patient engagement in mental healthcare. To amplify these effects, the feedback should be tailored according to patients’ needs and preferences. The GET.FEEDBACK.GP RCT will test the efficacy of this patient-targeted feedback intervention in primary care.Methods and analysis The multicentre three-arm GET.FEEDBACK.GP RCT aims to recruit a total of 1074 primary care patients from North, East and South Germany. Patients will be screened for depression using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9). In the case of a positive depression screening result (PHQ-9 score ≥10), the participant will be randomised into one of three groups to either receive (a) patient-targeted and general practitioner (GP)-targeted feedback regarding the depression screening results, (b) only GP-targeted feedback or (c) no feedback. Patients will be followed over a period of 12 months. The primary outcome is depression severity (PHQ-9) 6 months after screening. Secondary outcomes include patient engagement in mental healthcare, professional depression care and cost-effectiveness. According to a statistical analysis plan, the primary endpoint of all randomised patients will be analysed regarding the intention-to-treat principle.Ethics and dissemination The Ethics Committee of the Hamburg Medical Association approved the study. A clinical trial company will ensure data safety, monitoring and supervision. The multicentre GET.FEEDBACK.GP RCT is the first trial in primary care that tests the efficacy of a patient-targeted feedback intervention as an adjunct to depression screening. Its results have the potential to influence future depression guidelines and will be disseminated in scientific as well as patient-friendly language.Trial registration number NCT03988985

Maintenance N-acetyl cysteine treatment for bipolar disorder : a double-blind randomized placebo controlled trial

Background: N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) is a glutathione precursor that has been shown to have antidepressant efficacy in a placebo-controlled trial. The current study aimed to investigate the maintenance effects of NAC following eight weeks of open-label treatment for bipolar disorder. Method: The efficacy of a double blind randomized placebo controlled trial of 2 g/day NAC as adjunct maintenance treatment for bipolar disorder was examined. Participants (n = 149) had a Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Score of ≥12 at trial entry and, after eight weeks of open-label NAC treatment, were randomized to adjunctive NAC or placebo, in addition to treatment as usual. Participants (primarily outpatients) were recruited through public and private services and through newspaper advertisements. Time to intervention for a mood episode was the primary endpoint of the study, and changes in mood symptoms, functionality and quality of life measures were secondary outcomes. Results: There was a substantial decrease in symptoms during the eight-week open-label NAC treatment phase. During the subsequent double-blind phase, there was minimal further change in outcome measures with scores remaining low. Consequently, from this low plateau, between-group differences did not emerge on recurrence, clinical functioning or quality of life measures. Conclusions: There were no significant between-group differences in recurrence or symptomatic outcomes during the maintenance phase of the trial; however, these findings may be confounded by limitations. Trial Registration: The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12607000074493)

COVID-19 Vaccines: Fear of Side Effects among German Health Care Workers

(1) Background: Health care workers (HCWs) play a key role in increasing anti-COVID vaccination rates. Fear of potential side effects is one of the main reasons for vaccine hesitancy. We investigated which side effects are of concern to HCWs and how these are associated with vaccine hesitancy. (2) Methods: Data were collected in an online survey in February 2021 among HCWs from across Germany with 4500 included participants. Free-text comments on previously experienced vaccination side effects, and fear of short- and long-term side effects of the COVID-19 vaccination were categorized and analyzed. (3) Results: Most feared short-term side effects were vaccination reactions, allergic reactions, and limitations in daily life. Most feared long-term side effects were (auto-) immune reactions, neurological side effects, and currently unknown long-term consequences. Concerns about serious vaccination side effects were associated with vaccination refusal. There was a clear association between refusal of COVID-19 vaccination in one&rsquo;s personal environment and fear of side effects. (4) Conclusions: Transparent information about vaccine side effects is needed, especially for HCW. Especially when the participants&rsquo; acquaintances advised against vaccination, they were significantly more likely to fear side effects. Thus, further education of HCW is necessary to achieve good information transfer in clusters as well