Negative cognitive schema modification as mediator of symptom improvement after electroconvulsive therapy in major depressive disorder

Background: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a potent option for treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (MDD). Cognitive models of depression posit that negative cognitions and underlying all-or-nothing negative schemas contribute to and perpetuate depressed mood. This study investigates whether ECT can modify negative schemas, potentially via memory reactivation, and whether such changes are related to MDD symptom improvement. Method: Seventy-two patients were randomized to either an emotional memory reactivation electroconvulsive therapy (EMR-ECT) or control memory reactivation electroconvulsive therapy (CMR-ECT) intervention prior to ECT-sessions in a randomized controlled trail. Emotional memories associated with patients' depression were reactivated before ECT-sessions. At baseline and after the ECT-course, negative schemas and depression severity were assessed using the Dysfunctional Attitude Scale (DAS) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale HDRS. Mediation analyses were used to examine whether the effects of ECT on HDRS-scores were mediated by changes in DAS-scores or vice versa. Results: Post-ECT DAS-scores were significantly lower compared to baseline. Post-ECT, the mean HDRS-score of the whole sample (15.10 ± 8.65 [SD]; n = 59) was lower compared to baseline (24.83 ± 5.91 [SD]). Multiple regression analysis showed no significant influence of memory reactivation on schema improvement. Path analysis showed that depression improvement was mediated by improvement of negative cognitive schemas. Conclusion: ECT is associated with improvement of negative schemas, which appears to mediate the improvement of depressive symptoms. An emotional memory intervention aimed to modify negative schemas showed no additional effect

Effectiveness of Emotional Memory Reactivation vs Control Memory Reactivation Before Electroconvulsive Therapy in Adult Patients With Depressive Disorder A Randomized Clinical Trial:A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance: Although electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is often effective, approximately half of patients with depression undergoing ECT do not benefit sufficiently, and relapse rates are high. ECT sessions have been shown to weaken reactivated memories. The effect of emotional memory retrieval on cognitive schemas remains unknown. Objective: To assess whether emotional memory retrieval just before patients receive ECT sessions weakens underlying cognitive schemas, improves ECT effectiveness, increases ECT response, and reduces relapse rates. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this multicenter randomized clinical trial conducted from 2014 to 2018 in the departments of psychiatry in 3 hospitals in the Netherlands, 72 participants were randomized 1:1 to 2 parallel groups to receive either emotional memory reactivation (EMR-ECT) or control memory reactivation (CMR-ECT) interventions before ECT sessions. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS [total score range: 0-52, with 0-7 indicating no depression and ≥24 indicating severe depression]) was used to measure symptoms of depression during and after ECT, with a 6-month follow-up period. Participants were between ages 18 and 70 years with a primary diagnosis of unipolar major depressive disorder (MDD) according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (Fourth Edition, Text Revision) and in whom ECT was indicated. Data analysis was performed from July to November 2019. Interventions: EMR-ECT or CMR-ECT interventions prior to ECT sessions. Main Outcomes and Measures: Depression scores and relapse rates within 6 months were assessed with the HDRS and analyzed using logistic and linear multiple regression analyses. Results: A total of 66 patients (mean [SD] age, 49.3 [12.3] years; 39 [59.1%] women) were randomized to the EMR-ECT group (n = 32) or the CMR-ECT group (n = 34). Regardless of the memory intervention, 42.4% (28 of 66) of patients responded (≥50% decrease of symptom severity on the HDRS). Of patients who responded, 39.3% (11 of 28) relapsed within 6 months. Remission rates (CMR-ECT group, 29.4% [10 of 34] vs EMR-ECT group, 25.0% [8 of 32]; P = .58), mean (SD) HDRS scores after the ECT course (CMR-ECT group, 14.6 [8.6] vs EMR-ECT group, 14.9 [8.8]; P = .88), total mean (SD) number of required ECT sessions for response (CMR-ECT group, 14.9 [7.9] vs EMR-ECT group, 15.6 [7.3]; P = .39), and relapse rates (CMR-ECT group, 46.7% [7 of 15] vs EMR-ECT group, 30.8% [4 of 13]; P = .33) were not significantly altered by the intervention. Conclusions and Relevance: Study findings suggest that the EMR-ECT intervention just before patient receipt of ECT for depression did not improve effectiveness, increase speed of response, or reduce relapse rates after the ECT course compared with patients receiving CMR-ECT. Trial Registration: Trialregister.nl Identifier: NL4289

Antidepressants are frequently prescribed but still critized; a perspective on causes and solutions

BACKGROUND: From around 1980, antidepressants (ad) have increasingly been prescribed, for longer periods of time, especially selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (ssris). Paradoxically, their effectiveness is still doubted, especially outside the psychiatric profession.&lt;br/&gt; AIM: To explain increase and offer a perspective on causes and solutions, and to indicate how to reach consensus.&lt;br/&gt; METHOD: Position paper with critical analysis and synthesis of relevant literature.&lt;br/&gt; RESULTS: The rise in AD prescriptions results from: 1. increased safety and ease of prescribing, 2. increased presentation and recognition of depression in primary care, 3. extension of indication criteria, 4. effective marketing strategies, and 5. effectiveness in acute phase (aad) and of relapse/recurrence prevention in continuation/maintenance phases (coad).Critics point to: 1. low added value of aad relative to placebo, 2. many drop-outs and non-responders, 3. relapse/recurrence prevention with coad works only for responders to aad, 4. relapse/recurrence after AD discontinuation often involves withdrawal symptoms, and 5. publication bias, selective reporting, selective patient selection, and suboptimal blinding, resulting in overestimated effectiveness and underestimated disadvantages.Factors that keep fueling the controversy are: 1. critics stress the net effectiveness of AD whereas proponents point at gross effectiveness which includes spontaneous recovery and placebo effect; 2. persistence of distrust in industry-funded rcts; 3. ideological positions, reinforced by conflicts of interest and selective citations; 4. lack of rcts with relevant long-term outcome measurements.&lt;br/&gt; CONCLUSION: Although consensus is difficult to achieve given the ideological component, there are options. Three factors are critically important: confer to establish which data convince the opposition, response prediction (what works for whom), and rcts with long-term functional outcomes.</p

Most Antidepressant Use in Primary Care Is Justified; Results of the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety

BACKGROUND: Depression is a common illness, often treated in primary care. Many studies have reported undertreatment with antidepressants in primary care. Recently, some studies also reported overtreatment with antidepressants. The present study was designed to assess whether treatment with antidepressants in primary care is in accordance with current guidelines, with a special focus on overtreatment. METHODOLOGY: We used baseline data of primary care respondents from the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA) (n = 1610). Seventy-nine patients with treatment in secondary care were excluded. We assessed justification for treatment with antidepressant according to the Dutch primary care guidelines for depression and for anxiety disorders. Use of antidepressants was based on drug-container inspection or, if unavailable, on self-report. Results were recalculated to the original population of primary care patients from which the participants in NESDA were selected (n = 10,677). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Of 1531 included primary care patients, 199 (13%) used an antidepressant, of whom 188 (94.5%) (possibly) justified. After recalculating these numbers to the original population (n = 10,677), we found 908 (95% CI 823 to 994) antidepressant users. Forty-nine (95% CI 20 to 78) of them (5.4%) had no current justification for an antidepressant, but 27 of them (54.5%) had a justified reason for an antidepressant at some earlier point in their life. CONCLUSIONS: We found that overtreatment with antidepressants in primary care is not a frequent problem. Too long continuation of treatment seems to explain the largest proportion of overtreatment as opposed to inappropriate initiation of treatment