Infections up to 76 days after stroke increase disability and death

Early infection after stroke is associated with a poor outcome. We aimed to determine whether delayed infections (up to 76 days post-stroke) are associated with poor outcome at 90 days. Data came from the international Efficacy of Nitric Oxide Stroke (ENOS, ISRCTN99414122) trial. Post hoc data on infections were obtained from serious adverse events reports between 1 and 76 days following stroke in this large cohort of patients. Regression models accounting for baseline covariates were used to analyse fatalities and functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Barthel Index, Euro-Qol-5D) at 90 days, in patients with infection compared to those without infection. Of 4011 patients, 242 (6.0%) developed one or more serious infections. Infections were associated with an increased risk of death (p < 0.001) and an increased likelihood of dependency (measured by mRS) compared to those of all other patients (p < 0.001). This remained when only surviving patients were analysed, indicating that the worsening of functional outcome is not due to mortality (p < 0.001). In addition, the timing of the infection after stroke did not alter its detrimental association with fatality (p = 0.14) or functional outcome (p = 0.47). In conclusion, severe poststroke infections, whether occurring early or late after stroke, are associated with an increased risk of death and poorer functional outcome, independent of differences in baseline characteristics or treatment. Not only are strategies needed for reducing the risk of infection immediately after stroke, but also during the first 3 months following a stroke. This study is registered: ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN99414122, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT00989716

Infections up to 76 days after stroke increase disability and death

Early infection after stroke is associated with a poor outcome. We aimed to determine whether delayed infections (up to 76 days post-stroke) are associated with poor outcome at 90 days. Data came from the international Efficacy of Nitric Oxide Stroke (ENOS, ISRCTN99414122) trial. Post hoc data on infections were obtained from serious adverse events reports between 1 and 76 days following stroke in this large cohort of patients. Regression models accounting for baseline covariates were used to analyse fatalities and functional outcomes (modified Rankin Scale (mRS), Barthel Index, Euro-Qol-5D) at 90 days, in patients with infection compared to those without infection. Of 4011 patients, 242 (6.0%) developed one or more serious infections. Infections were associated with an increased risk of death (p < 0.001) and an increased likelihood of dependency (measured by mRS) compared to those of all other patients (p < 0.001). This remained when only surviving patients were analysed, indicating that the worsening of functional outcome is not due to mortality (p < 0.001). In addition, the timing of the infection after stroke did not alter its detrimental association with fatality (p = 0.14) or functional outcome (p = 0.47). In conclusion, severe post-stroke infections, whether occurring early or late after stroke, are associated with an increased risk of death and poorer functional outcome, independent of differences in baseline characteristics or treatment. Not only are strategies needed for reducing the risk of infection immediately after stroke, but also during the first 3 months following a stroke. This study is registered: ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN99414122, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT00989716

Rapid Recovery with an Effective Therapist: A Comment on Hansen, Lambert, and Vlass

The person of the therapist is a robust predictor of psychotherapy outcome (Wampold &amp; Imel, 2015). Additionally, some clients make rapid improvements, or sudden gains, in therapy and little is known about the mechanisms underlying this process. In the target article Hansen, Lambert, and Vlass (2015) explore the interaction between these two facets of psychotherapy and discuss how one therapist was able to obtain sudden gains with a high percentage of her clinical caseload. In our comment, we discuss aspects of the therapist who was the focus of the Hansen et al. that we believe contributed to her status as an effective therapist. Furthermore, we discuss the sudden gains obtained by the therapist in Hansen et al., review these improvements within the context of the larger body of evidence and suggest that both case mix as well as therapist skills played a significant role in the exceptional outcomes.&nbsp;&nbsp

Determining what works in the treatment of PTSD

Many researchers accept that trauma-focused treatments are superior to non-trauma focused treatments for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). However, Benish, Imel, and Wampold (2008) recently published a meta-analysis of clinical trials directly comparing 'bona fide' PTSD treatments that failed to reject the null hypothesis that PTSD treatments are similarly effective. They concluded that the results of previous meta-analysis may have been influenced by several confounds, including the use of control treatments, to make conclusions about the relative efficacy of specific PTSD treatments. Ehlers et al. (2010) claim that the selection procedures of the Benish et al. meta-analysis were biased and cite results from individual studies and previous meta-analyses that suggest trauma-focused psychological treatments are superior to non-trauma focused treatments. We first offer a review and justification of the coding criteria and procedure used in Benish et al. In addition, we discuss the appropriateness of utilizing treatments designed to control for non-specifics or common factors such as 'supportive therapy' for determining the relative efficacy of specific PTSD treatments. Finally, we note several additional confounds, such as therapist effects, allegiance, and alteration of legitimate protocols, in PTSD research and describe conceptual problems involved in the classification scheme used to determine the "trauma focus" of interventions, which lead to inappropriate conclusions about what works in the treatment of PTSD

Evidence-based treatments for depression and anxiety versus treatment-as-usual: a meta-analysis of direct comparisons

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the relative efficacy of evidence-based treatments (EBTs) versus treatment-as-usual (TAU) in routine care for anxiety and depression in adults. METHOD: A computerized search of studies that directly compared an EBT with a TAU was conducted. Meta-analytic methods were used to estimate effectiveness of EBTs relative to TAU and to model how various confounding variables impacted the results of this comparative research. RESULTS: A total of 14 studies were included in the final meta-analysis. There was significant heterogeneity in the TAU conditions, which ranged from unknown and/or minimal mental health treatment to psychotherapeutic interventions provided by trained professionals. Although the effect for EBT vs. TAU was significantly greater than zero, the effect for EBT vs. TAUs that were psychotherapeutic interventions was not statistically different from zero. CONCLUSIONS: Heterogeneity of TAU conditions in this meta-analysis highlight the importance of clarifying the research questions being asked when investigating and drawing conclusions from EBT-TAU comparisons. Researchers need to clarify if they are comparing an EBT to psychotherapeutic services in routine care or to minimal mental health services. Extant research on EBT versus TAU reveals that there is insufficient evidence to recommend the transportation of EBTs for anxiety and depression to routine care, particularly when the routine care involves psychotherapeutic services

In pursuit of truth: A critical examination of meta-analyses of cognitive behavior therapy

OBJECTIVE: Three recent meta-analyses have made the claim, albeit with some caveats, that cognitive-behavioral treatments (CBT) are superior to other psychotherapies, in general or for specific disorders (e.g., social phobia). METHOD: The purpose of the present article was to examine four issues in meta-analysis that mitigate claims of CBT superiority: (a) effect size, power, and statistical significance, (b) focusing on disorder-specific symptom measures and ignoring other important indicators of psychological functioning, (c) problems inherent in classifying treatments provided in primary studies into classes of treatments, and (d) the inclusion of problematic trials, which biases the results, and the exclusion of trials that fail to find differences among treatments. RESULTS: When these issues are examined, the effects demonstrating the superiority of CBT are small, nonsignificant for the most part, limited to targeted symptoms, or are due to flawed primary studies. CONCLUSION: Meta-analytic evidence for the superiority of CBT in the three meta-analysis are nonexistent or weak

The SOMATICS collaborative: Introduction to a National Institute on Drug Abuse cooperative study of pharmacotherapy for opioid treatment in criminal justice settings

Among the nearly 750,000 inmates in U.S. jails, 12% report using opioids regularly, 8% report use in the month prior to their offense, and 4% report use at the time of their offense. Although ample evidence exists that medications effectively treat Opiate Use Disorder (OUD) in the community, strong evidence is lacking in jail settings. The general lack of medications for OUD in jail settings may place persons suffering from OUD at high risk for relapse to drug use and overdose following release from jail. The three study sites in this collaborative are pooling data for secondary analyses from three open-label randomized effectiveness trials comparing: (1) the initiation of extended-release naltrexone [XR-NTX] in Sites 1 and 2 and interim methadone in Site 3 with enhanced treatment-as usual (ETAU); (2) the additional benefit of patient navigation plus medications at Sites 2 and 3 vs. medication alone vs. ETAU. Participants are adults with OUD incarcerated in jail and transitioning to the community. We describe the rationale, specific aims, and designs of three separate studies harmonized to enhance their scientific yield to investigate how to best prevent jail inmates from relapsing to opioid use and associated problems as they transition back to the community. Conducting drug abuse research during incarceration is challenging and study designs with data harmonization across different sites can increase the potential value of research to develop effective treatments for individuals in jail with OUD