A Systematic Literature Review with Meta-Analyses of Within- and Between-Day Differences in Objectively Measured Physical Activity in School-Aged Children

Background: Targeting specific time periods of the day or week may enhance physical activity (PA) interventions in youth. The most prudent time segments to target are currently unclear.  Objectives: To systematically review the literature describing differences in young people’s objectively measured PA on weekdays vs. weekends, in school vs. out of school, weekends vs. out of school and lesson time vs. break time.  Methods: Electronic databases were searched for English-language, cross-sectional studies of school-aged children (4–18 years) reporting time-segment-specific accelerometer-measured PA from 01/1990 to 01/2013. We meta-analysed standardised mean differences (SMD) between time segments for mean accelerometer counts per minute (TPA) and minutes in moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA). SMD is reported in units of standard deviation; 0.2, 0.5 and 0.8 represent small, moderate and large effects. Heterogeneity was explored using meta-regression (potential effect modifiers: age, sex and study setting).  Results: Of the 54 included studies, 37 were eligible for meta-analyses. Children were more active on weekdays than weekends [pooled SMD (95 % CI) TPA 0.14 (0.08; 0.20), MVPA 0.42 (0.35; 0.49)]. On school days, TPA was lower in school than out of school; however, marginally more MVPA was accumulated in school [TPA −0.24 (−0.40; −0.08), MVPA 0.17 (−0.03; 0.38)]. TPA was slightly lower on weekends than out of school on school days, but a greater absolute volume of MVPA was performed on weekends [TPA −0.10 (−0.19; −0.01), MVPA 1.02 (0.82; 1.23)]. Heterogeneity between studies was high (I2 73.3–96.3 %), with 20.3–53.1 % of variance between studies attributable to potential moderating factors.  Conclusions: School-aged children are more active on weekdays than weekend days. The outcome measure influences the conclusions for other comparisons. Findings support the tailoring of intervention strategies to specific time periods

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy versus Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy in the outpatient treatment of depression: a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Previous research has shown that Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy (SPSP) is an effective alternative to pharmacotherapy and combined treatment (SPSP and pharmacotherapy) in the treatment of depressed outpatients. The question remains, however, how Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy compares with other established psychotherapy methods. The present study compares Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy to the evidence-based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in terms of acceptability, feasibility, and efficacy in the outpatient treatment of depression. Moreover, this study aims to identify clinical predictors that can distinguish patients who may benefit from either of these treatments in particular. This article outlines the study protocol. The results of the study, which is being currently carried out, will be presented as soon as they are available.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Adult outpatients with a main diagnosis of major depressive disorder or depressive disorder not otherwise specified according to DSM-IV criteria and mild to severe depressive symptoms (<it>Hamilton Depression Rating Scale </it>score ≥ 14) are randomly allocated to Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy or Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Both treatments are individual psychotherapies consisting of 16 sessions within 22 weeks. Assessments take place at baseline (week 0), during the treatment period (week 5 and 10) and at treatment termination (week 22). In addition, a follow-up assessment takes place one year after treatment start (week 52). Primary outcome measures are the number of patients refusing treatment (acceptability); the number of patients terminating treatment prematurely (feasibility); and the severity of depressive symptoms (efficacy) according to an independent rater, the clinician and the patient. Secondary outcome measures include general psychopathology, general psychotherapy outcome, pain, health-related quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Clinical predictors of treatment outcome include demographic variables, psychiatric symptoms, cognitive and psychological patient characteristics and the quality of the therapeutic relationship.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study evaluates Short Psychodynamic Supportive Psychotherapy as a treatment for depressed outpatients by comparing it to the established evidence-based treatment Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Specific strengths of this study include its strong external validity and the clinical relevance of its research aims. Limitations of the study are discussed.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trails ISRCTN31263312</p

Variation in diabetes care by age: opportunities for customization of care

BACKGROUND: The quality of diabetes care provided to older adults has usually been judged to be poor, but few data provide direct comparison to other age groups. In this study, we hypothesized that adults age 65 and over receive lower quality diabetes care than adults age 45–64 years old. METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of members of a health plan cared for by multiple medical groups in Minnesota. Study subjects were a random sample of 1109 adults age 45 and over with an established diagnosis of diabetes using a diabetes identification method with estimated sensitivity 0.91 and positive predictive value 0.94. Survey data (response rate 86.2%) and administrative databases were used to assess diabetes severity, glycemic control, quality of life, microvascular and macrovascular risks and complications, preventive care, utilization, and perceptions of diabetes. RESULTS: Compared to those aged 45–64 years (N = 627), those 65 and older (N = 482) had better glycemic control, better health-related behaviors, and perceived less adverse impacts of diabetes on their quality of life despite longer duration of diabetes and a prevalence of cardiovascular disease twice that of younger patients. Older patients did not ascribe heart disease to their diabetes. Younger adults often had explanatory models of diabetes that interfere with effective and aggressive care, and accessed care less frequently. Overall, only 37% of patients were simultaneously up-to-date on eye exams, foot exams, and glycated hemoglobin (A1c) tests within one year. CONCLUSION: These data demonstrate the need for further improvement in diabetes care for all patients, and suggest that customisation of care based on age and explanatory models of diabetes may be an improvement strategy that merits further evaluation

Preventing mood and anxiety disorders in youth: a multi-centre RCT in the high risk offspring of depressed and anxious patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Anxiety and mood disorders are highly prevalent and pose a huge burden on patients. Their offspring is at increased risk of developing these disorders as well, indicating a clear need for prevention of psychopathology in this group. Given high comorbidity and non-specificity of intergenerational transmission of disorders, prevention programs should target both anxiety and depression. Further, while the indication for preventive interventions is often elevated symptoms, offspring with other high risk profiles may also benefit from resilience-based prevention programs.</p> <p>Method/design</p> <p>The current STERK-study (Screening and Training: Enhancing Resilience in Kids) is a randomized controlled clinical trial combining selected and indicated prevention: it is targeted at both high risk individuals without symptoms and at those with subsyndromal symptoms. Individuals without symptoms meet two of three criteria of the High Risk Index (HRI; female gender, both parents affected, history of a parental suicide (attempt). This index was developed in an earlier study and corresponds with elevated risk in offspring of depressed patients. Children aged 8–17 years (n = 204) with subthreshold symptoms or meeting the criteria on the HRI are randomised to one of two treatment conditions, namely (a) 10 weekly individual child CBT sessions and 2 parent sessions or (b) minimal information. Assessments are held at pre-test, post-test and at 12 and 24 months follow-up. Primary outcome is the time to onset of a mood or anxiety disorder in the offspring. Secondary outcome measures include number of days with depression or anxiety, child and parent symptom levels, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Based on models of aetiology of mood and anxiety disorders as well as mechanisms of change during interventions, we selected potential mediators and moderators of treatment outcome, namely coping, parent–child interaction, self-associations, optimism/pessimism, temperament, and emotion processing.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The current intervention trial aims to significantly reduce the risk of intergenerational transmission of mood and anxiety disorders with a short and well targeted intervention that is directed at strengthening the resilience in potentially vulnerable children. We plan to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of such an intervention and to identify mechanisms of change.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>NTR2888</p

Excessive substance use in bipolar disorder is associated with impaired functioning rather than clinical characteristics, a descriptive study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is a strong association between bipolar disorder (BD) and substance use disorder (SUD). The clinical and functional correlates of SUD in BD are still unclear and little is known about the role of excessive substance use that does not meet SUD criteria. Thus, the aims of the current study were to investigate lifetime rates of illicit substance use in BD relative to the normal population and if there are differences in clinical and functional features between BD patients with and without excessive substance use.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>125 consecutively recruited BD in- and outpatients from the Oslo University Hospitals and 327 persons randomly drawn from the population in Oslo, Norway participated. Clinical and functional variables were assessed. Excessive substance use was defined as DSM-IV SUD and/or excessive use according to predefined criteria.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The rate of lifetime illicit substance use was significantly higher among patients compared to the reference population (OR = 3.03, CI = 1.9-4.8, p < .001). Patients with excessive substance use (45% of total) had poorer educational level, occupational status, GAF-scores and medication compliance, with a trend towards higher suicidality rates, compared to patients without. There were no significant group differences in current symptom levels or disease course between groups.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The percentage of patients with BD that had tried illicit substances was significantly higher than in the normal population. BD patients with excessive substance use clearly had impaired functioning, but not a worse course of illness compared to patients without excessive substance use. An assessment of substance use beyond SUD criteria in BD is clinically relevant.</p

Association between Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors and the Risk of Hospitalization or Death among Patients with Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Disease and COVID-19

Importance: Although tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors are widely prescribed globally because of their ability to ameliorate shared immune pathways across immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs), the impact of COVID-19 among individuals with IMIDs who are receiving TNF inhibitors remains insufficiently understood. Objective: To examine the association between the receipt of TNF inhibitor monotherapy and the risk of COVID-19-associated hospitalization or death compared with other commonly prescribed immunomodulatory treatment regimens among adult patients with IMIDs. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study was a pooled analysis of data from 3 international COVID-19 registries comprising individuals with rheumatic diseases, inflammatory bowel disease, and psoriasis from March 12, 2020, to February 1, 2021. Clinicians directly reported COVID-19 outcomes as well as demographic and clinical characteristics of individuals with IMIDs and confirmed or suspected COVID-19 using online data entry portals. Adults (age ≥18 years) with a diagnosis of inflammatory arthritis, inflammatory bowel disease, or psoriasis were included. Exposures: Treatment exposure categories included TNF inhibitor monotherapy (reference treatment), TNF inhibitors in combination with methotrexate therapy, TNF inhibitors in combination with azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine therapy, methotrexate monotherapy, azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine monotherapy, and Janus kinase (Jak) inhibitor monotherapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was COVID-19-associated hospitalization or death. Registry-level analyses and a pooled analysis of data across the 3 registries were conducted using multilevel multivariable logistic regression models, adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics and accounting for country, calendar month, and registry-level correlations. Results: A total of 6077 patients from 74 countries were included in the analyses; of those, 3215 individuals (52.9%) were from Europe, 3563 individuals (58.6%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 48.8 (16.5) years. The most common IMID diagnoses were rheumatoid arthritis (2146 patients [35.3%]) and Crohn disease (1537 patients [25.3%]). A total of 1297 patients (21.3%) were hospitalized, and 189 patients (3.1%) died. In the pooled analysis, compared with patients who received TNF inhibitor monotherapy, higher odds of hospitalization or death were observed among those who received a TNF inhibitor in combination with azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine therapy (odds ratio [OR], 1.74; 95% CI, 1.17-2.58; P =.006), azathioprine/6-mercaptopurine monotherapy (OR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.30-2.61; P =.001), methotrexate monotherapy (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.57-2.56; P <.001), and Jak inhibitor monotherapy (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.21-2.73; P =.004) but not among those who received a TNF inhibitor in combination with methotrexate therapy (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.85-1.63; P =.33). Similar findings were obtained in analyses that accounted for potential reporting bias and sensitivity analyses that excluded patients with a COVID-19 diagnosis based on symptoms alone. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, TNF inhibitor monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes compared with other commonly prescribed immunomodulatory treatment regimens among individuals with IMIDs