Coping strategies in anxious surgical patients

Multiple hierarchical regression analysis. This supplement shows a table summarizing results of the multiple hierarchical regression analysis concerning the contribution of various patient characteristics to the prediction of surgical and anaesthesia anxiety. (DOCX 39 kb

evaluating a novel online depression intervention for persons with epilepsy

Background Depression is common among persons with epilepsy (PwE), affecting roughly one in three individuals, and its presence is associated with personal suffering, impaired quality of life, and worse prognosis. Despite the availability of effective treatments, depression is often overlooked and treated inadequately in PwE, in part because of assumed concerns over drug interactions or proconvulsant effects of antidepressants. Internet- administered psychological interventions might complement antidepressant medication or psychotherapy, and preliminary evidence suggests that they can be effective. However, no trial has yet examined whether an Internet intervention designed to meet the needs of PwE can achieve sustained reductions in depression and related symptoms, such as anxiety, when offered as adjunct to treatment as usual. Methods/Design This randomized controlled trial will include 200 participants with epilepsy and a current depressive disorder, along with currently at least moderately elevated depression (Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) sum score of at least 10). Patients will be recruited via epilepsy treatment centers and other sources, including Internet forums, newspaper articles, flyers, posters, and media articles or advertisements, in German-speaking countries. Main inclusion criteria are: self-reported diagnosis of epilepsy and a depressive disorder, as assessed with a phone-administered structured diagnostic interview, none or stable antidepressant medication, no current psychotherapy, no other major psychiatric disorder, no acute suicidality. Participants will be randomly assigned to either (1) a care-as-usual/waitlist (CAU/WL) control group, in which they receive CAU and are given access to the Internet intervention after 3 months (that is, a CAU/WL control group), or (2) a treatment group that may also use CAU and in addition immediately receives six-month access to the novel, Internet-administered intervention. The primary outcome measure is the PHQ-9, collected at three months post-baseline; secondary measures include self-reported anxiety, work and social adjustment, epilepsy symptoms (including seizure frequency and severity), medication adherence, potential negative treatment effects and health-related quality of life. Measurements are collected online at pre-treatment (T0), three months (T1), six months (T2), and nine months (T3). Discussion Results of this trial are expected to extend the body of knowledge with regard to effective and efficient treatment options for PwE who experience elevated depression and anxiety. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02791724. Registered 01 June 2016

Supporting antidepressant discontinuation: the development and optimisation of a digital intervention for patients in UK primary care using a theory, evidence and person-based approach.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to develop a digital intervention to support antidepressant discontinuation in UK primary care that is scalable, accessible, safe and feasible. In this paper, we describe the development using a theory, evidence and person-based approach. DESIGN: Intervention development using a theory, evidence and person-based approach. SETTING: Primary Care in the South of England. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen participants with a range of antidepressant experience took part in 'think aloud' interviews for intervention optimisation. INTERVENTION: Our digital intervention prototype (called 'ADvisor') was developed on the basis of a planning phase consisting of qualitative and quantitative reviews, an in-depth qualitative study, the development of guiding principles and a theory-based behavioural analysis. Our optimisation phase consisted of 'think aloud' interviews where the intervention was iteratively refined. RESULTS: The qualitative systematic review and in-depth qualitative study highlighted the centrality of fear of depression relapse as a key barrier to discontinuation. The quantitative systematic review showed that psychologically informed approaches such as cognitive-behavioural therapy were associated with greater rates of discontinuation than simple advice to reduce. Following a behavioural diagnosis based on the behaviour change wheel, social cognitive theory provided a theoretical basis for the intervention. The intervention was optimised on the basis of think aloud interviews, where participants suggested they like the flexibility of the system and found it reassuring. Changes were made to the tone of the material and the structure was adjusted based on this qualitative feedback. CONCLUSIONS: 'ADvisor' is a theory, evidence and person-based digital intervention designed to support antidepressant discontinuation. The intervention was perceived as helpful and reassuring in optimisation interviews. Trials are now needed to determine the feasibility, clinical and cost-effectiveness of this approach

How does the side-effect information in patient information leaflets influence peoples’ side-effect expectations? A cross-sectional national survey of 18- to 65-year-olds in England

Objectives To establish how the terms recommended by the European Commission to describe side‐effect risk in patient information leaflets (PILs) influences expectations of side‐effects and to identify factors associated with these side‐effect expectations. Design A cross‐sectional online survey was carried out by a market research company. Setting Data were collected in England between 18th March and 1st April 2016. Participants A total of 1003 adults aged between 18 and 65. Main outcome measures: Self‐reported expectation that the described side‐effects would affect participants if they took the medicine, measured on a likelihood scale from 1 (very unlikely) to 5 (very likely). Results Participants formed high expectations of side‐effects for “very common” and “common” side‐effects, with 51.9% and 45.0% of participants rating these as “very likely” or “likely” to happen to them, respectively. This fell to 8.1% for “uncommon,” 5.8% for “rare” and 4.1% for “very rare.” For each descriptor, higher expectations of side‐effects were more associated with women or being from an ethnic minority, or having less education, a household illness, high perceived sensitivity to medicines or negative beliefs about medicines. Discussion The current use of verbal descriptors to communicate side‐effect risk in PILs leads to high side‐effect expectations. These expectations could contribute to nocebo‐induced medication side‐effects experienced by patients. Additional work is required to identify ways to improve the way risk information is conveyed in PILs

Possible alleviation of symptoms and side effects through clinicians’ nocebo information and empathy in an experimental video vignette study.

Health and self-regulatio

A Randomized Trial of Three Psychosocial Treatments for the Symptoms of Rheumatoid Arthritis

To assess and compare the benefits of three psychosocial treatments for rheumatoid arthritis

How Experiences Become Data: The Process of Eliciting Adverse Event, Medical History and Concomitant Medication Reports in Antimalarial and Antiretroviral Interaction Trials.

Accurately characterizing a drug's safety profile is essential. Trial harm and tolerability assessments rely, in part, on participants' reports of medical histories, adverse events (AEs), and concomitant medications. Optimal methods for questioning participants are unclear, but different methods giving different results can undermine meta-analyses. This study compared methods for eliciting such data and explored reasons for dissimilar participant responses. Participants from open-label antimalarial and antiretroviral interaction trials in two distinct sites (South Africa, n = 18 [all HIV positive]; Tanzania, n = 80 [86% HIV positive]) were asked about ill health and treatment use by sequential use of (1) general enquiries without reference to particular conditions, body systems or treatments, (2) checklists of potential health issues and treatments, (3) in-depth interviews. Participants' experiences of illness and treatment and their reporting behaviour were explored qualitatively, as were trial clinicians' experiences with obtaining participant reports. Outcomes were the number and nature of data by questioning method, themes from qualitative analyses and a theoretical interpretation of participants' experiences. There was an overall cumulative increase in the number of reports from general enquiry through checklists to in-depth interview; in South Africa, an additional 12 medical histories, 21 AEs and 27 medications; in Tanzania an additional 260 medical histories, 1 AE and 11 medications. Checklists and interviews facilitated recognition of health issues and treatments, and consideration of what to report. Information was sometimes not reported because participants forgot, it was considered irrelevant or insignificant, or they feared reporting. Some medicine names were not known and answers to questions were considered inferior to blood tests for detecting ill health. South African inpatient volunteers exhibited a "trial citizenship", working to achieve researchers' goals, while Tanzanian outpatients sometimes deferred responsibility for identifying items to report to trial clinicians. Questioning methods and trial contexts influence the detection of adverse events, medical histories and concomitant medications. There should be further methodological work to investigate these influences and find appropriate questioning methods

Placebo and other psychological interactions in headache treatment

We present a theory according which a headache treatment acts through a specific biological effect (when it exists), a placebo effect linked to both expectancy and repetition of its administration (conditioning), and a non-specific psychological effect. The respective part of these components varies with the treatments and the clinical situations. During antiquity, suggestions and beliefs were the mainstays of headache treatment. The word placebo appeared at the beginning of the eighteenth century. Controversies about its effect came from an excessive interpretation due to methodological bias, inadequate consideration of the variation of the measure (regression to the mean) and of the natural course of the disease. Several powerful studies on placebo effect showed that the nature of the treatment, the associated announce, the patients’ expectancy, and the repetition of the procedures are of paramount importance. The placebo expectancy is associated with an activation of pre-frontal, anterior cingular, accumbens, and periacqueducal grey opioidergic neurons possibly triggered by the dopaminergic meso-limbic system. In randomized control trials, several arms design could theoretically give information concerning the respective part of the different component of the outcome and control the natural course of the disease. However, for migraine and tension type headache attacks treatment, no three arm (verum, placebo, and natural course) trial is available in the literature. Indirect evidence of a placebo effect in migraine attack treatment, comes from the high amplitude of the improvement observed in the placebo arms (28% of the patients). This figure is lower (6%) when using the harder criterium of pain free at 2 h. But these data disregard the effect of the natural course. For prophylactic treatment with oral medication, the trials performed in the last decades report an improvement in 21% of the patients in the placebo arms. However, in these studies the duration of administration was limited, the control of attacks uncertain as well as the evolution of the co-morbid psycho-pathology. Considering the reviews and meta-analysis of complex prophylactic procedures, it must be concluded that their effect is mostly linked to a placebo and non-specific psychological effects. Acupuncture may have a slight specific effect on tension type headache, but not on migraine. Manual therapy studies do not exhibit difference between manipulation, mobilization, and controls; touch has no proven specific effect. A comprehensive efficacy review of biofeedback studies concludes to a small specific effect on tension type headache but not on migraine. A review of behavioral treatment conclude to an interesting mean improvement but did not demonstrated a specific effect with the exception of a four arm study including a pseudo meditation control group. Expectation-linked placebo, conditioning, and non-specific psychological effects vary according clinical situations and psychological context; likely low in RCT, high after anempathic medical contact, and at its maximum with a desired charismatic healer. The announcements of doctors strongly influence the beliefs of patients, and in consequence their pain and anxiety sensibilities; this modulates the amplitude of the placebo and the non-specific psychological effects and is therefore a major determinant of the therapeutic success. Furthermore, any repetitive contact, even through a placebo, may interfere positively with the psychopathological co-morbidity. One has to keep in mind that the non-specific psychological interactions play a major role in the improvement of the majority of the headache sufferers

Reference programme: Diagnosis and treatment of headache disorders and facial pain. Danish Headache Society, 2nd Edition, 2012

Headache and facial pain are among the most common, disabling and costly disorders in Europe. Correct diagnosis and treatment is important for achieving a high quality of care. As a national organisation whose role is to educate and advocate for the needs of patients with primary headaches, the Danish Headache Society has set up a task force to develop a set of guidelines for the diagnosis, organisation and treatment of the most common types of headaches and for trigeminal neuralgia in Denmark. The guideline was published in Danish in 2010 and has been a great success. The Danish Headache Society decided to translate and publish our guideline in English to stimulate the discussion on optimal organisation and treatment of headache disorders and to encourage other national headache authorities to produce their own guidelines. The recommendations regarding the most common primary headaches and trigeminal neuralgia are largely in accordance with the European guidelines produced by the European Federation of Neurological Societies. The guideline provides a practical tool for use in daily clinical practice for primary care physicians, neurologists with a common interest in headache, as well as other health-care professionals treating headache patients. The guideline first describes how to examine and diagnose the headache patient and how headache treatment is organised in Denmark. This description is followed by individual sections on the characteristics, diagnosis, differential diagnosis and treatment of each of the major headache disorders and trigeminal neuralgia. The guideline includes many tables to facilitate a quick overview. Finally, the particular problems regarding headache in children and headache in relation to female hormones and pregnancy are described