Efficacy of an Algorithm-Guided Treatment Compared With Treatment as Usual A Randomized, Controlled Study of Inpatients With Depression

被引:64
作者
Bauer, Michael [1 ]
Pfennig, Andrea [1 ]
Linden, Michael [2 ]
Smolka, Michael N. [1 ]
Neu, Peter [3 ]
Adli, Mazda [3 ]
机构
[1] Tech Univ Dresden, Univ Hosp Carl Gustav Carus, Dept Psychiat & Psychotherapy, D-01307 Dresden, Germany
[2] Rehabil Ctr Seehof, Teltow, Germany
[3] Charite Univ Med Berlin, Dept Psychiat & Psychotherapy, D-13353 Berlin, Germany
关键词
depression; algorithm; treatment as usual; outcome; TREATMENT-RESISTANT DEPRESSION; STAR-ASTERISK-D; MAJOR DEPRESSION; TRANYLCYPROMINE; OUTCOMES; ANTIDEPRESSANTS; METAANALYSES; AUGMENTATION; FEASIBILITY; SENSITIVITY;
D O I
10.1097/JCP.0b013e3181ac4839
中图分类号
R9 [药学];
学科分类号
1007 ;
摘要
Objective: Medication algorithms have been proposed as effective means to offer optimal treatment and improved outcome for patients with severe mental illness. This single-center prospective study compared the efficacy and effects on treatment prescriptions of an algorithm-guided treatment regimen with treatment as usual (TAU) in depressed inpatients. Methods: Depressed inpatient participants were randomized to an algorithm-guided standardized stepwise drug treatment regimen (SSTR, n = 74) or TAU (n = 74). The SSTR regimen included sleep deprivation, antidepressant monotherapy, lithium augmentation, monoamine oxidase inhibitor therapy, or electroconvulsive therapy guided by scores oil the clinician-rated Bech-Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale. The primary outcome was time to remission (defined as a Bech-Rafaelsen Melancholia Scale score of <= 7). Secondary outcomes were remission rates, number of changes in treatment strategies (types), and the number of different prescribed medications over the treatment period. Results: Patients receiving SSTR had a significantly shorter time to remission (7.0 +/- 0.9 weeks vs 12.3 +/- 1.8 weeks for TAU). Compared with that in remitters in SSTR, the number of strategy changes was significantly higher in TAU remitters (3.0 +/- 2.7 and 1.0 +/- 1.5) and had more psychotropic medications (fix agents: 3.0 +/- 1.5 and 1.9 +/- 1.1; optional agents: 1.5 +/- 1.0 and 0.9 +/- 0.7). although more patients dropped out of the SSTR group (33 of SSTR, 12 of TAU), the probability of remission tended to be higher in SSTR. Conclusions: Algorithm-guided treatment produces better Outcomes and less frequent medication changes than TAU. A systematic, stepwise, measurement-based approach to the treatment of depressed inpatients is warranted.
引用
收藏
页码:327 / 333
页数:7
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]  
Adli M, 2003, PHARMACOPSYCHIATRY, V36, pS222
[2]   Effectiveness and feasibility of a standardized stepwise drug treatment regimen algorithm for inpatients with depressive disorders:: Results of a 2-year observational algorithm study [J].
Adli, M ;
Berghöfer, A ;
Linden, M ;
Helmchen, H ;
Müller-Oerlinghausen, B ;
Mackert, A ;
Stamm, T ;
Bauer, M .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHIATRY, 2002, 63 (09) :782-790
[3]   Safety of High-intensity Treatment with the Irreversible Monoamine Oxidase Inhibitor Tranylcypromine in Patients with Treatment-resistant Depression [J].
Adli, M. ;
Pilhatsch, M. ;
Bauer, M. ;
Koeberle, U. ;
Ricken, R. ;
Janssen, G. ;
Ulrich, S. ;
Bschor, T. .
PHARMACOPSYCHIATRY, 2008, 41 (06) :252-257
[4]   Algorithms and collaborative-care systems for depression: Are they effective and why? A systematic review [J].
Adli, Mazda ;
Bauer, Michael ;
Rush, A. John .
BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY, 2006, 59 (11) :1029-1038
[5]  
*AHCPR, 1999, EV REP TREATM DEPR N
[6]   Treatment algorithms in treatment-resistant depression [J].
Amsterdam, JD ;
HornigRohan, M .
PSYCHIATRIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1996, 19 (02) :371-+
[7]   FLUOXETINE EFFICACY IN TREATMENT-RESISTANT DEPRESSION [J].
AMSTERDAM, JD ;
MAISLIN, G ;
POTTER, L .
PROGRESS IN NEURO-PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY & BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY, 1994, 18 (02) :243-261
[8]  
[Anonymous], 1993, COMP INT DIAGN INT V
[9]  
Bauer Michael, 2002, World J Biol Psychiatry, V3, P5, DOI 10.3109/15622970209150599
[10]  
Bauer Michael, 2002, World J Biol Psychiatry, V3, P69, DOI 10.3109/15622970209150605