Randomised controlled trials in psychiatry: important but poorly accepted

Morita therapy for anxiety disorders in adults

BACKGROUND

Morita therapy, first proposed in 1919, is a systematic psychological therapy for anxiety disorders that is based on eastern philosophy. It is mainly used as an alternative therapy for anxiety disorders in Asian countries such as Japan and China. Varying foci of treatment outcomes have been reported. To date, there has been no systematic review to investigate the strength of evidence for Morita therapy in anxiety disorders.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of Morita therapy compared with pharmacological therapy, other psychological therapy, no intervention or wait list for anxiety disorders in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group's Specialised Register (CCDANCTR, which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from MEDLINE (1950 to date), EMBASE (1974 to date) and PsycINFO (1967 to date)), Dissertation Abstracts International (DAI) and four main Chinese medical databases (Chongqing VIP Database, Wanfang Database, China Hospital Knowledge Database, China Biology Medicine disc) as described in the protocol of this review to December 2014. Furthermore, we extended our search in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) and the Sagace, a web-based search engine for biomedical databases in Japan. We applied no date or language restrictions. We contacted experts in the field for supplemental data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all relevant randomised controlled trials comparing Morita therapy with any other treatment in the treatment of anxiety disorders.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data. For homogenous dichotomous data, we calculated fixed-effect risk ratios (RR), 95% confidence intervals (CI) and, where appropriate, numbers needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated fixed-effect standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

We found seven small Chinese studies (449 participants), six of which provided useable data for meta-analysis. No study compared Morita therapy with an inactive control. Unclear randomisation methods, lack of blinding and low quality reporting of outcomes were common in the included studies. We graded the overall risk of bias as high and the quality of the evidence as very low.Two social phobia studies (75 outpatients) directly compared Morita therapy with pharmacological therapy. In this comparison, the pooled RR of global state was 1.85 (95% CI 1.27 to 2.69) and the NNTB was 3 (95% CI 2 to 5), indicating a significant difference between groups favouring Morita therapy in the short term (up to 12 weeks' post-treatment). Data regarding drop-outs was insufficient and no description of adverse effects was provided. We graded the quality of the evidence for this comparison as very low, mainly due to high risk of bias in the studies and insufficient information in the results.Four studies (288 inpatients) investigated the effect of Morita therapy plus pharmacological therapy versus pharmacological therapy alone, three studies for the treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) (228 participants) and one study for generalised anxiety disorder (60 participants). One of the OCD studies reported incomplete data of global state while the outcome of global state was missing in the other three studies. There was no significant difference between groups for drop-outs for any reason in two OCD studies in the short term (RR 1.76, 95% CI 0.47 to 6.67; I(2) = 44%). Information pertaining to drop-outs for adverse effects was unclear. We rated the risk of bias of this comparison as high. We graded the quality of the evidence as very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base on Morita therapy for anxiety disorders was limited. All studies included in this review were conducted in China, and the results may not be applicable to Western countries. These included studies were small, provided insufficient information about drop-outs and adverse effects, and contained considerable risk of bias. Therefore, we graded the evidence as very low quality and were unable to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of Morita therapy in the treatment of anxiety disorders. Well-designed future studies that employ adequate allocation concealment, recruit large sample sizes, report drop-outs and adverse effects, and report outcomes clearly and consistently are needed to establish the effectiveness of Morita therapy for anxiety disorders.

Psychological treatment of anxiety in primary care: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Guidelines and mental healthcare models suggest the use of psychological treatment for anxiety disorders in primary care but systematic estimates of the effect sizes in primary care settings are lacking. The aim of this study was to examine the effectiveness of psychological therapies in primary care for anxiety disorders.

METHOD

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO and Pubmed databases were searched in July 2010. Manuscripts describing psychological treatment for anxiety disorders/increased level of anxiety symptoms in primary care were included if the research design was a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and if the psychological treatment was compared with a control group.

RESULTS

In total, 1343 abstracts were identified. Of these, 12 manuscripts described an RCT comparing psychological treatment for anxiety with a control group in primary care. The pooled standardized effect size (12 comparisons) for reduced symptoms of anxiety at post-intervention was d = 0.57 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.84, p = 0.00, the number needed to treat (NNT) = 3.18]. Heterogeneity was significant among the studies (I 2 = 58.55, Q = 26.54, p < 0.01). The quality of studies was not optimal and missing aspects are summarized.

CONCLUSIONS

We found a moderate effect size for the psychological treatment of anxiety disorders in primary care. Several aspects of the treatment are related to effect size. More studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effects given the chronicity and recurrent nature of anxiety.

Use of quetiapine XR and quetiapine IR in clinical practice for hospitalized patients with schizophrenia: a retrospective study

Quetiapine fumarate, a first-line treatment for schizophrenia, exists in two formulations: extended release (XR) and immediate release (IR). This naturalistic, noninterventional study evaluated use of quetiapine XR/IR among in-patients with schizophrenia [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01214135]. Data were collected from medical records. Categorical and numerical outcomes were compared using χ(2) and t tests. Of 178 enrolled patients, 66% and 34% used quetiapine XR and IR respectively. Based on mean daily dose, XR was used as antipsychotic medication in 64% of patients compared with 40% of patients on IR (dose ≥ 400 mg/day; p = 0.002) and in higher doses than IR (494 versus 345 mg/day; p = 0.001; calculated averages). Schizophrenia was more commonly reported as reason for use of XR than IR (20% versus 0%; p = 0.0003). Patients with comorbid substance abuse or somatic disease were more likely to receive XR (p = 0.003; p = 0.03). Treatment cessation due to nonadherence was less common in patients on XR (3.4% versus 12%; p = 0.03). Polypharmacy was seen in 98% of patients. Quetiapine XR/IR usage varies in hospitalized patients with schizophrenia. XR is more often used in antipsychotic dosage; IR is more commonly used at lower doses as add-on therapy. Both quetiapine XR and IR have their place in clinical practice and provide treatment choice in schizophrenia.

Stepped care treatment for depression and anxiety in primary care. a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Depressive and anxiety disorders are common in general practice but not always treated adequately. Introducing stepped care might improve this. In this randomized trial we examined the effectiveness of such a stepped care model.

METHODS

The study population consisted of primary care attendees aged 18-65 years with minor or major DSM-IV depressive and/or anxiety disorders, recruited through screening. We randomized 120 patients to either stepped care or care as usual. The stepped care program consisted of (1) watchful waiting, (2) guided self-help, (3) short face-to-face problem solving treatment and (4) pharmacotherapy and/or specialized mental health care. Patients were assessed at baseline and after 8, 16 and 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Symptoms of depression and anxiety decreased significantly over time for both groups. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups (IDS: P = 0.35 and HADS: P = 0.64). The largest, but not significant, effect (d = -0.21) was found for anxiety on T3. In both groups approximately 48% of the patients were recovered from their DSM-IV diagnosis at the final 6 months assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

In summary we could not demonstrate that stepped care for depression and anxiety in general practice was more effective than care as usual. Possible reasons are discussed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trails: ISRCTN17831610.

Appraising evidence for intervention effectiveness in early psychosis: conceptual framework and review of evaluation approaches

The literature that is relevant to evaluation of treatment effectiveness is large, scattered and difficult to assemble for appraisal. This scoping review first develops a conceptual framework to help organize the field, and second, uses the framework to appraise early psychosis intervention (EPI) studies. Literature searches were used to identify representative study designs, which were then sorted according to evaluation approach. The groupings provided a conceptual framework upon which a map of the field could be drawn. Key words were cross-checked against definitions in dictionaries of scientific terms and the National Library of Medicine Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) browser. Using the final list of key words as search terms, the EPI evaluation literature was appraised. Experimental studies could be grouped into two classes: efficacy and effectiveness randomized controlled trials. Non-experimental studies could be subgrouped into at least four overlapping categories: clinical epidemiological; health service evaluations; quality assurance studies; and, quasi-experimental assessments of treatment effects. Applying this framework to appraise EPI studies indicated promising evidence for the effectiveness of EPI irrespective of study design type, and a clearer picture of where future evaluation efforts should be focused. Reliance on clinical trials alone will restrict the type of information that can inform clinical practice. There is convergent evidence for the benefits of specialized EPI service functions across a range of study designs. Greater investment in health services research and quality assurance approaches in evaluating EPI effectiveness should be made, which will involve scaling up of study sizes and development of an EPI programme fidelity rating template. The degree of complexity of the evaluation field suggests that greater focus on research methodology in the training of Australasian psychiatrists is urgently needed.

Stepped care for depression and anxiety: from primary care to specialized mental health care: a randomised controlled trial testing the effectiveness of a stepped care program among primary care patients with mood or anxiety disorders

BACKGROUND

Mood and anxiety disorders are highly prevalent and have a large impact on the lives of the affected individuals. Therefore, optimal treatment of these disorders is highly important. In this study we will examine the effectiveness of a stepped care program for primary care patients with mood and anxiety disorders. A stepped care program is characterized by different treatment steps that are arranged in order of increasing intensity.

METHODS

This study is a randomised controlled trial with two conditions: stepped care and care as usual, whereby the latter forms the control group. The stepped care program consists of four evidence based interventions: (1) Watchful waiting, (2) Guided self-help, (3) Problem Solving Treatment and (4) Medication and/or specialized mental health care. The study population consists of primary care attendees aged 18-65 years. Screeners are sent to all patients of the participating general practitioners. Individuals with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental disorders (DSM) diagnosis of major depression, dysthymia, panic disorder (with or without agoraphobia), generalized anxiety disorder, or social phobia are included as well as individuals with minor depression and anxiety disorders. Primary focus is the reduction of depressive and anxiety symptoms. Both conditions are monitored at 8, 16 and 24 weeks.

DISCUSSION

This study evaluates the effectiveness of a stepped care program for patients with depressive and anxiety disorder. If effective, a stepped care program can form a worthwhile alternative for care as usual. Strengths and limitations of this study are discussed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trails: ISRCTN17831610.

Improving the quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery: the way forward

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery, to identify factors associated with good reporting quality, and to assess the awareness of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement and ascertain the views of authors reporting randomized controlled trials on the difficulties in conducting randomized controlled trials and the possible ways to further improve the reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials of cardiothoracic surgery published in principal cardiothoracic and 4 general medical journals in 2003 were included. The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials was assessed by using allocation concealment, the Jadad score, and a Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials checklist devised for the purpose. A questionnaire survey of authors reporting randomized controlled trials in principal cardiothoracic journals in 2003 was conducted.

RESULTS

The overall reporting quality of the 64 randomized controlled trials included in the analysis was suboptimal as assessed by the 3 methods adopted. Most of the authors (63.5%) were not aware of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement; however, awareness was not associated with reporting quality. More than 65% of the authors responded that conducting randomized controlled trials in surgical specialties was difficult, and the main difficulties were blinding and obtaining a large-enough sample size to detect statistically significant differences. Fifty-four percent of the authors responded that endorsement of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement by the cardiothoracic journals may improve the reporting quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of reporting randomized controlled trials in cardiothoracic surgery is suboptimal. Endorsement of the Consolidated Standards for Reporting of Trials statement by the cardiothoracic journals may improve the quality of reporting.

Restoring wisdom to the practice of psychiatry

OBJECTIVE

While psychiatry is an exciting and rewarding discipline of medicine, the practice of psychiatry has become increasingly simplistic. This address seeks to identify some of the influences that underlie this phenomenon.

CONCLUSIONS

The influences include an increased demand for services and pressure on beds, the sway of the pharmaceutical industry with a biological approach being promulgated, excessive managerial constraints with an emphasis on efficiency versus effectiveness, and the acceptance of DSM diagnostic categories of uncertain validity. I argue that we need to rediscover a more wise approach to psychiatric practice. We have to insist upon changes to our training such that trainees are encouraged to get to know their patients and understand them from a biopsychosocial perspective. As a profession, we have to insist on proper care for our patients and work with managers and bureaucrats to ensure that the management of our patients is centred on quality of care and effectiveness over and above efficiency.

Changes in early psychosis service provision: a file audit

OBJECTIVE

To measure change in services provided to young people with first-episode psychosis following the introduction of specialized early psychosis teams and staff training.

METHOD

A standardized tool was developed to audit services provided to young people with first-episode psychosis. The tool initially comprised 27 clinical indicators measuring aspects of optimal care derived from the Australian clinical guidelines for early psychosis. The first 12 months of treatment, as documented in the case records, were audited for all young people receiving their first treatment for psychosis during a 6-month period prior to the introduction of these service developments (n = 47). These subjects were compared with those who received treatment after the implementation of service development strategies (n = 70). A comparison was also made within the second group, between those receiving some treatment from a specialized early psychosis team and those being exclusively treated by other services.

RESULTS

Inter-rater reliability was achieved for 24 of the 27 indicators. Improvements were found on 10 indicators which measured psychosocial interventions, prescribing practices, family interventions and continuity of care. There was no significant deterioration on any of the indicators. Clients who attended early psychosis teams were significantly more likely to receive psychoeducation.

CONCLUSIONS

The services increased their provision of "guideline concordant" care for early psychosis. The audit proved useful to monitor performance, to demonstrate improvements in care and to identify those areas of service provision and documentation in need of improvement.

Utilising survey data to inform public policy: comparison of the cost-effectiveness of treatment of ten mental disorders

BACKGROUND

Mental health survey data are now being used proactively to decide how the burden of disease might best be reduced.

AIMS

To study the cost-effectiveness of current and optimal treatments for mental disorders and the proportion of burden avertable by each.

METHOD

Data for three affective, four anxiety and two alcohol use disorders and for schizophrenia were compared interms of cost, burden averted and efficiency of current and optimal treatment. We then calculated the burden unavertable given current knowledge. The unit of health gain was a reduction in the years lived with disability (YLDs).

RESULTS

Summing across all disorders, current treatment averted 13% of the burden, at an average cost of 30,000 Australian dollars per YLD gained. Optimal treatment at current coverage could avert 20% of the burden, at an average cost of 18,000 Australian dollars per YLD gained. Optimal treatment at optimal coverage could avert 28% of the burden, at 16,000 Australian dollars per YLD gained. Sixty per cent of the burden of mental disorders was deemed to be unavertable.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficiency of treatment varied more than tenfold across disorders. Although coverage of some of the more efficient treatments should be extended, other factors justify continued use of less-efficient treatments for some disorders.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation for treating depression

BACKGROUND

Transcranial magnetic stimulation can either excite or inhibit cortical areas of the brain, depending on whether the speed of the repetitive stimulation is applied at high or low frequencies. It has been used for physiological studies and it has also been proposed as a treatment for depression.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical efficacy and safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation for treating depression.

SEARCH STRATEGY

An electronic search was performed including the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Neurosis and Anxiety Review Group trials register (last searched June, 2001), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Issue 2, 2001), MEDLINE (1966-2001), EMBASE (1974-2001), PsycLIT (1980-2001), and bibliographies from reviewed articles. Unpublished data and grey literature were searched through personal communications with researchers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials assessing the therapeutic efficacy and safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation for depression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

All reviewers independently extracted the information and verified it by cross-checking. Disagreements were resolved through discussion. Continuous data: When similar studies were grouped, the overall standardised mean difference was calculated under a fixed effect model weighted by the inverse variance method with 95% confidence intervals. (In the presence of statistical heterogeneity, a random effects model was to be used.)

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen trials were included in the review and fourteen contained data in a suitable form for quantitative analysis. Most comparisons did not show differences between rTMS and other interventions. No difference was seen between rTMS and sham TMS using the Beck Depression Inventory or the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, except for one time period (after two weeks of treatment) for left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and high frequency; and also for right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and low frequency, both in favour of rTMS and both using the Hamilton scale. Comparison of rTMS (left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and high frequency) with electroconvulsive therapy showed no difference except for psychotic patients after two weeks treatment, using the Hamilton scale, which indicated that electroconvulsive therapy was more effective than rTMS.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

The information in this review suggests that there is no strong evidence for benefit from using transcranial magnetic stimulation to treat depression, although the small sample sizes do not exclude the possibility of benefit.

Placebos, placebo effect, and the response to the healing situation: the evolution of a concept

In spite of its impressive progress, medicine has been strongly criticized for relying on its modern biomedical tradition to the neglect of the psychosocial aspects of health. This neglect may account for patients' dissatisfaction and eventual use of alternative health approaches. The concept of placebo has sustained dramatic "protean" metamorphoses through the ages. For centuries, placebos have been regarded as powerful deceptive therapies. From the middle of the twentieth century, however, conventional medicine has used placebos as methodologic tools to distinguish the specific from the nonspecific ingredients in treatments. In modern medical research, the double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial has been established as the gold standard for the assessment of any new treatment. Recently a new trend regarding placebos seems to have emerged. The placebo and other nonspecific effects elicited by the "healing situation" have been independently subjected to scientific study. Progress in this area may promote useful clinical applications, enabling physicians to broaden their perspectives on the healing process. We present the historical changes of the concept of placebo and the ethical issues raised by their use.

Shortfall in mental health service utilisation

BACKGROUND

Treatment coverage for mental disorders is poor in most developed countries.

AIMS

To explore some reasons for the poor treatment coverage for mental disorders in developed countries.

METHOD

Data were taken from Australian national surveys and from the World Health Report.

RESULTS

Only one-third of people with a mental disorder consulted. Probability of consulting varied by diagnosis: 90% for schizophrenia, which is accounted for by external factors; 60% for depression; and 15% for substance use and personality disorders. The probability of consulting varied by gender, age, marital status and disability, from 73% among women aged 25-54 years, disabled and once married to 9% among males without these risk factors. Those who did not consult but were disabled or comorbid said that they "preferred to manage themselves". Data from five countries showed no evidence that overall health expenditure, out-of-pocket cost or responsiveness of the health system affected the overall consulting rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Societal, attitudinal and diagnostic variables account for the variation. Funding does not. Public education about the recognition and treatment of mental disorders and the provision of effective treatment by providers might remedy the shortfall.

Is the randomized clinical trial the gold standard of research?

All research has flaws. Some flaws are so trivial that the research can still stand as the definitive study. Other flaws prevent a study from being definitive, but the study still provides useful guidance in the context of other research. Some flaws are so serious that the research provides no useful information at all. The tricky part is not finding flaws in the research but in deciding to what extent the flaws erode the credibility of the research. In general, the use of RCTs can add substantial credibility to a research study. There are calls for greater use of RCTs in many areas, such as surgery (Baum, 1999) and psychiatry (Andrews, 1999). Of course, nonrandomized trials are an important complement to RCTs when the latter are ethically inappropriate or logistically impossible (Black, 1996). Failure to use randomization or blinding, however, is not a fatal flaw. Furthermore, the artificial nature of RCTs will often restrict their applicability to overly simple interventions. When RCTs focus on narrow patient groups or exclude important segments of the population, there may be difficulty in generalizing their results. So it would be a mistake to label the RCT as a gold standard for all research. A silver standard may be a more appropriate label.