North of England evidence-based guideline development project: summary version of guidelines for the choice of antidepressants for depression in primary care. North of England Anti-depressant Guideline Development Group

Advances in psychiatric treatment in primary care

Following ground-breaking work by Shepherd et al (1966) and, more recently, Goldberg & Huxley (1992), primary care is now recognised as the arena in which most contact occurs between the National Health Service (NHS) and people with mental health problems. General practitioners (GPs) remain the first, and in many cases the only, health professionals involved in the management of a whole range of conditions, from common anxiety and depressive disorders to severe and enduring mental illnesses.

Efficacy of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the prevention of relapse of depression: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Depression is a chronic illness that generally requires lifelong therapy. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a noninvasive technique with few side effects that has been reported to be useful in the treatment of depression. However, no studies to date have evaluated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) the efficacy of rTMS for maintenance treatment of depression.

METHODS/DESIGN

In this article, we report the design and protocol of a randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter study in China to evaluate the efficacy of rTMS in the prevention of relapse of depressive symptoms. In total, 540 patients, aged 18 to 60 years, diagnosed with depression and experiencing an acute exacerbation of depressive symptoms, will be enrolled. The study will consist of four phases: a screening/tolerability phase of up to 7 days; an open-label, flexible-dose lead-in phase of 8 weeks; an open-label, fixed-dose stabilization phase of 6 weeks; and a single-blind relapse prevention phase of 12 months. During the open-label phase, all patients will be treated with venlafaxine. Remitters with Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D₁₇) score ≤7 will be eligible to enter the single-blind phase and will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: group 1 on active rTMS and venlafaxine; group 2 on sham rTMS and venlafaxine; and group 3 on venlafaxine alone. Efficacy will be evaluated during the study using relapse assessment (time between subject randomization to treatment and the first occurrence of relapse). Secondary outcome measures will include: symptom changes, measured by the HAM-D₁₇; illness severity changes, measured by the Clinical Global Impression of Severity for Depression (CGI-S-DEP); and changes in subject functioning, assessed with the Personal and Social Performance (PSP)scale. Safety will be assessed throughout the study by monitoring of adverse events, clinical laboratory tests, electrocardiography (ECG), and measurements of vital signs (temperature, pulse, and blood pressure) and weight. Suicidality will be assessed by the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS).

DISCUSSION

The result of this trial will assess the efficacy of rTMS in the prevention of relapse of symptoms of depression by determining whether rTMS in combination with an antidepressant is more efficacious than the antidepressant alone for maintenance of the clinical response.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01516931.

Cost-effectiveness comparisons between antidepressant treatments in depression: evidence from database analyses and prospective studies

BACKGROUND

Knowledge regarding the relative cost-effectiveness of different antidepressants is crucial for the planning of depression treatment. However, there have been only a small number of reviews of such evidence and synthesizing economic evidence across studies is methodologically challenging. In particular, there have been few reviews of the methods employed in database analyses (studies that use data from real-world practice).

METHODS

Published economic evaluations based on database analyses were systematically reviewed to compare antidepressant treatments in depression. Prospective studies of cost-effectiveness were also reviewed to highlight unanswered questions through comparisons between these two different study designs.

RESULTS

Forty papers met the criteria and were included. A relatively large number of industry-sponsored evaluations of escitalopram were identified and these found escitalopram to be potentially cost-effective in depression treatment. Evidence of cost-effectiveness differences between other individual SSRIs was not unequivocally established. Inconsistent findings further emerged concerning the cost-effectiveness of SSRIs versus TCAs between retrospective database analyses and prospective studies.

LIMITATIONS

Different outcome measures and cost perspectives make it difficult to make comparisons across studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of different antidepressants in depression continues to accumulate. Beyond the efficacy or tolerability data found for newer antidepressants in controlled trials, further research from real-world settings is needed to examine the relative cost-effectiveness of different antidepressant agents.

Attitudes and adjustment to the parental role in mothers following treatment for postnatal depression

BACKGROUND

Few intervention studies of postnatal depression (PND) have evaluated accompanying changes in parenting, in spite of mounting evidence that exposure to chronic depression is detrimental to infant development. This study examined maternal attitudes and adjustment over the first postnatal year within a treatment trial. The aim was to examine whether maternal adjustment improved with earlier remission, and with combined medical and psychological treatment.

METHODS

As part of a multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled trial of treatment for PND, mothers completed a measure of maternal adjustment and attitudes and the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale at an initial home visit (week 0) and three follow-ups (weeks 4, 18 and 44).

RESULTS

Maternal attitudes and adjustment improved with PND remission; earlier remission conferred no additional benefit by 44-week follow-up. In line with previous studies, no particular treatment modality (antidepressant or health-visitor delivered non-directive counselling), or combination of treatments, was more effective for improving adjustment to parenthood. However, the earlier start of antidepressant treatment provided a short-term advantage for improving attitudes and reducing perceived stress.

LIMITATIONS

As a result of the study's pragmatic trial design, there was high treatment non-compliance and no 'pure' control group. More depressed mothers may have been less likely to complete the maternal adjustment and attitudes measure.

CONCLUSIONS

Effective treatment of PND is important not only for the mother's wellbeing but also for healthy adjustment to parenthood. Provision of treatment choice and early antidepressant treatment are suggested for optimising maternal attitudes and adjustment.

Is untargeted educational outreach visiting delivered by pharmaceutical advisers effective in primary care? A pragmatic randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is increasing evidence that clinical guidelines can lead to improvements in clinical care. However, they are not self-implementing. While educational outreach visits may improve prescribing behaviour, the effectiveness of routine delivery of these visits by existing pharmaceutical advisers is unknown.

METHODS

Within a pragmatic randomized controlled trial, involving all general practices in two primary care trusts (PCTs), routine methods were used to distribute guidelines for the choice of antidepressants for the management of depression. Intervention practices were offered two visits (most accepted only one) by their PCT pharmaceutical adviser who had been trained in the techniques of outreach visiting. Intervention practices were visited regardless of whether they had prior problems with prescribing ('untargeted' visits). The intervention was evaluated using level three prescribing analysis and cost (PACT) data for antidepressant drugs for the six months during which the intervention was delivered and the subsequent twelve months.

RESULTS

Across the 72 study practices there was no significant impact of the intervention on usage of any group of antidepressant drugs.

CONCLUSION

The routine use of untargeted educational outreach visiting delivered by existing pharmaceutical advisers may not be a worthwhile strategy.

WITHDRAWN: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus other antidepressants for depression

BACKGROUND

The relatively new class of antidepressant, the selective serotonin reputake inhibitors (SSRIs), may be better tolerated than the older tricyclic antidepressants. This review compares the efficacy of SSRIs with other antidepressants.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the relative efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) compared to other antidepressants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The search strategy included a search of (a) Electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE); (b) reference lists of related reviews (c) reference lists of all located studies (d) contact with the manufacturer and (e) the Cochrane Group register of controlled trials

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors with other kinds of antidepressants in the treatment of patients with depressive disorders. The outcome measures assessed included measures of the severity of depression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were collected from each study the main outcome measurefrom each study. These included: mean Hamilton depression rating scale, mean Montgomery & Asberg depression rating scale, Clinical Global Impression rating scale. An analysis of standardised mean difference of these scales was performed using Review Manager 3.1 software. The presence of heterogeneity of treatment effect was assessed

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-eight trials contributed data to the analysis of the relative efficacy of SSRIs and related drugs with comparator antidepressants (Figure 3 & Appendix 3). Analysis of efficacy was based upon 5044 patients treated with an SSRI or related drug, and 4510 treated with an alternative antidepressant. The standardised effect size for SSRIs and related drugs together versus alternative antidepressants using a fixed effects model was 0.035 (95% CI -0.006 to 0.076; Q = 149.25, df = 97, p < 0.001).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are no clinically significant differences in effectiveness between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants. Treatment decisions need to be based on considerations of relative patient acceptability, toxicity and cost.

Trends in antidepressant overdoses

BACKGROUND

Debate continues about antidepressants and suicide. However, there are few recent nation-wide data about antidepressant overdoses. The purpose of this study was to describe United States trends from 1983 through 2003 in antidepressant overdoses as well as trends in health care utilization and mortality.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the American Association of Poison Control Centers' (AAPPC) Toxic Exposure Surveillance System (TESS), the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) of emergency departments, and the National Hospital Discharge Survey(NHDS).

RESULTS

Antidepressant overdose reports rose dramatically in the United States (from 0.61 per 10,000 population in 1983 to 3.26 per 10,000 population in 2003) chiefly due to the rise in selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) ingestion. However, fatalities per antidepressant overdose report declined from 73 per 10,000 reported ingestions to 32 per 10,000 ingestions. Tricyclic antidepressant (TCA) overdoses had higher rates of hospitalization (78.7 vs. 64.7% hospitalized) and much higher fatality rates than did SSRI overdose reports (0.73 vs. 0.14% mortality). If the 55,977 SSRI overdoses in 2003 had represented TCA overdoses, then (other things being equal) approximately 410 fatalities would have been expected but only 106 people died. Emergency department visits associated with antidepressant overdose increased along with all emergency department visits. Hospitalization associated with antidepressant overdose increased in the early 1980s but then reached a plateau while overall hospitalizations declined.

CONCLUSIONS

The dramatic rise in United States antidepressant overdoses has not been reflected in antidepressant overdose fatalities nor in hospitalizations. If the marked increase in antidepressant overdoses in the United States had involved TCAs rather than SSRIs, then there would have been roughly 300 excess deaths annually.

Escitalopram: a review of its use in the management of major depressive disorder

Escitalopram (Cipralex, Lexapro), the active S-enantiomer of the racemic selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) citalopram (RS-citalopram), is a highly selective inhibitor of the serotonin transporter protein. It possesses a rapid onset of antidepressant activity, and is an effective and generally well tolerated treatment for moderate-to-severe major depressive disorder (MDD). Pooled analyses from an extensive clinical trial database suggest that escitalopram is consistently more effective than citalopram in moderate-to-severe MDD. Preliminary studies suggest that escitalopram is as effective as other SSRIs and the extended-release (XR) formulation of the serotonin/noradrenaline (norepinephrine) reuptake inhibitor venlafaxine, and may have cost-effectiveness and cost-utility advantages. However, additional longer-term, comparative studies evaluating specific efficacy, tolerability, health-related quality of life and economic indices would be helpful in definitively positioning escitalopram relative to these other agents in the treatment of MDD. Nevertheless, available clinical and pharmacoeconomic data indicate that escitalopram is an effective first-line option in the management of patients with MDD.

SSRIs and cognitive performance in a working sample

BACKGROUND

Studies of the impact of antidepressant use on cognitive performance have frequently been carried out among the elderly or on healthy volunteers. Comparatively little research has considered their impact on a relatively young, working population, particularly within the context of everyday life.

AIMS

To examine any association between SSRI use and cognitive performance, mood and human error at work.

METHODS

SSRI users and controls completed a battery of laboratory based computer tasks measuring mood and cognitive function pre- and post-work at the start and end of a working week. They also completed daily diaries reporting their work performance.

RESULTS

SSRI use was associated with memory impairment: specifically poorer episodic, though not working or semantic memory. Effects of SSRI use on recognition memory seemed to vary according to the underlying psychopathology, while effects on delayed recall were most pronounced among those whose symptoms had not (yet) resolved. There were no detrimental effects on psychomotor speed, attention, mood or perceived human error at work.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings lend support to the SSRIs comparative safety, even among workers, particularly as the symptoms of the underlying psychopathology are successfully addressed. Possible memory impairments may, however, be found in those taking SSRIs.

Psychotropic medication use and accidents, injuries and cognitive failures

BACKGROUND

Psychotropic medication has the potential to impair psychomotor and cognitive function, and several medications have well documented links to increased accident and injury susceptibility. Those developed more recently have many fewer side effects. However, there is little work examining any association between psychotropic medication use and safety within the context of other demographic, health and lifestyle factors.

AIMS

To examine and compare any associations between psychotropic medication use (including benzodiazepines, tricyclics and SSRIs) and accidents, injuries and cognitive failures in a community sample.

METHODS

A postal questionnaire survey was conducted among people selected at random from the electoral registers of Cardiff and Merthyr Tydfil.

RESULTS

Psychotropic medication use was associated with accidents, injuries and cognitive failures, particularly among those who already had higher levels of other risk factors and/or continuing mental health problems.

CONCLUSIONS

The well established associations between accidents and injuries and older psychotropic medications were replicated. SSRIs, however, were relatively safer. The study also highlighted the need to consider any effect of psychotropic medication within the context of both mental health status and other factors.

Early Intervention for Adolescent Substance Abuse: Pretreatment to Posttreatment Outcomes of a Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Multidimensional Family Therapy and Peer Group Treatment

This randomized clinical trial evaluated a family-based therapy and a peer group therapy with 80 urban, low-income, and ethnically diverse young adolescents (11 to 15 years) referred for substance abuse and behavioral problems. Both treatments were outpatient, relatively brief, manual-guided, equal in intervention dose, and delivered by community drug treatment therapists. Adolescents and their parents were assessed at intake to treatment, randomly assigned to either MDFT or group therapy, and reassessed at six weeks after intake and at discharge. Results indicated that the family-based treatment (MDFT, an intervention that targets teen and parent functioning within and across multiple systems on a variety of risk and protective factors) was significantly more effective than peer group therapy in reducing risk and promoting protective processes in the individual, family, peer, and school domains, as well as in reducing substance use over the course of treatment. These results, which add to the body of previous findings about the clinical and cost effectiveness of MDFT, support the clinical effectiveness and dissemination potential of this family-based, multisystem and developmentally-oriented intervention.

Escitalopram : a review of its use in the management of major depressive and anxiety disorders

Escitalopram is the therapeutically active S-enantiomer of RS-citalopram, a commonly prescribed SSRI. The R-enantiomer is essentially pharmacologically inactive. Escitalopram 10 or 20 mg/day produced significantly greater improvements in standard measurements of antidepressant effect (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS], Clinical Global Impressions Improvement and Severity scales [CGI-I and CGI-S] and Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D]) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) than placebo in several 8-week, placebo-controlled, randomised, double-blind, multicentre studies. Symptom improvement was rapid, with some parameters improving within 1-2 weeks of starting escitalopram treatment. In addition, escitalopram showed earlier and clearer separation from placebo than RS-citalopram, at one-quarter to half the dosage, in 8-week, placebo-controlled trials; had significantly better efficacy than RS-citalopram in a subgroup of patients with moderate MDD in a 24-week trial; and produced sustained response and remission significantly faster than venlafaxine extended release in patients with MDD. Escitalopram reduced relapse rate compared with placebo and increased the percentage of patients in remission in long-term trials (up to 52 weeks). Consistently significant improvements for all efficacy parameters were also observed in patients with generalised anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder and panic disorder treated with escitalopram for 8-12 weeks in individual, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind investigations. The good tolerability profile of escitalopram is predictable and similar to that of RS-citalopram. Such adverse events as nausea, ejaculatory problems, diarrhoea and insomnia are expected but, with the exception of ejaculatory problems and nausea, which is mild and transient, these were generally no more frequent than with placebo in fully published clinical trials. No adverse events not previously seen in acute trials were reported with long-term use.

CONCLUSIONS

Escitalopram, the S-enantiomer of RS-citalopram, is a highly selective inhibitor for the serotonin transporter, ameliorates depressive symptoms in patients with MDD at half the RS-citalopram dosage, has a rapid onset of symptom improvement and has a predictable tolerability profile of generally mild adverse events. Like RS-citalopram, escitalopram is expected to have a low propensity for drug interactions, a potential benefit in the management of patients with comorbidities. In combination, these properties place escitalopram, like other SSRIs, as first-line therapy in patients with MDD. Escitalopram is indicated for use in patients with panic disorder in Europe and, should further evidence confirm early findings that escitalopram reduces anxiety, the drug may well find an additional role in the management of anxiety disorders.

Major depressive disorder in the general hospital: adaptation of clinical practice guidelines

Major Depressive Disorder is particularly frequent among physically ill inpatients. Despite the considerable human burden and financial costs, Major Depressive Disorder remains under-detected and under-treated. To improve this situation, clinical practice guidelines for the management of Major Depressive Disorder were developed for patients in the general hospital. They were adapted from existing good quality guidelines. A literature search has been conducted to identify guidelines and systematic reviews about the management of Major Depressive Disorder. The quality of the existing guidelines was evaluated by means of the AGREE instrument (Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation). Complementary literature searches were necessary to answer questions such as "depression and physical illness" or "antidepressants and somatic medication". The guidelines were discussed by a multidisciplinary internal panel. The final version was reviewed by an external panel. This paper presents the development process and a summary of these guidelines for the management of Major Depressive Disorder. The adaptation of good quality guidelines to local needs requires much time, effort and skills. Easier ways for the adaptation and use of high quality guidelines at the local level may result from better coordination, organization and updating of guidelines at a national or supranational level.

Economic evaluation of antidepressive agents: a systematic critique of experimental and observational studies

The purpose of this study was to examine whether experimental and observational pharmacoeconomic analyses of antidepressant drugs support the choice of one of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or newer antidepressants as first-line treatment for patients with major depression. We systematically reviewed economic evaluations of two or more antidepressants completed in clinical practice. A systematic electronic search yielded 38 studies meeting the inclusion criteria, of which 23 were administrative database analyses, 12 were observational studies, and 3 were randomized clinical trials. Experimental data indicated that tricyclic antidepressants are equivalent to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in terms of total expenditure. While the database analyses are susceptible to bias and confounding variables, they provided an added dimension based on observations from everyday clinical practice. The majority of these studies failed to show any significant difference. Taken together, available pharmacoeconomic studies indicate that tricyclic drugs and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have similar cost effectiveness in the health care systems where these comparisons have been made.

Clinical databases of patients receiving antidepressants. The missing link between research and practice?

BACKGROUND

In the last 10 years the use of antidepressants has increased drastically. Unfortunately, the epidemiology of these compounds has shown significant gaps between recommendations derived from randomised controlled trials and current clinical practice.

METHODS

We argue for the need to develop and maintain clinical databases of patients receiving antidepressants as a way of bridging this situation.

RESULTS

In addition to experimental data generated in selected patients and settings, observational databases of large cohorts of typical patients, followed in typical settings, should be developed and maintained. Clinical databases could collect information on patient social and demographic characteristics, clinical symptoms, diagnosis and pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments. In addition, they can provide accurate estimates of probabilities of different outcomes and on factors that affect outcome.

CONCLUSION

Clinical databases should not be seen as another expensive administrative task for busy doctors. Clinical databases should be developed, organised and utilised only by clinicians who are interested in monitoring their clinical practice and want to provide patients, relatives and the public with information on prognosis and outcome in their specific context of care. Maintaining clinical databases is a routine process, nested in everyday clinical activity, which aims at constituting a permanent link between research and practice.

Efficacy and tolerability of venlafaxine compared with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and other antidepressants: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In individual studies and limited meta-analyses venlafaxine has been reported to be more effective than comparator antidepressants, particularly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs).

AIMS

To perform a systematic review of all such studies.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic review of double-blind, randomised trials comparing venlafaxine with alternative antidepressants in the treatment of depression. The primary outcome was the difference in final depression rating scale value, expressed as a standardised effect size. Secondary outcomes were response rate, remission rate and tolerability.

RESULTS

A total of 32 randomised trials were included. Venlafaxine was more effective than other antidepressants (standardised effect size was -0.14, 95% Cl -0.07 to -0.22). A similar significant advantage was found against SSRIs (20 studies) but not tricyclic antidepressants (7 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Venlafaxine has greater efficacy than SSRIs although there is uncertainty in comparison with other antidepressants. Further studies are required to determine the clinical importance of this finding.

Paroxetine: an update of its use in psychiatric disorders in adults

Paroxetine is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), with antidepressant and anxiolytic activity. In 6- to 24-week well designed trials, oral paroxetine 10 to 50 mg/day was significantly more effective than placebo, at least as effective as tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and as effective as other SSRIs and other antidepressants in the treatment of major depressive disorder. Relapse or recurrence over 1 year after the initial response was significantly lower with paroxetine 10 to 50 mg/day than with placebo and similar to that with imipramine 50 to 275 mg/day. The efficacy of paroxetine 10 to 40 mg/day was similar to that of TCAs and fluoxetine 20 to 60 mg/day in 6- to 12-week trials in patients aged > or =60 years with major depression. Paroxetine 10 to 40 mg/day improved depressive symptoms to an extent similar to that of TCAs in patients with comorbid illness, and was more effective than placebo in the treatment of dysthymia and minor depression. Paroxetine 20 to 60 mg/day was more effective than placebo after 8 to 12 weeks' treatment of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), panic disorder, social anxiety disorder (social phobia), generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Improvement was maintained or relapse was prevented for 24 weeks to 1 year in patients with OCD, panic disorder, social anxiety disorder or GAD. The efficacy of paroxetine was similar to that of other SSRIs in patients with OCD and panic disorder and similar to that of imipramine but greater than that of 2'chlordesmethyldiazepam in patients with GAD. Paroxetine is generally well tolerated in adults, elderly individuals and patients with comorbid illness, with a tolerability profile similar to that of other SSRIs. The most common adverse events with paroxetine were nausea, sexual dysfunction, somnolence, asthenia, headache, constipation, dizziness, sweating, tremor and decreased appetite. In conclusion, paroxetine, in common with other SSRIs, is generally better tolerated than TCAs and is a first-line treatment option for major depressive disorder, dysthymia or minor depression. Like other SSRIs, paroxetine is also an appropriate first-line therapy for OCD, panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, GAD and PTSD. Notably, paroxetine is the only SSRI currently approved for the treatment of social anxiety disorder and GAD, which makes it the only drug of its class indicated for all five anxiety disorders in addition to major depressive disorder. Thus, given the high degree of psychiatric comorbidity of depression and anxiety, paroxetine is an important first-line option for the treatment of major depressive disorder, OCD, panic disorder, social anxiety disorder, GAD and PTSD.

Psychotropic drug use in Italy, 1984-99: the impact of a change in reimbursement status

After years of corruption surrounding drug reimbursement, in 1994, a change in drug reimbursement status was implemented in Italy according to cost-effectiveness criteria. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of these changes on the use of psychotropic drugs. National trends in antipsychotic, antidepressant and benzodiazepine prescriptions were analysed from 1984 to 1999. During the study period, prescriptions of antipsychotic drugs were stable from 1984 to 1994 but, in the subsequent 5 years, increased by 54%. Although the use of atypical compounds in 1999 accounted for only 6% of total antipsychotics sold, the cost of these new drugs accounted for almost one-half the total antipsychotic expenditure. The use of benzodiazepines increased by 53%. In 1999, the psychotropic drugs lorazepam and alprazolam were the most sold by value. From 1984 to 1999, the total antidepressants sold increased by 55%. Although the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and newer antidepressants in 1999 accounted for less than 50% of total antidepressants sold, the cost of these drugs accounted for 65% of total antidepressant expenditure. This analysis highlights specific areas of concern which should become the object of public health programs.

Amitriptyline v. the rest: still the leading antidepressant after 40 years of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Tricyclic antidepressants have similar efficacy and slightly lower tolerability than selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). However, there are no systematic reviews assessing amitriptyline, the reference tricyclic drug, v. other tricyclics and SSRIs directly.

AIMS

To review the tolerability and efficacy of amitriptyline in the management of depression.

METHOD

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing amitriptyline with other tricyclics/heterocyclics or with an SSRI.

RESULTS

We reviewed 186 RCTs. The overall estimate of the efficacy of amitriptyline revealed a standardised mean difference of 0.147 (95% CI 0.05-0.243), significantly favouring amitriptyline. The overall OR for dropping out was 0.99 (95% CI 0.91-1.08) and that for side-effects was 0.62 (95% CI 0.54-0.70), favouring the control drugs. With drop-outs included as treatment failures, the estimate of the effectiveness of amitriptyline v. tricyclics/heterocyclics and SSRIs showed a 2.5% difference in the proportion of responders in favour of amitriptyline (number needed to treat 40, CI 21-694; OR 1.12 (95% CI 1.01-1.24)).

CONCLUSIONS

Amitriptyline is less well tolerated than tricyclics/heterocyclics and SSRIs, but slightly more patients treated on it recover than on alternative antidepressants.

Treatment delivery and guidelines in primary care

Because depressive illness is so prevalent, the majority of patients are managed in primary care, without recourse to specialist services. Primary care management is seen to fall short of the standards set in secondary care, but unfortunately there is as yet relatively little evidence from primary care to guide management in this distinctive patient population. Guidelines have been introduced as a means of quality management, and their value in improving care has been assessed in trials. To date, the benefits of the implementation of guidelines have been marginal at best. By contrast, strategies which improve the access of patients to specialist services do seem to be beneficial. There is also evidence that such strategies may be associated with 'cost-offset'. Choice of antidepressant medication for maximum cost benefit should also be informed by an evidence base, which is beginning to be accumulated. Further research on this topic in the primary care context is still needed.

Problem solving treatment and group psychoeducation for depression: multicentre randomised controlled trial. Outcomes of Depression International Network (ODIN) Group

OBJECTIVES

To determine the acceptability of two psychological interventions for depressed adults in the community and their effect on caseness, symptoms, and subjective function.

DESIGN

A pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial, stratified by centre.

SETTING

Nine urban and rural communities in Finland, Republic of Ireland, Norway, Spain, and the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

452 participants aged 18 to 65, identified through a community survey with depressive or adjustment disorders according to the international classification of diseases, 10th revision or Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition.

INTERVENTIONS

Six individual sessions of problem solving treatment (n=128), eight group sessions of the course on prevention of depression (n=108), and controls (n=189).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Completion rates for each intervention, diagnosis of depression, and depressive symptoms and subjective function.

RESULTS

63% of participants assigned to problem solving and 44% assigned to prevention of depression completed their intervention. The proportion of problem solving participants depressed at six months was 17% less than that for controls, giving a number needed to treat of 6; the mean difference in Beck depression inventory score was -2. 63 (95% confidence interval -4.95 to -0.32), and there were significant improvements in SF-36 scores. For depression prevention, the difference in proportions of depressed participants was 14% (number needed to treat of 7); the mean difference in Beck depression inventory score was -1.50 (-4.16 to 1.17), and there were significant improvements in SF-36 scores. Such differences were not observed at 12 months. Neither specific diagnosis nor treatment with antidepressants affected outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

When offered to adults with depressive disorders in the community, problem solving treatment was more acceptable than the course on prevention of depression. Both interventions reduced caseness and improved subjective function.

The educational challenge of mental health

This paper poses a series of fundamental educational challenges about mental health. First, it questions whether 'mental health' is a valid concept, in the light of debates over mind/body dualism. If the concept is valid, should the absence of mental health be seen as an illness, an adaptive strategy or simply a statistical eccentricity? Fulford's concept of 'failure of intentional action' is commended as a philosophical basis for unravelling these issues. Secondly, the paper considers whether diagnosis is a simple or complex process, and whether it can be an objective activity or one which involves a strong subjective element. The current and potential value of multiaxial classification systems are discussed. Thirdly, themes concerning mental health treatment are introduced, covering problems with consent and patient preference, the evidential basis of interventions, and the range and limitations of possible treatments. Finally, the paper reviews the educational processes needed to meet these challenges effectively. It recommends the development of multifaceted educational programmes, nurturing a spirit of critical enquiry and personal awareness and, above all, the recognition and toleration of the uncertainty and complexity which lie at the heart of successful medical practice.

The importance of achieving additional drug benefits at a reasonable cost. A review of the fluoxetine years

Fluoxetine continues to be remarkably successful; greater volumes of this drug are sold than for any other antidepressant in the world. Prozac has also become a household name. In this article we examine the circumstances that surround this success, and the evidence base that supports it. Rather than being a major step forward in the treatment for depression, the evidence for fluoxetine and for the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in general suggest at best a modest improvement in tolerability, with no evidence of improved efficacy. We note that the road to success was not problem free for fluoxetine, and highlight the response of the sponsor in the development of subsequent drugs for CNS disorders.

SSRIs versus other antidepressants for depressive disorder

OBJECTIVES

To examine the relative efficacy of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) compared to other antidepressants.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The search strategy included a search of (a) Electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE); (b) reference lists of related reviews (c) reference lists of all located studies (d) contact with the manufacturer and (e) the Cochrane Group register of controlled trials

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors with other kinds of antidepressants in the treatment of patients with depressive disorders. The outcome measures assessed included measures of the severity of depression.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were collected from each study the main outcome measurefrom each study. These included: mean Hamilton depression rating scale, mean Montgomery & Asberg depression rating scale, Clinical Global Impression rating scale. An analysis of standardised mean difference of these scales was performed using Review Manager 3. 1 software. The presence of heterogeneity of treatment effect was assessed

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-eight trials contributed data to the analysis of the relative efficacy of SSRIs and related drugs with comparator antidepressants (Figure 3 & Appendix 3). Analysis of efficacy was based upon 5044 patients treated with an SSRI or related drug, and 4510 treated with an alternative antidepressant. The standardised effect size for SSRIs and related drugs together versus alternative antidepressants using a fixed effects model was 0. 035 (95% CI -0.006 to 0.076; Q = 149.25, df = 97, p < 0.001).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

There are no clinically significant differences in effectiveness between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants. Treatment decisions need to be based on considerations of relative patient acceptability, toxicity and cost.