Literature DB >> 15367043

Subject expectations of treatment effectiveness and outcome of treatment with an experimental antidepressant.

Heather V Krell1, Andrew F Leuchter, Melinda Morgan, Ian A Cook, Michelle Abrams.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between treatment expectations and response in a 9-week, single-blind experimental antidepressant treatment study.
METHOD: Twenty-five adult subjects meeting DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder with Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) scores of >/= 17 completed a treatment trial using the experimental antidepressant reboxetine. Following a 1-week placebo lead-in, subjects received single-blind treatment for 8 weeks with reboxetine 8 to 10 mg/day. During the screening visit, subjects were asked to self-rate their expectations of the effectiveness of the study medication. Forced-choice responses were "not at all effective," "somewhat effective," or "very effective." Response to treatment was defined as a final HAM-D score of </= 10 at the end of the 9-week trial. Data were collected from October 1999 to July 2001.
RESULTS: Subjects with a higher pretreatment expectation of medication effectiveness had a greater likelihood of response. Of the subjects who reported an expectation that the medication would be very effective, 90.0% (N = 9) responded to treatment, while only 33.3% (N = 5) of those who reported expecting medication to be somewhat effective responded to treatment (chi(2) = 7.819, p <.005). There was no association between the level of depression severity, duration of current episode, number of prior episodes, or basic demographic factors and treatment outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that individuals with high baseline expectations of improvement demonstrate a significantly higher level of response to reboxetine than those with lower expectations of improvement with treatment. The data in this study suggest that a subject's expectation of efficacy is associated with the outcome of experimental antidepressant treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15367043     DOI: 10.4088/jcp.v65n0904

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Psychiatry        ISSN: 0160-6689            Impact factor:   4.384


  39 in total

1.  Does study design influence outcome?. The effects of placebo control and treatment duration in antidepressant trials.

Authors:  Bret R Rutherford; Joel R Sneed; Steven P Roose
Journal:  Psychother Psychosom       Date:  2009-03-24       Impact factor: 17.659

2.  Pharmacogenetics and pharmacovigilance.

Authors:  Robert H Howland
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 5.606

3.  Improving study design for antidepressant effectiveness assessment.

Authors:  Florian Naudet; Bruno Millet; Jean Michel Reymann; Bruno Falissard
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2013-08-30       Impact factor: 4.035

4.  Patient Pre-Treatment Expectations Do Not Predict Cocaine Use Outcomes: Data From Four Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Kelly Serafini; Brian D Kiluk; Theresa Babuscio; Kathleen M Carroll
Journal:  Subst Use Misuse       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 2.164

Review 5.  Deconstructing pediatric depression trials: an analysis of the effects of expectancy and therapeutic contact.

Authors:  Bret R Rutherford; Joel R Sneed; Jane M Tandler; David Rindskopf; Bradley S Peterson; Steven P Roose
Journal:  J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry       Date:  2011-06-15       Impact factor: 8.829

6.  The role of treatment expectancy in youth receiving exposure-based CBT for obsessive compulsive disorder.

Authors:  Adam B Lewin; Tara S Peris; R Lindsey Bergman; James T McCracken; John Piacentini
Journal:  Behav Res Ther       Date:  2011-06-15

7.  A Randomized Survey of the Public's Expectancies and Willingness to Participate in Clinical Trials of Antidepressants Versus Psychotherapy for Depression.

Authors:  Brandon A Gaudiano; Stacy R Ellenberg; Casey A Schofield; Lara S Rifkin
Journal:  Prim Care Companion CNS Disord       Date:  2016-02-25

8.  The impact of psychological factors on placebo responses in a randomized controlled trial comparing sham device to dummy pill.

Authors:  Suzanne M Bertisch; Anna R T Legedza; Russell S Phillips; Roger B Davis; William B Stason; Rose H Goldman; Ted J Kaptchuk
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.431

9.  Expectancy and the Treatment of Depression: A Review of Experimental Methodology and Effects on Patient Outcome.

Authors:  Bret R Rutherford; Tor D Wager; Steven P Roose
Journal:  Curr Psychiatry Rev       Date:  2010-02-01

10.  Study design affects participant expectations: a survey.

Authors:  Bret R Rutherford; Scott Alan Rose; Joel R Sneed; Steven P Roose
Journal:  J Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.153

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.