Norman Sussman1. 1. Department of Psychiatry, New York University School of Medicine, New York, N.Y, USA. sussman01@aol.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review is to summarize lessons learned from, and limitations of, the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial, focusing on measurement-based care. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and MEDLINE were searched from 1980 through 2006 using terms such as depression, major depressive disorder, augmentation, switching, measurement-based care, and remission. Other relevant articles were identified by checking reference lists of the identified studies. STUDY SELECTION: A total of 60 studies were initially identified, which resulted in 34 studies used in this review. The salient criteria used for selection of studies centered on whether results had implications for clinical practice and provided lessons that could be learned and practically applied to real-life settings. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted from the STAR*D trial and associated studies that were pertinent to everyday problems encountered by mental health professionals in the community: determination of whether the optimum strategy for a particular patient involves "augmentation" or "switching" of a patient's medication. DATA SYNTHESIS: Measurement-based care is essential in order to identify the two thirds of patients who do not achieve remission with the first treatment strategy. Timely changes in antidepressant therapy can improve outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The STAR*D trial underscores the importance of measurement-based care in identifying patients who may not have achieved remission with an initial antidepressant, enabling alternative options such as augmentation or switching to be prescribed to meet this ultimate goal of therapy.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review is to summarize lessons learned from, and limitations of, the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D) trial, focusing on measurement-based care. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and MEDLINE were searched from 1980 through 2006 using terms such as depression, major depressive disorder, augmentation, switching, measurement-based care, and remission. Other relevant articles were identified by checking reference lists of the identified studies. STUDY SELECTION: A total of 60 studies were initially identified, which resulted in 34 studies used in this review. The salient criteria used for selection of studies centered on whether results had implications for clinical practice and provided lessons that could be learned and practically applied to real-life settings. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted from the STAR*D trial and associated studies that were pertinent to everyday problems encountered by mental health professionals in the community: determination of whether the optimum strategy for a particular patient involves "augmentation" or "switching" of a patient's medication. DATA SYNTHESIS: Measurement-based care is essential in order to identify the two thirds of patients who do not achieve remission with the first treatment strategy. Timely changes in antidepressant therapy can improve outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The STAR*D trial underscores the importance of measurement-based care in identifying patients who may not have achieved remission with an initial antidepressant, enabling alternative options such as augmentation or switching to be prescribed to meet this ultimate goal of therapy.
Authors: Madhukar H Trivedi; A John Rush; Stephen R Wisniewski; Andrew A Nierenberg; Diane Warden; Louise Ritz; Grayson Norquist; Robert H Howland; Barry Lebowitz; Patrick J McGrath; Kathy Shores-Wilson; Melanie M Biggs; G K Balasubramani; Maurizio Fava Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: A John Rush; Madhukar H Trivedi; Stephen R Wisniewski; Andrew A Nierenberg; Jonathan W Stewart; Diane Warden; George Niederehe; Michael E Thase; Philip W Lavori; Barry D Lebowitz; Patrick J McGrath; Jerrold F Rosenbaum; Harold A Sackeim; David J Kupfer; James Luther; Maurizio Fava Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Ronald C Kessler; Patricia Berglund; Olga Demler; Robert Jin; Doreen Koretz; Kathleen R Merikangas; A John Rush; Ellen E Walters; Philip S Wang Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-06-18 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: S Nassir Ghaemi; Klara J Rosenquist; James Y Ko; Claudia F Baldassano; Nicholas J Kontos; Ross J Baldessarini Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: A John Rush; Maurizio Fava; Stephen R Wisniewski; Philip W Lavori; Madhukar H Trivedi; Harold A Sackeim; Michael E Thase; Andrew A Nierenberg; Frederic M Quitkin; T Michael Kashner; David J Kupfer; Jerrold F Rosenbaum; Jonathan Alpert; Jonathan W Stewart; Patrick J McGrath; Melanie M Biggs; Kathy Shores-Wilson; Barry D Lebowitz; Louise Ritz; George Niederehe Journal: Control Clin Trials Date: 2004-02
Authors: A John Rush; Madhukar H Trivedi; Stephen R Wisniewski; Jonathan W Stewart; Andrew A Nierenberg; Michael E Thase; Louise Ritz; Melanie M Biggs; Diane Warden; James F Luther; Kathy Shores-Wilson; George Niederehe; Maurizio Fava Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-03-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Maurizio Fava; A John Rush; Stephen R Wisniewski; Andrew A Nierenberg; Jonathan E Alpert; Patrick J McGrath; Michael E Thase; Diane Warden; Melanie Biggs; James F Luther; George Niederehe; Louise Ritz; Madhukar H Trivedi Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 19.242