Literature DB >> 19588448

Antidepressants versus placebo for depression in primary care.

Bruce Arroll1, C Raina Elley, Tana Fishman, Felicity A Goodyear-Smith, Tim Kenealy, Grant Blashki, Ngaire Kerse, Stephen Macgillivray.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Concern has been expressed about the relevance of secondary care studies to primary care patients specifically about the effectiveness of antidepressant medication. There is a need to review the evidence of only those studies that have been conducted comparing antidepressant efficacy with placebo in primary care-based samples.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and tolerability of antidepressants in patients (under the age of 65 years) with depression in primary care. SEARCH STRATEGY: All searches were conducted in September 2007.The Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Group (CCDAN) Controlled Trials Register was searched, together with a supplementary search of MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and PSYNDEX. Abstracts of all possible studies for inclusion were assessed independently by two reviewers. Further trials were sought through searching the reference lists of studies initially identified and by scrutinising other relevant review papers. Selected authors and experts were also contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies were selected if they were randomised controlled trials of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) versus placebo in adults. Older patients (over 65 years) were excluded. Patients had to be recruited from a primary care setting. For continuous outcomes the Hamilton Depression scale of the Montgomery Asberg Scale was requred. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted using data extraction forms by two reviewers independently, with disagreements resolved by discussion. A similar process was used for the validity assessment. Pooling of results was done using Review Manager 5. The primary outcome was depression reduction, based on a dichotomous measure of clinical response, using relative risk (RR), and on a continuous measure of depression symptoms, using the mean difference (MD), with 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN
RESULTS: There were fourteen studies (16 comparisons) with extractable data included in the review, of which ten studies examined TCAs, two examined SSRIs and two included both classes, all compared with placebo. The number of participants in the intervention groups was 1364 and in the placebo groups 919. Nearly all studies were of short duration, typically 6-8 weeks. Pooled estimates of efficacy data showed an RR of 1.24, 95% CI 1.11-1.38 in favour of TCAs against placebo. For SSRIs this was 1.28, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.43.. The numbers needed to treat (NNT) for TCAs ranged from 7 to 16 {median NNT 9} patient expected event rate ranged from 63% to 26% respectively) and for SSRIs from 7 to 8 {median NNT 7} (patient expected event rate ranged from 48% to 42% respectively) . The numbers needed to harm (NNH for withdrawal due to side effects) ranged from 4 to 30 for TCAs (excluding three studies with no harmful events leading to withdrawal) and 20 to 90 for SSRIs. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: Both TCAs and SSRIs are effective for depression treated in primary care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19588448     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007954

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  97 in total

Review 1.  Ketamine for depression: where do we go from here?

Authors:  Marije Aan Het Rot; Carlos A Zarate; Dennis S Charney; Sanjay J Mathew
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2012-06-16       Impact factor: 13.382

2.  Time for a rethink of treatment for patients with depression in primary care.

Authors:  Bruce Arroll; Fiona Moir
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 5.386

3.  A randomized trial to reduce the prevalence of depression and self-harm behavior in older primary care patients.

Authors:  Osvaldo P Almeida; Jane Pirkis; Ngaire Kerse; Moira Sim; Leon Flicker; John Snowdon; Brian Draper; Gerard Byrne; Robert Goldney; Nicola T Lautenschlager; Nigel Stocks; Helman Alfonso; Jon J Pfaff
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2012 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.166

4.  Mood matters: a national survey on attitudes to depression.

Authors:  John R Kelly; Mary Cosgrove; Cian Judd; Kathy Scott; Aoibheann Mc Loughlin; Veronica O'Keane
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 1.568

5.  The fallacy of thresholds used in defining response and remission in depression rating scales.

Authors:  Florian Naudet; Bruno Millet; Jean Michel Reymann; Bruno Falissard
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 4.035

6.  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

Review 7.  Role of immune-inflammatory and oxidative and nitrosative stress pathways in the etiology of depression: therapeutic implications.

Authors:  George Anderson; Michael Berk; Olivia Dean; Steven Moylan; Michael Maes
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 5.749

Review 8.  Transcranial direct current stimulation for acute major depressive episodes: meta-analysis of individual patient data.

Authors:  André R Brunoni; Adriano H Moffa; Felipe Fregni; Ulrich Palm; Frank Padberg; Daniel M Blumberger; Zafiris J Daskalakis; Djamila Bennabi; Emmanuel Haffen; Angelo Alonzo; Colleen K Loo
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 9.319

9.  Has evidence-based medicine left quackery behind?

Authors:  Florian Naudet; Bruno Falissard; Rémy Boussageon; David Healy
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 3.397

10.  Diminished neural processing of aversive and rewarding stimuli during selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment.

Authors:  Ciara McCabe; Zevic Mishor; Philip J Cowen; Catherine J Harmer
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2009-12-24       Impact factor: 13.382

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.