Laser Acupuncture for Mild to Moderate Depression in a Primary Care Setting – a Randomised Controlled Trial

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 103-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joo Im Quah-Smith ◽  
Wai Mun Tang ◽  
Janice Russell
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Beck Depression Inventory ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Laser Acupuncture ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Major Public Health Problem ◽  
Sham Control ◽  
Moderate Depression ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Objective Depression is a major public health problem. There is some evidence supporting the effectiveness of needle acupuncture in its treatment. Laser stimulation, regarded here as a modality of acupuncture, is non-invasive and therefore free of infection risk; and it is acceptable to patients with needle phobia. The technique is relatively easily learned by community-based general practitioners. It is also amenable to sham control and therefore double-blinding in clinical trials. A double-blind randomised controlled trial was conducted to test the efficacy of low level laser acupuncture in mild to moderate depression. Methods Thirty patients with depression were randomised to receive either active or inactive laser treatment. The laser unit could be switched to one of two settings. One switch position delivered active laser acupuncture and the other was inactive (sham). In the active mode, 0.5J was delivered to each of six to eight individually tailored acupuncture sites per visit. All patients were treated twice weekly for four weeks then weekly for a further four weeks. The patients and the acupuncturist were both blinded to conditions. Outcome was assessed using the Beck Depression Inventory at baseline, weeks four and eight during treatment, and at 4 and 12 weeks following the treatment. Results At the end of the treatment period, Beck Depression Inventory scores fell from baseline by 16.1 points in the intervention group and by 6.8 points in the sham control group (P<0.001). The difference showed only a trend four weeks later, but was again significant after 12 weeks (P=0.007). Laser acupuncture was well tolerated with transient fatigue as the most common adverse effect. Conclusion Laser acupuncture may be worth further investigation as a treatment for mild to moderate depression in primary care.

Acute and one-year outcome of a randomised controlled trial of brief cognitive therapy for major depressive disorder in primary care

1997 ◽  
Vol 171 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Scott ◽  
Mary Jane Tacchi ◽  
Roger Jones ◽  
Jan Scott
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Major Depressive Disorder ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Depressive Disorder ◽  
Cognitive Therapy ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Major Depressive ◽  
Treatment As Usual ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BackgroundThe consensus statement on the treatment of depression (Paykel & Priest, 1992) advocates the use of cognitive therapy techniques as an adjunct to medication.MethodThis paper describes a randomised controlled trial of brief cognitive therapy (BCT) plus ‘treatment as usual’ versus treatment as usual in the management of 48 patients with major depressive disorder presenting in primary care.ResultsAt the end of the acute phase, significantly more subjects (P < 0.05) met recovery criteria in the intervention group (n=15) compared with the control group (n=8). When initial neuroticism scores were controlled for, reductions in Beck Depression Inventory and Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression scores favoured the BCT group throughout the 12 months of follow-up.ConclusionsBCT may be beneficial, but given the time constraints, therapists need to be more rather than less skilled in cognitive therapy. This, plus methodological limitations, leads us to advise caution before applying this approach more widely in primary care.

scholarly journals Triaging and Referring In Adjacent General and Emergency Departments (the TRIAGE trial): a cluster randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Morreel ◽  
Hilde Philips ◽  
Diana De Graeve ◽  
Koenraad G Monsieurs ◽  
Jarl Kampen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Cluster Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Objectives: To determine the effectiveness and safety of a tool diverting low urgency patients eligible for primary care from an emergency department (ED) to the adjacent general practitioner cooperative (GPC). Methods: Unblinded, randomised controlled trial with weekends serving as clusters (three intervention clusters for each control). The intervention was nurse-led triage using a new tool assigning patients to either ED or GPC. During intervention weekends, patients were encouraged to follow this assignment while it was not communicated to the patients during control weekends (they remained at the ED). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients assigned to and handled by the GPC during intervention weekends. The trial was randomised for the secondary outcome: the proportion of patients assigned to the GPC during intervention and control weekends. Additional outcomes were association of these outcomes with possible confounders (study tool parameters, nurse, and patient characteristics), proportion of patients referred back to the ED by the GPC, hospitalisations, and performance of the study tool to detect primary care eligible patients (with the opinion of the treating physician as the gold standard). Results: In the intervention group, 838/6374 patients (13.3%, 95% CI 12.5 to 14.2) were assigned to the GPC (secondary outcome), in the control group 431/1744 (24.7%, 95% CI 22.7 to 26.8). In the intervention group, 599/6374 patients (9.5%, 95% CI 8.8 to 10.3) experienced the primary outcome which was influenced by the chosen MTS presentational flowchart, patient's age, and the nurse. 24/599 patients (4.0%, 95% CI 2.7 to 5.9) patients were referred back to the ED of which three were hospitalised. Positive and negative predictive values of the studied tool during intervention weekends were 0.96 (95%CI 0.94 to 0.97) and 0.60 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.62). Out of the patients assigned to the GPC, 2.4% (95% CI 1.7 to 3.4) were hospitalised. Conclusions: ED nurses using a new tool safely diverted 9.5% of the included patients to primary care. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03793972 Funding: Research Foundation, Flanders (FWO)

scholarly journals Oral ondansetron for paediatric gastroenteritis in primary care: a randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
pp. BJGP.2021.0211
Author(s):  
Irma Bonvanie ◽  
Anouk AH Weghorst ◽  
Gea Holtman ◽  
Heleen A Russchen ◽  
Freek Fickweiler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Acute Gastroenteritis ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Parental Satisfaction ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Out Of Hours ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Oral Ondansetron

Background: Acute gastroenteritis affects almost all children younger than 5 years. Due to vomiting the standard oral rehydration therapy (ORT) treatment is less effective. In secondary care, ondansetron was found to be effective in reducing vomiting. Aim: To determine the effectiveness of adding oral ondansetron to care-as-usual on vomiting in children with acute gastroenteritis attending out-of-hours primary care. Design and setting: A pragmatic randomised controlled trial with a follow-up of 7 days, at three out-of-hours primary care centres. Method: Inclusion criteria: 1) age 6 months to 6 years, 2) acute gastroenteritis diagnosed by a general practitioner, 3) at least four reported episodes of vomiting in the 24 hours before presentation, 4) at least one reported episode of vomiting in the 4 hours before presentation, and 5) written informed consent from both parents. The control group received care-as-usual (ORT). The intervention group received care-as-usual plus one dose of oral ondansetron (0.1 mg/kg). Results: In total, 194 children were included for randomisation. One dose of oral ondansetron decreased the proportion of children who continued vomiting within 4 hours from 42.9% to 19.5%, with an odds ratio of 0.37 (95% CI = 0.20–0.72, NNT 4). Ondansetron also decreased the number of vomiting episodes within 4 hours, incidence rate ratio of 0.51 (95% CI, 0.29-0.88), and improved overall parental satisfaction with treatment (p = 0.027). Conclusions: Ondansetron decreased vomiting and increased parental satisfaction in children with acute gastroenteritis. We were not able to show an increased ORT intake or decrease in referral rate.

scholarly journals Triaging and referring in adjacent general and emergency departments (the TRIAGE trial): A cluster randomised controlled trial

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. e0258561
Author(s):  
Stefan Morreel ◽  
Hilde Philips ◽  
Diana De Graeve ◽  
Koenraad G. Monsieurs ◽  
Jarl K. Kampen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Triage System ◽  
Predictive Values ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Objectives To determine whether a new triage system safely diverts a proportion of emergency department (ED) patients to a general practitioner cooperative (GPC). Methods Unblinded randomised controlled trial with weekends serving as clusters (three intervention clusters for each control). The intervention was triage by a nurse using a new extension to the Manchester Triage System assigning low-risk patients to the GPC. During intervention weekends, patients were encouraged to follow this assignment; it was not communicated during control weekends (all patients remained at the ED). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients assigned to and handled by the GPC during intervention weekends. The trial was randomised for the secondary outcome: the proportion of patients assigned to the GPC. Additional outcomes were association of these outcomes with possible confounders (study tool parameters, nurse, and patient characteristics), proportion of patients referred back to the ED by the GPC, hospitalisations, and performance of the study tool to detect primary care patients (the opinion of the treating physician was the gold standard). Results In the intervention group, 838/6294 patients (13.3%, 95% CI 12.5 to 14.2) were assigned to the GPC, in the control group this was 431/1744 (24.7%, 95% CI 22.7 to 26.8). In total, 599/6294 patients (9.5%, 95% CI 8.8 to 10.3) experienced the primary outcome which was influenced by the reason for encounter, age, and the nurse. 24/599 patients (4.0%, 95% CI 2.7 to 5.9) were referred back to the ED, three were hospitalised. Positive and negative predictive values of the studied tool during intervention weekends were 0.96 (95%CI 0.94 to 0.97) and 0.60 (95% CI 0.58 to 0.62). Out of the patients assigned to the GPC, 2.4% (95% CI 1.7 to 3.4) were hospitalised. Conclusions ED nurses using a new tool safely diverted 9.5% of the included patients to primary care. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03793972

scholarly journals Cost-effectiveness of a care manager collaborative care programme for patients with depression in primary care: 12-month economic evaluation of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Holst ◽  
Frida Labori ◽  
Cecilia Björkelund ◽  
Dominique Hange ◽  
Irene Svenningsson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Societal Perspective ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Health Benefits ◽  
Care Manager ◽  
Moderate Depression ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Objectives To study the cost-effectiveness of a care manager organization for patients with mild to moderate depression in Swedish primary care in a 12-month perspective. Methods Cost-effectiveness analysis of the care manager organization compared to care as usual (CAU) in a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial including 192 individuals in the care manager group and 184 in the CAU group. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from a health care and societal perspectives. Costs were assessed in relation to two different health outcome measures: depression free days (DFDs) and quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Results At the 12-month follow-up, patients treated at the intervention Primary Care Centres (PCCs) with a care manager organization had larger health benefits than the group receiving usual care only at control PCCs. Mean QALY per patient was 0.73 (95% CI 0.7; 0.75) in the care manager group compared to 0.70 (95% CI 0.66; 0.73) in the CAU group. Mean DFDs was 203 (95% CI 178; 229) in the care manager group and 155 (95% CI 131; 179) in the CAU group. Further, from a societal perspective, care manager care was associated with a lower cost than care as usual, resulting in a dominant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for both QALYs and DFDs. From a health care perspective care manager care was related to a low cost per QALY (36,500 SEK / €3,379) and DFD (31 SEK/€3). Limitations A limitation is the fact that QALY data was impaired by insufficient EQ-5D data for some patients. Conclusions A care manager organization at the PCC to increase quality of care for patients with mild-moderate depression shows high health benefits, with no decay over time, and high cost-effectiveness both from a health care and a societal perspective. Trial registration details: The trial was registered in ClinicalTrials.com (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02378272) in 02/02/2015 with the registration number NCT02378272. The first patient was enrolled in 11/20/2014.

scholarly journals Withdrawal of unnecessary antidepressant medication: a randomised controlled trial in primary care

BJGP Open ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen17X101265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rhona Eveleigh ◽  
Esther Muskens ◽  
Peter Lucassen ◽  
Peter Verhaak ◽  
Jan Spijker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Antidepressant Medication ◽  
Treatment Recommendation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Antidepressant Use ◽  
Randomised Controlled

BackgroundAntidepressant use has increased exponentially in recent decades, mostly due to long continuation.AimTo assess the effectiveness of a tailored recommendation to withdraw antidepressant treatment.Design & settingRandomised controlled trial in primary care (PANDA study) in the Netherlands.MethodLong-term antidepressant users (≥9 months) were selected from GPs prescription databases. Patients were diagnosed with the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI). Long-term users without indication for maintenance treatment (overtreatment) were selected. The intervention consisted of disclosure of the current psychiatric diagnosis combined with a tailored treatment recommendation. Patients were followed for 12 months.ResultsThe study included 146 participants from 45 family practices. Of the 70 patients in the intervention group, 34 (49%) did not comply with the advice to stop their antidepressant medication. Of the 36 (51%) patients who agreed to try, only 4 (6%) succeeded. These figures were consistent with the control group, where 6 (8%) of the 76 patients discontinued antidepressant use successfully. Patients who were recommended to discontinue their antidepressant medication reported a higher relapse rate than the control group (26% versus 13%, P = 0.05).ConclusionChanging inappropriate long-term antidepressant use is difficult.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document