Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Effectiveness Trials (effectiveness + trials)
Selected AbstractsThe epidemiology of major depressive episodes: results from the International Consortium of Psychiatric Epidemiology (ICPE) surveysINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF METHODS IN PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH, Issue 1 2003Laura Andrade Abstract Absence of a common diagnostic interview has hampered cross-national syntheses of epidemiological evidence on major depressive episodes (MDE). Community epidemiological surveys using the World Health Organization Composite International Diagnostic Interview administered face-to-face were carried out in 10 countries in North America (Canada and the US), Latin America (Brazil, Chile, and Mexico), Europe (Czech Republic, Germany, the Netherlands, and Turkey), and Asia (Japan). The total sample size was more than 37,000. Lifetime prevalence estimates of hierarchy-free DSM-III-R/DSM-IV MDE varied widely, from 3% in Japan to 16.9% in the US, with the majority in the range of 8% to 12%. The 12-month/lifetime prevalence ratio was in the range 40% to 55%, the 30-day/12-month prevalence ratio in the range 45% to 65%, and median age of onset in the range 20 to 25 in most countries. Consistent socio-demographic correlates included being female and unmarried. Respondents in recent cohorts reported higher lifetime prevalence, but lower persistence than those in earlier cohorts. Major depressive episodes were found to be strongly co-morbid with, and temporally secondary to, anxiety disorders in all countries, with primary panic and generalized anxiety disorders the most powerful predictors of the first onset of secondary MDE. Major depressive episodes are a commonly occurring disorder that usually has a chronic-intermittent course. Effectiveness trials are needed to evaluate the impact of early detection and treatment on the course of MDE as well as to evaluate whether timely treatment of primary anxiety disorders would reduce the subsequent onset, persistence, and severity of secondary MDE. Copyright © 2003 Whurr Publishers Ltd. [source] The effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care settings: A systematic reviewDRUG AND ALCOHOL REVIEW, Issue 3 2009EILEEN F. S. KANER Abstract Issues. Numerous studies have reported that brief interventions delivered in primary care are effective in reducing excessive drinking. However, much of this work has been criticised for being clinically unrepresentative. This review aimed to assess the effectiveness of brief interventions in primary care and determine if outcomes differ between efficacy and effectiveness trials. Approach. A pre-specified search strategy was used to search all relevant electronic databases up to 2006. We also hand-searched the reference lists of key articles and reviews. We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) involving patients in primary care who were not seeking alcohol treatment and who received brief intervention. Two authors independently abstracted data and assessed trial quality. Random effects meta-analyses, subgroup and sensitivity analyses and meta-regression were conducted. Key Findings. The primary meta-analysis included 22 RCT and evaluated outcomes in over 5800 patients. At 1 year follow up, patients receiving brief intervention had a significant reduction in alcohol consumption compared with controls [mean difference: ,38 g week,1, 95%CI (confidence interval): ,54 to ,23], although there was substantial heterogeneity between trials (I2 = 57%). Subgroup analysis confirmed the benefit of brief intervention in men but not in women. Extended intervention was associated with a non-significantly increased reduction in alcohol consumption compared with brief intervention. There was no significant difference in effect sizes for efficacy and effectiveness trials. Conclusions. Brief interventions can reduce alcohol consumption in men, with benefit at a year after intervention, but they are unproven in women for whom there is insufficient research data. Longer counselling has little additional effect over brief intervention. The lack of differences in outcomes between efficacy and effectiveness trials suggests that the current literature is relevant to routine primary care. [Kaner EFS, Dickinson HO, Beyer F, Pienaar E, Schlesinger C, Campbell F, Saunders JB, Burnand B, Heather N. The effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care settings: A systematic review. Drug Alcohol Rev 2009;28:301,323] [source] Postpartum depression: what we knowJOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY, Issue 12 2009Michael W. O'Hara Abstract Postpartum depression (PPD) is a serious mental health problem. It is prevalent, and offspring are at risk for disturbances in development. Major risk factors include past depression, stressful life events, poor marital relationship, and social support. Public health efforts to detect PPD have been increasing. Standard treatments (e.g., Interpersonal Psychotherapy) and more tailored treatments have been found effective for PPD. Prevention efforts have been less consistently successful. Future research should include studies of epidemiological risk factors and prevalence, interventions aimed at the parenting of PPD mothers, specific diathesis for a subset of PPD, effectiveness trials of psychological interventions, and prevention interventions aimed at addressing mental health issues in pregnant women. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Psychol 65:1,12, 2009. [source] Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drugs: Future Directions for Screening and Intervention in the Emergency DepartmentACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE, Issue 11 2009Rebecca M. Cunningham MD Abstract This article is a product of a breakout session on injury prevention from the 2009 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference on "Public Health in the ED: Screening, Surveillance, and Intervention." The emergency department (ED) is an important entry portal into the medical care system. Given the epidemiology of substance use among ED patients, the delivery of effective brief interventions (BIs) for alcohol, drug, and tobacco use in the ED has the potential to have a large public health impact. To date, the results of randomized controlled trials of interventional studies in the ED setting for substance use have been mixed in regard to alcohol and understudied in the area of tobacco and other drugs. As a result, there are more questions remaining than answered. The work group developed the following research recommendations that are essential for the field of screening and BI for alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs in the ED. 1) Screening,develop and validate brief and practical screening instruments for ED patients and determine the optimal method for the administration of screening instruments. 2) Key components and delivery methods for intervention,conduct research on the effectiveness of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment (SBIRT) in the ED on outcomes (e.g., consumption, associated risk behaviors, and medical psychosocial consequences) including minimum dose needed, key components, optimal delivery method, interventions focused on multiple risk behaviors and tailored based on assessment, and strategies for addressing polysubstance use. 3) Effectiveness among patient subgroups,conduct research to determine which patients are most likely to benefit from a BI for substance use, including research on moderators and mediators of intervention effectiveness, and examine special populations using culturally and developmentally appropriate interventions. 4) Referral strategies,a) promote prospective effectiveness trials to test best strategies to facilitate referrals and access from the ED to preventive services, community resources, and substance abuse and mental health treatment; b) examine impact of available community services; c) examine the role of stigma of referral and follow-up; and d) examine alternatives to specialized treatment referral. 5) Translation,conduct translational and cost-effectiveness research of proven efficacious interventions, with attention to fidelity, to move ED SBIRT from research to practice. [source] Adherence and Flexibility: They Can (and Do) Coexist!CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY: SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, Issue 3 2010Rex Forehand [Clin Psychol Sci Prac 17: 258,264, 2010] Using their experiences disseminating the Triple P parenting program, Mazzucchelli and Sanders (2010) make a strong case for how flexibility enhances provider satisfaction, critical thinking about intervention delivery, and most importantly, adherence and fidelity. Their article makes an outstanding and innovative contribution to the literature on implementation research, advancing the field to a view of flexibility as a feature that may facilitate adherence. In this commentary, we place Mazzucchelli and Sanders's work within the context of ongoing implementation research. We also call for embedding questions about implementation science into effectiveness trials to better inform dissemination efforts aimed at facilitating provider adoption and adherence to empirically supported treatments. [source] | |||||||||||||