Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire (leed + sleep_evaluation_questionnaire)
Selected AbstractsComparing effects of methylphenidate, sertraline and placebo on neuropsychiatric sequelae in patients with traumatic brain injuryHUMAN PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY: CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL, Issue 2 2005Hoon Lee Abstract Background This study aimed to investigate the effects of methylphenidate and sertraline compared with placebo on various neuropsychiatric sequelae associated with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Methods This was a 4 week, double-blind, parallel-group trial. Thirty patients with mild to moderate degrees of TBI were randomly allocated to one of three treatment groups (n,=,10 in each group) with matching age, gender and education, i.e. methylphenidate (starting at 5,mg/day and increasing to 20,mg/day in a week), sertraline (starting at 25,mg/day and increasing to 100,mg/day in a week) or placebo. At the baseline and at the 4 week endpoint, the following assessments were administered: subjective (Beck Depression Inventory) and objective (Hamilton Depression Rating Scale) measures of depression; Rivermead Postconcussion Symptoms Questionnaire for postconcussional symptoms; SmithKline Beecham Quality of Life Scale for quality of life; seven performance tests (Critical Flicker Fusion, Choice Reaction Time, Continuous Tracking, Mental Arithmetic, Short-Term memory, Digit Symbol Substitution and Mini-Mental State Examination); subjective measures of sleep (Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire) and daytime sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale). All adverse events during the study period were recorded and their relationships to the drugs were assessed. Results Neuropsychiatric sequelae seemed to take a natural recovery course in patients with traumatic brain injury. Methylphenidate had significant effects on depressive symptoms compared with the placebo, without hindering the natural recovery process of cognitive function. Although sertraline also had significant effects on depressive symptoms compared with the placebo, it did not improve many tests on cognitive performances. Daytime sleepiness was reduced by methylphenidate, while it was not by sertraline. Conclusions Methylphenidate and sertraline had similar effects on depressive symptoms. However, methylphenidate seemed to be more beneficial in improving cognitive function and maintaining daytime alertness. Methylphenidate also offered a better tolerability than sertraline. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Mirtazapine and paroxetine: a drug-drug interaction study in healthy subjectsHUMAN PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY: CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL, Issue 6 2001F. J. L. Ruwe Abstract Paroxetine inhibits cytochrome P450 2D6, which is involved in the metabolism of mirtazapine. The possible drug-drug interaction between two pharmacologically distinct antidepressants, mirtazapine and paroxetine, has been investigated in a randomized, three-way crossover study in 24 healthy male and female subjects. After a titration phase of 3 days, each subject received single daily doses of 30,mg mirtazapine, 40,mg paroxetine or the combination for 6 days. Assessments included serial blood sampling for pharmacokinetics at steady state, cognitive testing using the test battery of CDR Ltd, a visual analogue mood rating scale (Bond and Lader) and the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire. Paroxetine inhibits the metabolism of mirtazapine, as shown by increases of approximately 17% and 25% of the 24,h AUC's of mirtazapine and its demethyl metabolite, respectively. Mirtazapine did not alter the pharmacokinetics of paroxetine. The combined administration of mirtazapine and paroxetine probably does not alter cognitive functioning or result in major changes on the visual analogue mood rating scale and Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire, compared with the administration of either drug alone. The incidence of adverse events was lower during combined administration of mirtazapine and paroxetine than during administration of either drug alone. Fatigue, dizziness, headache, nausea, anxiety and somnolence were the most common adverse events during combined administration. These data suggest that the combination of mirtazapine and paroxetine is unlikely to lead to clinically relevant drug-drug interactions and can be used without dose adjustment of either drug. The combination may even be better tolerated than either drug alone. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] Effectiveness of mirtazapine for nausea and insomnia in cancer patients with depressionPSYCHIATRY AND CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCES, Issue 1 2008Sung-Wan Kim md Aims:, The purpose of the present paper was to evaluate the effectiveness of mirtazapine orally disintegrating tablets for nausea and sleep disturbance, which are common and distressing symptoms of cancer. Methods:, This was a 4-week, prospective, open-labeled study of cancer patients. Assessments were performed at baseline and on days 1, 3, 5, 7, 14, and 28. Primary outcome measures were the Clinical Global Impression scale for nausea/vomiting and the Chonnam National University Hospital,Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire (C-LSEQ) including total amount of night sleep time. The secondary outcome measures consisted of pain items in the 36-item Short Form Health Survey, the Montgomery,Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and the EuroQoL (EQ)-5D. Forty-two cancer patients were enrolled. Results:, Those with nausea (n = 28) improved significantly from day 1. The total night sleep time and each item on the C-LSEQ improved from days 1,5. The scores on the MADRS and the depression/anxiety dimension and visual analog scale of EQ-5D improved significantly from the first week. Pain measures also improved from day 1. Exacerbation of sleepiness developed in approximately one-third of subjects during the initial few days, but disappeared gradually. Conclusion:, In the present study mirtazapine rapidly improved nausea, sleep disturbance, pain and quality of life, as well as depression in cancer patients. Mirtazapine may be an effective treatment option in managing cancer patients with multiple distressing symptoms, including nausea and sleep disturbance. [source] Cross-cultural validation of the Leeds sleep evaluation questionnaire (LSEQ) in insomnia patientsHUMAN PSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY: CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL, Issue 8 2003Ricardo Tarrasch Abstract The Leeds sleep evaluation questionnaire (LSEQ) is a standardized self-reporting instrument comprising ten 100,mm visual analogue scales that pertain to the ease of getting to sleep (GTS), quality of sleep (QOS), ease of awakening from sleep (AFS) and alertness and behaviour following wakefulness (BFW). Although the LSEQ has been used in a variety of populations, published psychometric data on insomnia patients are limited. The LSEQ reliability and construct validity was evaluated in 396 French insomnia patients aged 55 years and over, who were treated with placebo (2 weeks) and melatonin (3 weeks). The results supported LSEQ internal consistency, reliability and construct validity with minor differences from those of the original English version. Then the internal consistency of the LSEQ was evaluated in 257 insomnia patients (age 20,80 years) in France and Israel who, following a 1 week placebo baseline, were randomized to placebo or melatonin treatment for 3 weeks. Cronbach's , and Pearson's r correlation coefficients for placebo and drug treatment conditions (p<0.001 for all) supported LSEQ internal consistency in different treatment and age groups and in different languages. It is concluded that the consistency, reliability and validity of the four LSEQ domains allows them to be singled out as independent outcome variables in cross cultural sleep research and clinical practice in adult and elderly patients with insomnia. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [source] | ||||||||||