A revision of the 2000 British Association for Psychopharmacology evidence-based guidelines for treating depressive disorders with antidepressants was undertaken to incorporate new evidence and to update the recommendations where appropriate. A consensus meeting involving experts in depressive disorders and their management was held in May 2006. Key areas in treating depression were reviewed, and the strength of evidence and clinical implications were considered. The guidelines were drawn up after extensive feedback from participants and interested parties. A literature review is provided, which identifies the quality of evidence to inform the recommendations, the strength of which are based on the level of evidence. These guidelines cover the nature and detection of depressive disorders, acute treatment with antidepressant drugs, choice of drug versus alternative treatment, practical issues in prescribing and management, next-step treatment, relapse prevention, treatment of relapse, and stopping treatment.
et al. A systematic review of controlled trials of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of brief psychological treatments for depression. Health Technol Assess 2001;5(35). Health Technology Assessment is indexed in Index Medicus/MEDLINE and Excerpta Medica/ EMBASE. Copies of the Executive Summaries are available from the NCCHTA website (see opposite). Reference lists References and bibliographies from the text of reports of relevant trials and reviews were examined for further RCTs not previously identified, and for papers relating to economic analyses.
Antidepressant prescribing patterns and factors influencing the choice of antidepressant for the treatment of depression were examined in the Factors Influencing Depression Endpoints Research (FINDER) study, a prospective, observational study in 12 European countries of 3468 adults about to start antidepressant medication for their first episode of depression or a new episode of recurrent depression. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) were the most commonly prescribed antidepressant (63.3% patients), followed by serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs, 13.6%), but there was considerable variation across countries. Notably, tricyclic and tetracyclic antidepressants (TCAs) were prescribed for 26.5% patients in Germany. The choice of the antidepressant prescribed was strongly influenced by the previous use of antidepressants, which was significantly associated with the prescription of a SSRI (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.54, 0.76), a SNRI (OR 1.49; 95% CI 1.18, 1.88) or a combination of antidepressants (OR 2.78; 95% CI 1.96, 3.96). Physician factors (age, gender, speciality) and patient factors (severity of depression, age, education, smoking, number of current physical conditions and functional syndromes) were associated with initial antidepressant choice in some models. In conclusion, the prescribing of antidepressants varies by country, and the type of antidepressant chosen is influenced by physician- as well as patient-related factors.
The use of benzodiazepine anxiolytics and hypnotics continues to excite controversy. Views differ from expert to expert and from country to country as to the extent of the problem, or even whether long-term benzodiazepine use actually constitutes a problem. The adverse effects of these drugs have been extensively documented and their effectiveness is being increasingly questioned. Discontinuation is usually beneficial as it is followed by improved psychomotor and cognitive functioning, particularly in the elderly. The potential for dependence and addiction have also become more apparent. The licensing of SSRIs for anxiety disorders has widened the prescribers' therapeutic choices (although this group of medications also have their own adverse effects). Melatonin agonists show promise in some forms of insomnia. Accordingly, it is now even more imperative that long-term benzodiazepine users be reviewed with respect to possible discontinuation. Strategies for discontinuation start with primary-care practitioners, who are still the main prescribers.This review sets out the stratagems that have been evaluated, concentrating on those of a pharmacological nature. Simple interventions include basic monitoring of repeat prescriptions and assessment by the doctor. Even a letter from the primary-care practitioner pointing out the continuing usage of benzodiazepines and questioning their need can result in reduction or cessation of use. Pharmacists also have a role to play in monitoring the use of benzodiazepines, although mobilizing their assistance is not yet routine. Such stratagems can avoid the use of specialist back-up services such as psychiatrists, home care, and addiction and alcohol misuse treatment facilities.Pharmacological interventions for benzodiazepine dependence have been reviewed in detail in a recent Cochrane review, but only eight studies proved adequate for analysis. Carbamazepine was the only drug that appeared to have any useful adjunctive properties for assisting in the discontinuation of benzodiazepines but the available data are insufficient for recommendations to be made regarding its use. Antidepressants can help if the patient is depressed before withdrawal or develops a depressive syndrome during withdrawal. The clearest strategy was to taper the medication; abrupt cessation can only be justified if a very serious adverse effect supervenes during treatment. No clear evidence suggests the optimum rate of tapering, and schedules vary from 4 weeks to several years. Our recommendation is to aim for withdrawal in <6 months, otherwise the withdrawal process can become the morbid focus of the patient's existence. Substitution of diazepam for another benzodiazepine can be helpful, at least logistically, as diazepam is available in a liquid formulation.Psychological interventions range from simple support through counselling to expert cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT). Group therapy may be helpful as it at least provides support from other patients. The value of counselling is not established and it ca...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.