Background Terminally ill patients may experience existential distress, depression, or anxiety, limiting quality of life in the final stage. Existing psychotherapeutic or pharmacological interventions have (time) limited efficacy. Psychedelic treatment may be a safe and effective alternative treatment option. Aim Systematically review studies on psychedelic treatment with and without psychotherapy for existential distress, depression, and anxiety in terminally ill patients. Methods Medline, PsycINFO, and Embase were searched for original-data studies on the treatment of depression, anxiety, and existential distress with classical or a-typical psychedelics in patients with a terminal illness, using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Results A total of 1850 records were screened, and 33 articles were included in this review: 14 studies on classical psychedelics (DPT, LSD, and psilocybin) and 19 studies on atypical psychedelics (MDMA and ketamine). Results of early pre-post studies are promising but have serious methodological flaws. Recent (controlled) trials with LSD, psilocybin, ketamine, and MDMA are of higher methodological quality and indicate positive effects on existential and spiritual well-being, quality of life, acceptance, and reduction of anxiety and depression with few adverse and no serious adverse effects. Conclusions Both classical and a-typical psychedelics are promising treatment options in patients with terminal illness. To draw final conclusions on effectiveness and safety of psychedelics, we need larger high-quality studies for classical psychedelics and MDMA. Ketamine studies should pay more attention to existential dimensions of well-being and the psychotherapeutic context of the treatment.
BackgroundKetamine and its enantiomer esketamine represent promising new treatments for treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Esketamine induces acute, transient psychoactive effects. How patients perceive esketamine treatment, and which conditions facilitate optimal outcomes, remains poorly understood. Understanding patient perspectives on these phenomena is important to identify unmet needs, which can be used to improve (es)ketamine treatments.AimsTo explore the perspectives of TRD patients participating in “off label” oral esketamine treatment.Materials and methodsIn-depth interviews were conducted with 17 patients (11 women) after a six-week, twice-weekly esketamine treatment program, and subsequently after six months of at-home use. Interviews explored participants’ perspectives, expectations, and experiences with esketamine treatment. Audio interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed following an Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) framework.ResultsKey themes included overwhelming experiences; inadequate preparation; letting go of control; mood states influencing session experiences; presence and emotional support, and supportive settings. Patients’ attempts to let go and give into vs. attempts to maintain control over occasionally overwhelming experiences was a central theme. Multiple factors influenced patients’ ability to give into the experience and appeared to impact their mood and anxiety about future sessions, including level of preparation and education, physical and emotional support, and setting during the session.ConclusionBetter preparation beforehand, an optimized treatment setting, and emotional and psychological support during (es)ketamine sessions can help patients to “let go” and may lead to better quality of care and outcomes. Recommendations to improve quality of patient care in (es)ketamine treatment are provided, including suggestions for the training of nurses and other support staff.
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.