The Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Depressive Disorder (KMAP-DD) first was published in 2002, and has been revised four times, in 2006, 2012, 2017, and 2021. In this review, we compared recommendations from the recently revised KMAP-DD 2021 to four global clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for depression published after 2010. The recommendations from the KMAP-DD 2021 were similar to those from other CPGs, although there were some differences. The KMAP-DD 2021 reflected social culture and the healthcare system in Korea and recent evidence about pharmacotherapy for depression, as did other recently published evidence-based guidelines. Despite some intrinsic limitations as an expert consensus-based guideline, the KMAP-DD 2021 can be helpful for Korean psychiatrists making decisions in clinical settings by complementing previously published evidence-based guidelines, especially for some clinical situations lacking evidence from rigorously designed clinical trials.
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of continued olanzapine (OLA) versus amisulpride (AMI) augmentation in schizophrenic patients with poor response to OLA monotherapy. Methods: The present 4-week, randomized, rater-blinded study included 25 patients with schizophrenia who were partially or completely unresponsive to treatment with OLA monotherapy. Eligible subjects were randomly assigned at a 1:1 ratio to continuation of OLA monotherapy (OLA group) or OLA with AMI augmentation (AMI group). Efficacy was primarily evaluated using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) at baseline and at 1, 2, and 4 weeks. Results: The changes in PANSS total score and PANSS-positive subscale score were significantly different (p < 0.05) between the OLA and AMI groups. The differences between the two groups in PANSS-negative subscale, PANSS-general subscale, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) scale scores were not statistically significant. Conclusion: AMI augmentation could be an effective strategy for patients with schizophrenia who show inadequate early response to OLA monotherapy.
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has multiple negative impacts on the psychiatric health of both those previously infected and not infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. Moreover, the negative impacts of COVID-19 are closely associated with geographical region, culture, medical system, and ethnic background. We summarized the evidence of the impact of COVID-19 on the psychiatric health of the Korean population. This narrative review included thirteen research articles, which investigated the impact of COVID-19 on the psychiatric health of Koreans. COVID-19 survivors were reported to have a 2.4 times greater risk of developing psychiatric disorders compared to members of a control group, and anxiety and stress-related disorders were the most common newly diagnosed psychiatric illnesses. Studies also reported that COVID-19 survivors had a 3.33-fold higher prevalence of insomnia, a 2.72-fold higher prevalence of mild cognitive impairment, and a 3.09-fold higher prevalence of dementia compared to the control group. In addition, more than four studies have highlighted that the medical staff members, including nurses and medical students, exhibit a greater negative psychiatric impact of COVID-19. However, none of the articles investigated the biological pathophysiology or mechanism linking COVID-19 and the risk of diverse psychiatric disorders. Moreover, none of the studies were actual prospective studies. Thus, longitudinal studies are needed to more clearly elucidate the effect of COVID-19 on the psychiatric health of the Korean population. Lastly, studies focusing on preventing and treating COVID-19–associated psychiatric problems are needed to provide a benefit in real clinical settings.
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.