No abstract

Objectives To examine the risk of relapse and time to relapse after discontinuation of antidepressants in patients with anxiety disorder who responded to antidepressants, and to explore whether relapse risk is related to type of anxiety disorder, type of antidepressant, mode of discontinuation, duration of treatment and follow-up, comorbidity, and allowance of psychotherapy. Design Systematic review and meta-analyses of relapse prevention trials. Data sources PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and clinical trial registers (from inception to July 2016). Study selection Eligible studies included patients with anxiety disorder who responded to antidepressants, randomised patients double blind to either continuing antidepressants or switching to placebo, and compared relapse rates or time to relapse. Data extraction Two independent raters selected studies and extracted data. Random effect models were used to estimate odds ratios for relapse, hazard ratios for time to relapse, and relapse prevalence per group. The effect of various categorical and continuous variables was explored with subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses respectively. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool. Results The meta-analysis included 28 studies (n=5233) examining relapse with a maximum follow-up of one year. Across studies, risk of bias was considered low. Discontinuation increased the odds of relapse compared with continuing antidepressants (summary odds ratio 3.11, 95% confidence interval 2.48 to 3.89). Subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses showed no statistical significance. Time to relapse (n=3002) was shorter when antidepressants were discontinued (summary hazard ratio 3.63, 2.58 to 5.10; n=11 studies). Summary relapse prevalences were 36.4% (30.8% to 42.1%; n=28 studies) for the placebo group and 16.4% (12.6% to 20.1%; n=28 studies) for the antidepressant group, but prevalence varied considerably across studies, most likely owing to differences in the length of follow-up. Dropout was higher in the placebo group (summary odds ratio 1.31, 1.06 to 1.63; n=27 studies). Conclusions Up to one year of follow-up, discontinuation of antidepressant treatment results in higher relapse rates among responders compared with treatment continuation. The lack of evidence after a one year period should not be interpreted as explicit advice to discontinue antidepressants after one year. Given the chronicity of anxiety disorders, treatment should be directed by long term considerations, including relapse prevalence, side effects, and patients’ preferences.

No abstract

No abstract

Background In recent years, virtual reality exposure–based cognitive behavioral therapy (VRE-CBT) has shown good treatment results in (subclinical) anxiety disorders and seems to be a good alternative to exposure in vivo in regular cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). However, previous meta-analyses on the efficacy of VRE-CBT on anxiety disorders have included studies on specific phobias and subthreshold anxiety; therefore, these results may not be generalizable to patients with more severe and disabling anxiety disorders. Objective The objective of our study is to determine the efficacy of VRE-CBT on more severe anxiety disorders, excluding specific phobias and subthreshold anxiety disorders. Meta-analyses will be conducted to examine the efficacy of VRE-CBT versus waitlist and regular CBT. Our secondary objectives are to examine whether the efficacy differs according to the type of anxiety disorder, type of recruitment, and type of VRE-CBT (virtual reality exposure either with or without regular CBT). Furthermore, attrition in VRE-CBT and CBT will be compared. Methods Studies published until August 20, 2020, were retrieved through systematic literature searches in PubMed, PsycINFO, and Embase. We calculated the effect sizes (Hedges g) for the difference between the conditions and their 95% CIs for posttest and follow-up measurements in a random effects model. A separate meta-analysis was performed to compare attrition between the VRE-CBT and CBT conditions. Results A total of 16 trials with 817 participants were included. We identified 10 comparisons between VRE-CBT and a waitlist condition and 13 comparisons between VRE-CBT and a CBT condition. With regard to risk of bias, information on random sequence generation, allocation concealment, and risk of bias for selective outcome reporting was often absent or unclear. The mean effect size of VRE-CBT compared with waitlist (nco=10) was medium and significant, favoring VRE-CBT (Hedges g=−0.490, 95% CI −0.82 to −0.16; P=.003). The mean effect size of VRE-CBT compared with CBT (nco=13) was small and nonsignificant, favoring CBT (Hedges g=0.083, 95% CI −0.13 to 0.30; P=.45). The dropout rates between VRE-CBT and CBT (nco=10) showed no significant difference (odds ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.49-1.27; P=.32). There were no indications of small study effects or publication bias. Conclusions The results of our study show that VRE-CBT is more effective than waitlist and as effective as CBT in the treatment of more severe anxiety disorders. Therefore, VRE-CBT may be considered a promising alternative to CBT for patients with more severe anxiety disorders. Higher-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to verify the robustness of these findings.

Use of antidepressants has recently increased, mainly caused by the increase of long-term users. Although evidence-based indications for long-term use are lacking, it is assumed that long-term use is unnecessary or undesirable in some patients. Perceived barriers to discontinuing antidepressants contribute to unnecessary or undesirable long-term use. Identifying barriers prior to, during and following discontinuation may enable strategies to overcome them. This narrative review summarises relevant qualitative and quantitative articles on perceived barriers to discontinuing antidepressants and provides recommendations for clinical practice. We can conclude that implications for clinical practice are diverse and the most important barriers experienced by patients and physicians include the fear of relapse or recurrence, insufficient evaluation and monitoring, withdrawal symptoms, and actual relapse or recurrence.

Background Anxiety disorders frequently recur in clinical populations, but the risk of recurrence of anxiety disorders is largely unknown in the general population. In this study, recurrence of anxiety and its predictors were studied in a large cohort of the adult general population. Methods Baseline, 3-year and 6-year follow-up data were derived from the Netherlands Mental Health Survey and Incidence Study-2 (NEMESIS-2). Respondents (N = 468) who had been in remission for at least a year prior to baseline were included. Recurrence was assessed at 3 and 6 years after baseline, using the Composite International Diagnostic Interview version 3.0. Cumulative recurrence rates were estimated using the number of years since remission of the last anxiety disorder. Furthermore, Cox regression analyses were conducted to investigate predictors of recurrence, using a broad range of putative predictors. Results The estimated cumulative recurrence rate was 2.1% at 1 year, 6.6% at 5 years, 10.6% at 10 years, and 16.2% at 20 years. Univariate regression analyses predicted a shorter time to recurrence for several variables, of which younger age at interview, parental psychopathology, neuroticism and a current depressive disorder remained significant in the, age and gender-adjusted, multivariable regression analysis. Conclusions Recurrence of anxiety disorders in the general population is common and the risk of recurrence extends over a lengthy period of time. In clinical practice, alertness to recurrence, monitoring of symptoms, and quick access to health care in case of recurrence are needed.

No abstract