Treatment Guidelines for Depression: Greater Emphasis on Physical Activity is Needed

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 ◽  
pp. 1-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Hallgren ◽  
B. Stubbs ◽  
D. Vancampfort ◽  
A. Lundin ◽  
P. Jääkallio ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (9) ◽  
pp. 587-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachael W Taylor ◽  
Lindsey Marwood ◽  
Emanuella Oprea ◽  
Valeria DeAngel ◽  
Sarah Mather ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Pharmacological augmentation is a recommended strategy for patients with treatment-resistant depression. A range of guidelines provide advice on treatment selection, prescription, monitoring and discontinuation, but variation in the content and quality of guidelines may limit the provision of objective, evidence-based care. This is of importance given the side effect burden and poorer long-term outcomes associated with polypharmacy and treatment-resistant depression. This review provides a definitive overview of pharmacological augmentation recommendations by assessing the quality of guidelines for depression and comparing the recommendations made. Methods A systematic literature search identified current treatment guidelines for depression published in English. Guidelines were quality assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II tool. Data relating to the prescription of pharmacological augmenters were extracted from those developed with sufficient rigor, and the included recommendations compared. Results Total of 1696 records were identified, 19 guidelines were assessed for quality, and 10 were included. Guidelines differed in their quality, the stage at which augmentation was recommended, the agents included, and the evidence base cited. Lithium and atypical antipsychotics were recommended by all 10, though the specific advice was not consistent. Of the 15 augmenters identified, no others were universally recommended. Conclusions This review provides a comprehensive overview of current pharmacological augmentation recommendations for major depression and will support clinicians in selecting appropriate treatment guidance. Although some variation can be accounted for by date of guideline publication, and limited evidence from clinical trials, there is a clear need for greater consistency across guidelines to ensure patients receive consistent evidence-based care.


2001 ◽  
Vol 72 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.M Marcus ◽  
K.L Barry ◽  
H.A Flynn ◽  
R Tandon ◽  
J.F Greden

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yamashita Makoto ◽  
Kawai Keisuke ◽  
Toda Kenta ◽  
Aso Suzuyama Chie ◽  
Suematsu Takafumi ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose Patients with anorexia nervosa (AN) require appropriate nutrient therapy and physical activity management. Eating disorder treatment guidelines do not include safe, evidence-based intensity criteria for exercise. This study used cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPX) to evaluate the exercise tolerance of patients with AN and develop treatment guidelines to optimize their physical activity. Methods CPX was done with 14 female AN patients admitted to a specialized eating disorder unit between 2015 and 2019. Their anaerobic threshold (AT) was determined by assessing their exercise tolerance using CPX and compared with 14 healthy controls (HC). The metabolic equivalents (AT-METS) were compared when AT was reached. We examined factors related to AT (AN-AT) in the AN group, including age, body mass index (BMI), previous lowest weight, minimum BMI, past duration of BMI < 15, exercise history, and ΔHR (heart rate at the AT - resting heart rate). Results The AT of the AN group (BMI: 15.7 [Mean] ± 1.8 [SD]) was significantly lower than the HC group (BMI: 19.7 ± 1.8) (AN: 10.0 ± 1.8 vs HC: 15.2 ± 3.0 ml/kg/min, P<0.001). AT-METS was also significantly lower in the AN than the HC group (AN: 2.9 ± 0.52 vs HC: 4.4 ± 0.91, P<0.001). AN-AT was highly influenced by ΔHR. Conclusion The AT-METS level for these AN patients was 2.5-3.3 METS, and this index can be used by clinicians to teach AN patients a safe exercise intensity. CPX and AT-METS are useful tools for clinicians to manage physical activity in AN patients. Level of evidence III: Evidence obtained from case-control analytic studies


Medical Care ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 42 (12) ◽  
pp. 1176-1185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie M. Donohue ◽  
Ernst R. Berndt ◽  
Meredith Rosenthal ◽  
Arnold M. Epstein ◽  
Richard G. Frank

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heike Spaderna ◽  
Jeremia M. Hoffman ◽  
Susan Hellwig ◽  
Vincent M. Brandenburg

Abstract. Background: Physical activity (PA) is recommended by heart failure treatment guidelines. Adherence to exercise prescriptions is low and not much is known about everyday PA in this patient group. Aims: This study describes objectively assessed everyday PA/sedentary behavior in men and women with chronic heart failure and examines associations of potential barriers for engaging in PA, namely fear of physical activity (FoPA), general anxiety, and depression, with indicators of PA and sedentary behavior. Method: In 61 outpatients with heart failure (67.5 ± 10.7 years of age) the impact of FoPA, trait anxiety, and depression on 6-day accelerometer measures was evaluated using linear regression models. Results: Sedentary behavior was prevalent in men and women alike, with lying down and sitting/standing as predominant activity classes during daytime. Men had higher PA energy expenditure (726 vs. 585 kcal/d, Cohen’s effect size d = 0.74) and walked up/down more often (0.21% vs. 0.12% of total PA, d = 0.56) than women. FoPA did not differ between sexes. FoPA, but not anxiety and depression, significantly and consistently predicted less walking up/down independent of covariates (β-values between −0.26 and −0.44, p-values < 0.024). Limitations: The self-selected sample included few women. Medical data were assessed via self-reports. Conclusion: FoPA, but not anxiety and depression, significantly and consistently predicted less walking up/down independent of covariates. These preliminary findings highlight FoPA as a barrier to everyday PA in patients with heart failure.


JAMA ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 197 (11) ◽  
pp. 891-893 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. P. Novak

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document