Prevalence of suicidal ideation and planning in patients with major depressive disorder: A meta-analysis of observation studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 293 ◽  
pp. 148-158
Author(s):  
Hong Cai ◽  
Yu Jin ◽  
Shou Liu ◽  
Qinge Zhang ◽  
Ling Zhang ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (01) ◽  
pp. 122-128
Author(s):  
Ralte Lalthankimi ◽  
Padmavathi Nagarajan ◽  
Vikas Menon ◽  
Jeby Jose Olickal

Abstract Objectives Mental disorders have a large impact on death by suicide. Hence, this study aims to determine the prevalence of suicidal behaviors among major depressive disorder (MDD) patients and the associated factors. Materials and Methods This cross-sectional analytical study was conducted among individuals aged 18 to 65 years, diagnosed with MDD in the Psychiatry Outpatient Department of a Tertiary Care Center, Puducherry during March to October 2019. Severity of depression was assessed using Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale was used to find the suicidal behaviors. Results For 166 participants in the study, mean (standard deviation) age was 40 (11) years and majority were females (76%). More than one-third (37%) had severe or very severe depression, and the prevalence of suicidal ideation, plan, and attempts were 83, 24, and 35%, respectively. After adjusting the covariates, the severity of depression and unemployment were significantly associated with suicidal attempts (adjusted prevalence ratios [aPR] = 11.4 and 1.9), and very severe depression was associated with suicidal ideation (aPR = 1.6). Among 140 individuals with suicidal ideation, 45 (32%) had an ideation frequency of 2 to 3 times/week, 69 (50%) had ideation for 1 hour, 36 (26%) could control ideation with little difficulty, and 12% had suicidal ideation mostly to end or stop their pain. Conclusion Suicidal ideation and attempts were significantly high in MDD patients, and the severity of depression was significantly associated with it. Early identification of high-risk suicidal behavior and implementation of effective preventive interventions are necessary to reduce death by suicide in these groups.



2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Juul ◽  
Faiza Siddiqui ◽  
Marija Barbateskovic ◽  
Caroline Kamp Jørgensen ◽  
Michael Pascal Hengartner ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Major depressive disorder is one of the most common, burdensome, and costly psychiatric disorders worldwide. Antidepressants are frequently used to treat major depressive disorder. It has been shown repeatedly that antidepressants seem to reduce depressive symptoms with a statistically significant effect, but the clinical importance of the effect sizes seems questionable. Both beneficial and harmful effects of antidepressants have not previously been sufficiently assessed. The main objective of this review will be to evaluate the beneficial and harmful effects of antidepressants versus placebo, ‘active placebo’, or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder. Methods/design A systematic review with meta-analysis will be reported as recommended by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA), bias will be assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool-version 2 (ROB2), our eight-step procedure will be used to assess if the thresholds for clinical significance are crossed, Trial Sequential Analysis will be conducted to control for random errors, and the certainty of the evidence will be assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. To identify relevant trials, we will search both for published and unpublished trials in major medical databases from their inception to the present. Clinical study reports will be obtained from regulatory authorities and pharmaceutical companies. Two review authors will independently screen the results of the literature searches, extract data, and perform risk of bias assessment. We will include any published or unpublished randomised clinical trial comparing one or more antidepressants with placebo, ‘active placebo’, or no intervention for adults with major depressive disorder. The following active agents will be included: agomelatine, amineptine, amitriptyline, bupropion, butriptyline, cianopramine, citalopram, clomipramine, dapoxetine, demexiptiline, desipramine, desvenlafaxine, dibenzepin, dosulepin, dothiepin, doxepin, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, imipramine, iprindole, levomilnacipran, lofepramine, maprotiline, melitracen, metapramine, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, nortriptyline, noxiptiline, opipramol, paroxetine, protriptyline, quinupramine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, tianeptine, trimipramine, venlafaxine, vilazodone, and vortioxetine. Primary outcomes will be depressive symptoms, serious adverse events, and quality of life. Secondary outcomes will be suicide or suicide attempt, suicidal ideation, and non-serious adverse events. Discussion As antidepressants are commonly used to treat major depressive disorder in adults, a systematic review evaluating their beneficial and harmful effects is urgently needed. This review will inform best practice in treatment and clinical research of this highly prevalent and burdensome disorder. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020220279





2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Powell ◽  
Joanna Martin ◽  
Anita Thapar ◽  
Frances Rice ◽  
Richard J. L. Anney

AbstractAttention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) demonstrates a high level of comorbidity with major depressive disorder (MDD). One possible contributor to this is that the two disorders show high genetic correlation. However, the specific regions of the genome that may be responsible for this overlap are unclear. To identify variants associated with both ADHD and MDD, we performed a meta-analysis of GWAS of ADHD and MDD. All genome wide significant (p < 5 × 10–8) SNPs in the meta-analysis that were also strongly associated (p < 5 × 10–4) independently with each disorder were followed up. These putatively pleiotropic SNPs were tested for additional associations across a broad range of phenotypes. Fourteen linkage disequilibrium-independent SNPs were associated with each disorder separately (p < 5 × 10–4) and in the cross-disorder meta-analysis (p < 5 × 10–8). Nine of these SNPs had not been highlighted previously in either individual GWAS. Evidence supported nine of the fourteen SNPs acting as eQTL and two as brain eQTL. Index SNPs and their genomic regions demonstrated associations with other mental health phenotypes. Through conducting meta-analysis on ADHD and MDD only, our results build upon the previously observed genetic correlation between ADHD and MDD and reveal novel genomic regions that may be implicated in this overlap.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document