Controlled Trials of Treatments for Major Depression in Multiple Sclerosis

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dawn Ehde
Neurology ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 61 (11) ◽  
pp. 1524-1527 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. B. Patten ◽  
C. A. Beck ◽  
J. V.A. Williams ◽  
C. Barbui ◽  
L. M. Metz

1986 ◽  
Vol 24 (22) ◽  
pp. 88.1-88

Readers have asked why we said that the continuing use of hyperbaric oxygen is not recommended. The reason is that the controlled trials of this treatment in the UK have not shown any clear benefit.1,2 Recent claims that titration of oxygen pressure for individual patients gives useful results for most patients,3 and that the treatment is bound to help patients suffering an acute attack,4 have not been tested in controlled trials.


1992 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 338B
Author(s):  
R. Marcus ◽  
D. Roberts ◽  
R. Francis ◽  
U. Schwiderski ◽  
R. Gammans ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Michael J.L. Sullivan ◽  
Brian Weinshenker ◽  
Samuel Mikail ◽  
Scott R. Bishop

AbstractBackgroundMultiple Sclerosis (MS) is associated with a high risk of developing major depression, but depression in MS patients frequently goes undetected and untreated. The current study examined the clinical utility of the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) as a screening measure for major depression in newly diagnosed MS patients.MethodsForty-six new referrals to an MS clinic completed the BDI and participated in a structured interview for major depression, within 2 months of the diagnosis of MS.ResultsAccording to DSM-III-R criteria, 40% of patients were diagnosed with major depression, 22% had adjustment disorder with depressed mood, and 37% showed no evidence of mood disorder. Sensitivity and specificity values, and positive and negative predictive values are reported for every BDI cut-off score between 9 and 21.ConclusionsA BDI cut-off score of 13 (sensitivity = .71, specificity = .79) is recommended as optimal for use in screening for major depression in newly diagnosed MS patients. The use of the BDI as a screening measure for major depression must proceed with caution given that a cut-off score of 13 still yielded a false-negative rate of 30%.


2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (5) ◽  
pp. 1173-1181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelo T. Berlim ◽  
Hannah J. Broadbent ◽  
Frederique Van den Eynde

Abstract Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a safe and effective treatment for major depression (MD). However, the perceived lack of a suitable sham rTMS condition might have compromised the success of blinding procedures in clinical trials. Thus, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, double-blind and sham-controlled trials (RCTs) on high frequency (HF-), low frequency (LF-) and bilateral rTMS for MD. We searched the literature from January 1995 to July 2012 using Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Scopus. The main outcome measure was participants' ability to correctly guess their treatment allocation at study end. We used a random-effects model and risk difference (RD). Overall, data were obtained from seven and two RCTs on HF- and bilateral rTMS, respectively. No RCT on LF-rTMS reporting on blinding success was found. HF- and bilateral rTMS trials enrolled 396 and 93 depressed subjects and offered an average of approximately 13 sessions. At study end, 52 and 59% of subjects receiving HF-rTMS and sham rTMS were able to correctly guess their treatment allocation, a non-significant difference (RD = −0.04; z = −0.51; p = 0.61). Furthermore, 63.3 and 57.5% of subjects receiving bilateral and sham rTMS were able to correctly guess their treatment allocation, also a non-significant difference (RD = 0.05; z = 0.49; p = 0.62). In addition, the use of angulation and sham coil in HF-rTMS trials produced similar results. In summary, existing sham rTMS interventions appear to result in acceptable levels of blinding regarding treatment allocation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document