Subject(s)
Aging/psychology , Agriculture , Retirement , Aged , Depressive Disorder/psychology , Family , Humans , Interpersonal Relations , Male , Role , Self ConceptABSTRACT
Mianserin and nomifensine were compared in 61 depressive patients in a randomized double-blind multicentre study. During the first week the antidepressant dosages were low, mianserin 30 mg and nomifensine 50 mg. After the first week dosages were doubled to 60 mg and 100 mg respectively. At baseline there were no significant differences between treatment groups for sex, age, class of depression, previous treatment, somatic symptoms, previous vital events, global clinical appreciation, global sleep appreciation, and depression assessed on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) or the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS). Assessments were made at 7, 14 and 28 days. There were no significant differences between treatment groups for HDRS, MADRS or HARS, either globally or when divided into endogenous and reactive subgroups. Compared with nomifensine there were significantly greater scores with mianserin for global clinical appreciation and global sleep appreciation. There were more withdrawals and dosage changes with nomifensine than with mianserin. Regarding concomitant treatment, significantly less anxiolytics were prescribed to the mianserin group. This study confirms that mianserin is an effective and sedative antidepressant whereas nomifensine is an effective and stimulating antidepressant.
Subject(s)
Adjustment Disorders/drug therapy , Anti-Anxiety Agents , Anxiety/drug therapy , Bipolar Disorder/drug therapy , Depressive Disorder/drug therapy , Dibenzazepines/therapeutic use , Mianserin/therapeutic use , Nomifensine/therapeutic use , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Depressive Disorder/physiopathology , Depressive Disorder, Major/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Male , Mianserin/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Nomifensine/adverse effectsABSTRACT
The antidepressant properties of amineptine and imipramine were compared in a double-blind controlled trial involving 38 patients randomized to one or the other treatment. The results were evaluated globally using three scales of psychiatric assessment: Hamilton's depression rating scale, brief psychiatric rating scale (Pichot, Overall and Gorham) and nursing staff observation scale (N.O.S.I.E.). Statistical analysis of the overall score, individual items and grouped items failed to demonstrate any significant difference between the two drugs for the periods considered. Detailed information is provided on the acceptability of both drugs, particularly as regards the cardiovascular system.
Subject(s)
Antidepressive Agents, Tricyclic/therapeutic use , Depressive Disorder/drug therapy , Dibenzocycloheptenes/therapeutic use , Imipramine/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Clinical Trials as Topic , Double-Blind Method , Electrocardiography , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Time FactorsABSTRACT
An open clinical study of loxapine succinate was developed on 30 hospitalized psychiatric patients in order to confirm its antipsychotic properties and its originality opposite the other major neuroleptics. Dosages ranged from 100 to 200 mg per day in 12 cases (40%), and more than 200 mg in serious psychosis or unamenable to therapeutic for which inferior dosages were inefficacious (11 cases). 56,7% of favourable results have been obtained, with a fair improvement of whole symptoms, paranoïd schizophrenic attack and acute delusions. Tolerance was remarkable: no neuro-vegetative manifestation was reported. The considerable sedative effect of loxapine had involved moderate and no invalidating drowsiness in 23% of cases. The extra-pyramidal occurring symptoms disappeared within 2 or 3 days. So loxapine succinate in proving to be a major first intention neuroleptic, suiting a considerable antipsychotic efficacy to a good tolerance, allowing new perspectives in the therapeutic and the approach of psychotic patients.
