First international consensus statement on sports psychiatry.

Sports psychiatry is a young field of medicine and psychiatry that focuses on mental health among athletes, and sports and exercise within psychiatry and mental disorders. However, the development of sports psychiatry and its fields of activity vary from region to region and are not uniform yet. Sports psychiatry and the role of sports psychiatrists have also already been discussed in the field of sports and exercise medicine, and within medical teams in competitive and elite sports. A uniform definition on sports psychiatry, its fields of activity, sports psychiatrist, and the essential knowledge, skills, and abilities (plus attitudes, eKSA+A) of the sports psychiatrist were developed as part of an International Society for Sports Psychiatry (ISSP) Summit, as well as First International Consensus Statement on Sports Psychiatry. Three fields of activity can be distinguished within sports psychiatry: (i) mental health and disorders in competitive and elite sports, (ii) sports and exercise in prevention of and treatment for mental disorders, and (iii) mental health and sport-specific mental disorders in recreational sports. Each of these fields have its own eKSA+A. The definitions on sports psychiatry and sports psychiatrists, as well as the framework of eKSA+A in the different fields of activity of sports psychiatrists will help to unify and standardize the future development of sports psychiatry, establish a standard of service within sports psychiatry and together with the neighboring disciplines, and should be included into current, and future sports psychiatry education and training.

Step away from depression-results from a multicenter randomized clinical trial with a pedometer intervention during and after inpatient treatment of depression.

Evidence for the effectiveness of physical activity (PA) in the treatment of depression prevails for outpatients with mild and moderate symptom levels. For inpatient treatment of severe depression, evidence-based effectiveness exists only for structured and supervised group PA interventions. The Step Away from Depression (SAD) study investigated the effectiveness of an individual pedometer intervention (PI) combined with an activity diary added to inpatient treatment as usual (TAU). In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, 192 patients were randomized to TAU or TAU plus PI. The two primary outcomes at discharge were depression-blindly rated with the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)-and average number of daily steps measured by accelerometers. Secondary outcomes were self-rated depression and PA, anxiety, remission and response rates. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) revealed no significant difference between both groups for depression and daily steps. Mean MADRS scores at baseline were 29.5 (SD = 8.3) for PI + TAU and 28.8 (SD = 8.1) for TAU and 16.4 (SD = 10.3) and 17.2 (SD = 9.9) at discharge, respectively. Daily steps rose from 6285 (SD = 2321) for PI + TAU and 6182 (SD = 2290) for TAU to 7248 (SD = 2939) and 7325 (SD = 3357). No differences emerged between groups in secondary outcomes. For severely depressed inpatients, a PI without supervision or further psychological interventions is not effective. Monitoring, social reinforcement and motivational strategies should be incorporated in PA interventions for this population to reach effectiveness.

Risk of PTSD Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Patients in Opioid Substitution Treatment.

Background: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of patients suffering from addictive disorders is of major concern. This study aimed to explore the presence and potential increase in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, depression, and anxiety since the beginning of the pandemic for patients in opioid substitution therapy (OST). Methods: This cross-sectional survey study evaluated a clinical sample of patients in OST (N = 123). Symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) due to the COVID-19 pandemic were assessed by an adapted version of the impact of event scale (IES-R), resulting in two subgroups of low and high risk for PTSD. The depression, anxiety, and stress scale (DASS-21) was applied to collect data on the respective symptoms, and changes since the onset of the pandemic were reported on separate scales. Sociodemographic and COVID-19 related factors, as well as data on craving, consumption patterns, concomitant use, and the drug market were further assessed. Results: A binary logistic regression analysis confirmed the impact of self-perceived higher burden by psychological and economic factors on the elevated risk for PTSD due to the pandemic. The high-risk PTSD group also showed higher levels of depression, anxiety and stress, as well as a more pronounced deterioration in these symptoms since the pandemic. While reported levels of craving did not differ between the two groups, the high-risk PTSD group indicated a significantly higher increase in craving since the crisis, when compared to the low-risk group. Discussion: Our findings demonstrate elevated levels of clinical symptoms among patients in OST, with more than a quarter of patients found at risk for PTSD due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, about 30-50% of our patients reported concerning levels of depression, anxiety, or stress. Special attention should be drawn to these findings, and potential deterioration of the situation should be addressed by health care facilities. Particularly, psychological, and financial burden due to the crisis were identified as factors increasing the risk for PTSD. These factors can easily be evaluated during routine anamneses, and might be a valuable source of information, when special attention is needed.