ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: An observational non-interventional study was conducted to obtain data on the efficacy and safety of Prospekta in the treatment of postpsychotic asthenia in patients with cognitive impairment (CI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: We selected 69 patients aged 18-75 years with asthenic disorders that developed after suffering psychotic conditions and CI, who were prescribed Prospekta. At four visits (at baseline, after 2, 4 and 8 weeks), the doctor collected complaints, anamnesis, examined the patient, assessed the severity of asthenia on the MFI-20 (The Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory-20) scale, CI - on the MMSE (The Mini-mental state examination). Concomitant diseases and maintenance therapy of the underlying disease were recorded, and the safety of treatment with Prospect was evaluated. At the last visit, the doctor's clinical impression was assessed using the CGI-I (Clinical Global Impression - Global Improvement Scale). RESULTS: The analysis included data from 69 patients (mean age 45.7 years), of which 27 (33.4%) were women. Prospekta reduced the severity of asthenia on the MFI-20 scale from 85.7±6.6 to 51.6±7.1 points, including general asthenia, mental and physical asthenia, and contributed to an increase in activity and motivation (p<0.001). 8-week treatment with Prospekta improved cognitive function on the MMSE scale from 25.7±3.7 to 28.8±1.5 points (p<0.001). There was no effect of the drug on blood pressure, heart rate. 76 adverse events (AEs) were detected in 22 patients, of which 62 AEs (82%) were of mild severity, 14 AEs (18%) were of moderate severity. A causal relationship of AEs with taking Prospekta, according to doctors, was absent in 48 (63%) cases. CONCLUSION: Prospekta is an effective and safe drug for the treatment of asthenic disorders that have developed after suffering psychotic conditions in patients with CI.
Subject(s)
Asthenia , Cognitive Dysfunction , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Male , Asthenia/drug therapy , Asthenia/etiology , Cognitive Dysfunction/etiology , Cognition , Blood Pressure , Heart RateABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: A comparative evaluation of the efficacy and safety of different types of pharmacotherapy: antidepressant monotherapy (agomelatine or sertraline), mood stabilizer monotherapy (valproate) and combination therapy (valproate + sertraline) in bipolar II disorder patients with major depressive episode. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A 6-week open randomized study included 89 inpatients and outpatients. Basic criteria of efficacy were ≥50% reduction of HAMD total score and remission (≤7 points) to the end of the study. RESULTS: At the end of the study (day 42), the highest number of patients with 50% reduction of HAMD total score was noted in the sertraline (65%) and combination therapy (60%) groups, in the valproate group it was 57.1%, and the lowest - in agomelatine group (42.9%), but the differences were not statistically significant. Remission was observed in 45% patients in combination therapy group compared with 33.3% in valproate group, 32.1% in agomelatine group and only 20% in group of sertraline, but the differences between the groups also were not significant. CONCLUSION: Antidepressants (agomelatine and sertraline) have demonstrated fast but insufficient influence on the reduction of depression in the patients. Treatment with sertraline rarely led to remission and was frequently associated with high rate of switch into hypomania. Valproate therapy was moderately effective and well-tolerated without risk of switching. Combination of valproic acid with sertraline had the highest efficacy and was fairly well tolerated.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There are no validated screening tools for Bipolar Disorder (BD) in Russia. OBJECTIVE: To validate the Russian version of the HCL-32 for the detection of Bipolar II disorder (BD II) in patients with Recurrent Depressive Disorder (RDD). METHODS: 409 patients with a current diagnosis of RDD were recruited. The diagnosis was confirmed by the validated Russian version of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Another investigator interviewed the patients using the ÐСL-32 questions. RESULTS: The total HCL-32 score in patients with BD II was significantly higher than in patients with RDD: 18.2 (4.22) versus 10.85 (5.81) (p<0.001, d=1447). At the cut-off 14 points the sensitivity was 83.7%, specificity 71.9% (p<0.001). The Cronbach's alpha was 0.887 that means good internal consistency. The best discrimination was achieved with 8 items: decreased need for sleep, less shyness or inhibition, talkativeness, more jokes and puns, jumping thoughts distractibility, exhausting or irritating others and high and more optimistic mood. We proposed the reduced variant of the scale, that includes only these 8 variables, with sensitivity 90.5%, specificity 69.8% (AUC=0.88). CONCLUSIONS: The Russian version of the HCL-32 displayed a good ratio of sensitivity to specificity and can be recommended as a validated screening instrument. An 8-item version of HCL needs further research. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include the specific nature of the sample, the HCL-32 assessment carried out by a psychiatrist, no comparison with other BD screening scales. The results of the 8-item version may be sample and culture dependent.
Subject(s)
Bipolar Disorder/diagnosis , Depression/complications , Surveys and Questionnaires , Adult , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Recurrence , Reproducibility of Results , RussiaABSTRACT
The analysis of modern Russian and world literature on the diagnosis and treatment of a depressive phase of bipolar affective disorder (BAD) is presented. Studies on the efficacy of different groups of drugs (antidepressants, mood stabilizers, antipsychotics) used in the treatment of bipolar disorders are reviewed. Expert views on the treatment of bipolar disorders are discussed.
