A Randomized Evaluation of MoodFX, a Patient-Centred e-Health Tool to Support Outcome Measurement for Depression: Une évaluation randomisée de MoodFX, un outil de santé en ligne centré sur le patient pour soutenir la mesure du résultat dans la dépression.

BACKGROUND: e-Health tools using validated questionnaires to assess outcomes may facilitate measurement-based care for psychiatric disorders. MoodFX was created as a free online symptom tracker to support patients for outcome measurement in their depression treatment. We conducted a pilot randomized evaluation to examine its usability, and clinical utility. METHODS: Patients presenting with a major depressive episode (within a major depressive or bipolar disorder) were randomly assigned to receive either MoodFX or a health information website as the intervention and control condition, respectively, with follow-up assessment surveys conducted online at baseline, 8 weeks and 6 months. The primary usability outcomes included the percentage of patients with self-reported use of MoodFX 3 or more times during follow up (indicating minimally adequate usage) and usability measures based on the System Usability Scale (SUS). Secondary clinical outcomes included the Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology, Self-Rated (QIDS-SR) and Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). RESULTS: Forty-nine participants were randomized (24 to MoodFX and 25 to the control condition). Of the 23 participants randomized to MoodFX who completed the user survey, 18 (78%) used MoodFX 3 or more times over the 6 months of the study. The mean SUS score of 72.7 (65th-69th percentile) represents good usability. Compared to the control group, the MoodFX group had significantly better improvement on QIDS-SR and PHQ-9 scores, with large effect sizes and higher response rates at 6 months. There were no differences between conditions on other secondary outcomes such as functioning and quality of life. CONCLUSION: MoodFX demonstrated good usability and was associated with reduction in depressive symptoms. This pilot study supports the use of digital tools in depression treatment.

E-health tools may be useful for measuring and tracking symptoms and other outcomes during treatment for depression. This study is a randomized evaluation of MoodFX, a free web-based app that helps patients track their symptoms using validated questionnaires, and also offers depression information and self-management tips. A total of 49 participants with clinical depression were randomized to using MoodFX or a health information website, for 6 months. In a survey, the participants that used MoodFX found it easy and useful to use. In addition, the participants that used MoodFX had greater improvement in depressive symptoms after 6 months, compared to those who used the health information website. These results suggest that MoodFX may be a useful tool to monitor outcomes and support depression treatment.

Blue-Light Therapy for Seasonal and Non-Seasonal Depression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the efficacy and safety of blue-light therapy in seasonal and non-seasonal major depressive disorder (MDD), by comparison to active and inactive control conditions. METHODS: We searched Web of Science, EMBASE, Medline, PsycInfo, and Clinicaltrials.gov through January 17, 2022, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using search terms for blue/blue-enhanced, light therapy, and depression/seasonal affective disorder. Two independent reviewers extracted data. The primary outcome was the difference in endpoint scores on the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale - Seasonal Affective Disorder (SIGH-SAD) or the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale with Atypical Depression Supplement (SIGH-ADS) between blue light and comparison conditions. Secondary outcomes were response (≥ 50% improvement from baseline to endpoint on a depression scale) and remission rates (endpoint score in the remission range). RESULTS: Of 582 articles retrieved, we included nine RCTs (n = 347 participants) assessing blue-light therapy. Seven studies had participants with seasonal MDD and two studies included participants with non-seasonal MDD. Four studies compared blue light to an inactive light condition (efficacy studies), and five studies compared it to an active condition (comparison studies). For the primary outcome, a meta-analysis with random-effects models found no evidence for the efficacy of blue-light conditions compared to inactive conditions (mean difference [MD] = 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.28 to 6.14, P = 0.20); however, blue-light also showed no differences compared to active conditions (MD = -0.11; 95% CI, -2.38 to 2.16, P = 0.93). There were no significant differences in response and remission rates between blue-light conditions and inactive or active light conditions. Blue-light therapy was overall well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of blue-light therapy in the treatment of seasonal and non-seasonal MDD remains unproven. Future trials should be of longer duration, include larger sample sizes, and attempt to better standardize the parameters of light therapy.

Functional outcomes with bright light in monotherapy and combined with fluoxetine in patients with major depressive disorder: Results from the LIFE-D trial.

BACKGROUND: Bright light therapy has been shown to improve depressive symptoms in patients with nonseasonal major depressive disorder (MDD) but there are few studies examining functional outcomes. METHODS: We examined secondary functional outcomes in the 8-week randomized, placebo-sham-controlled LIFE-D trial comparing light therapy, fluoxetine, and the combination in patients with nonseasonal MDD. Functional assessments included the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) and, for employed participants, the Lam Employment Absence and Productivity Scale (LEAPS). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted with SDS and LEAPS change scores from baseline to week 8 as dependent variables, treatment modality (light, fluoxetine) as an independent variable, and baseline SDS and LEAPS scores as covariates. RESULTS: Of 122 randomized participants, SDS data were available for 105 and LEAPS data for 70. For the SDS, there were no interaction effects, but there was a significant small- to medium-sized main effect of light treatment on total SDS scores with corresponding significant effects in the Social Life and Family Life domains, but not in the Work/Study domain. There were no significant interaction or main effects with LEAPS scores. CONCLUSION: Light therapy significantly improved social and family life functioning in patients with MDD. However, work functioning was not significantly improved despite large effect sizes; these results were limited by low statistical power because of small sample sizes. Future studies should use longer treatment durations and be powered to detect clinically relevant differences in functional outcomes.

Quality of Life Impacts of Bright Light Treatment, Fluoxetine, and the Combination in Patients with Nonseasonal Major Depressive Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Bright light therapy is increasingly recommended (alone or in combination with antidepressant medication) to treat symptoms of nonseasonal major depressive disorder (MDD). However, little is known about its impacts on quality of life (QoL), a holistic, patient-valued outcome. METHODS: This study utilizes secondary outcome data from an 8-week randomized, controlled, double blind trial comparing light monotherapy (n = 32), fluoxetine monotherapy (n = 30), and the combination of these (n = 27) to placebo (n = 30). QoL was assessed using the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form (Q-LES-Q-SF). Treatment-related differences in QoL improvements were assessed using a repeated measures analysis of variance. The influence of potential predictors of QoL (demographic variables and change in depressive symptoms) were investigated via hierarchical linear regression. RESULTS: Q-LES-Q-SF scores significantly improved across all treatment conditions; however, no significant differences were observed between treatment arms. QoL remained poor relative to community norms by the end of the trial period: Across conditions, 70.6% of participants had significantly impaired QoL at the 8-week assessment. Reduction in depressive scores was a significant predictor of improved QoL, with the final model accounting for 54% of variance in QoL change scores. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study emphasize that improvement in QoL and reduction in depressive symptoms in MDD, while related, cannot be taken to be synonymous. Adjunctive therapies may be required to address unmet QoL needs in patients with MDD receiving antidepressant or light therapies. Further research is required to explore additional predictors of QoL in order to better refine treatments for MDD.

Relationship between work functioning and self-reported cognitive complaints in patients with major depressive disorder treated with desvenlafaxine.

Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) often report that cognitive difficulties, such as memory problems or poor concentration, interfere with their work functioning. We examined the association between self-reported cognitive complaints and work functioning in employed patients with MDD treated with desvenlafaxine. A sample of 36 adult outpatients with MDD completed subjective cognition (British Columbia Cognitive Complaints Inventory [BC-CCI]) and functioning scales (Sheehan Disability Scale [SDS]; Lam Employment Absence and Productivity Scale [LEAPS]; and Health and Work Performance Questionnaire [HPQ]) before and after 8 weeks of open-label treatment with flexibly-dosed desvenlafaxine (50-100 mg/day). Multiple regression analyses were used to assess the relationship between subjective cognitive measures and work functioning scales. Patients showed significant improvements in clinical, cognitive, and work functioning measures following treatment with desvenlafaxine. A predictive association was found between the BC-CCI and both the SDS and LEAPS, but not with the HPQ, when adjusted for depression severity. Self-report cognitive questionnaires can provide useful information to monitor changes in cognitive functioning over time and to predict improvement in work functioning outcomes.

Appetitive Symptoms Differentially Predict Treatment Response to Fluoxetine, Light, and Placebo in Nonseasonal Major Depression.

OBJECTIVE: We previously reported that morning bright light therapy is efficacious in adults with nonseasonal major depressive disorder (MDD), both on its own and in combination with fluoxetine. Given that appetitive symptoms predict response to bright light therapy in seasonal depression, we examined, in this secondary analysis, whether the same held true in these nonseasonal MDD patients. METHODS: Data were collected from October 7, 2009, to March 11, 2014. One hundred twenty-two patients who met DSM-IV-TR criteria for MDD without a seasonal pattern were randomly assigned to light monotherapy, fluoxetine, combination light and fluoxetine, or double-placebo (inactivated negative ion generator plus placebo pill). Multiple regression assessed the percentage change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores based on treatment condition, appetitive symptom score at baseline (sum of 4 items on the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Seasonal Affective Disorders version), and the condition-by-appetitive score interaction. Sex was considered as a possible moderator of these effects. RESULTS: The overall regression model predicting treatment response was highly significant (P < .001), and the treatment condition-by-appetitive score interaction was a strong predictor of MADRS change scores (t = 2.65, P = .009). For individuals in the placebo group, more appetitive symptoms at baseline predicted less decrease in MADRS scores at 8 weeks (r = -0.37; large effect size). In contrast, for individuals in the active treatment groups, more appetitive symptoms at baseline predicted more of a decrease in depression scores at 8 weeks (fluoxetine group r = +0.23, medium effect size; light therapy group r = +0.11, small effect size; combination group r = +0.32, medium to large effect size). No moderation effect of sex was found. CONCLUSIONS: More severe appetitive symptoms at baseline predicted treatment response differentially across the 4 treatment groups. Contrary to prior findings in seasonal depression, this association was not robust for MDD patients receiving light therapy alone, although it was stronger in patients receiving fluoxetine with or without light. As the group sample sizes were modest, the current findings should be considered as preliminary only. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00958204.

The impact of fatigue and energy on work functioning and impairment in patients with major depressive disorder treated with desvenlafaxine.

Fatigue and low energy are cardinal symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD) that have an impact on work functioning. Antidepressants with noradrenergic activity have been hypothesized to improve symptoms of fatigue and low energy. We examined the impact of these symptoms on work functioning in patients with MDD treated with the serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor, desvenlafaxine. A secondary analysis was carried out from a study of employed adult outpatients (n=35) with MDD and subjective cognitive complaints treated with desvenlafaxine 50-100 mg/day for 8 weeks. Multiple regression analyses modeled improvement in work functioning measures (Lam Employment Absence and Productivity Scale, Health and Work Performance Questionnaire, Sheehan Disability Scale) with measures of fatigue (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Fatigue scale and 20-item Hopkins Symptom Check List Energy scale). Patients showed a significant improvement in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale scores as well as in fatigue and work functioning measures following treatment. Fatigue measures were significantly associated with improvement in some (Lam Employment Absence and Productivity Scale, Sheehan Disability Scale), but not all (Health and Work Performance Questionnaire) work functioning measures, independent of improvement in overall depressive symptoms. The limitations of this study include the small sample size and the lack of a placebo or a comparison group. Fatigue and low energy are important symptoms that are associated with occupational impairment in MDD. Treatments that improve these symptoms are likely to improve work functioning.

The effects of desvenlafaxine on neurocognitive and work functioning in employed outpatients with major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is associated with staggering personal and economic costs, a major proportion of which stem from impaired psychosocial and occupational functioning. Few studies have examined the impact of depression-related cognitive dysfunction on work functioning. We examined the association between neurocognitive and work functioning in employed patients with MDD. METHODS: Employed adult outpatients (n=36) with MDD of at least moderate severity (≥23 on the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale, MADRS) and subjective cognitive complaints completed neurocognitive tests (CNS Vital Signs computerized battery) and validated self-reports of their work functioning (LEAPS, HPQ) before and after 8 weeks of open-label treatment with flexibly-dosed desvenlafaxine 50-100mg/day. Relationships between neurocognitive tests and functional measures were examined using bivariate correlational and multiple regression analyses, as appropriate. An ANCOVA model examined whether significant change in neurocognitive performance, defined as improvement of ≥1SD in the Neurocognition Index (NCI) from baseline to post-treatment, was associated with improved outcomes. RESULTS: Patients showed significant improvements in depressive symptom, neurocognitive, and work functioning measures following treatment with desvenlafaxine (e.g., MADRS response=77% and MADRS remission=49%). There were no significant correlations between changes in NCI or cognitive domain subscales and changes in MADRS, LEAPS, or HPQ scores. However, patients demonstrating significant improvement in NCI scores (n=11, 29%) had significantly greater improvement in clinical and work functioning outcomes compared to those without NCI improvement. LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this study include small sample size, lack of a placebo control group, and lack of a healthy comparison group. Our sample also had more years of education and higher premorbid intelligence than the general population. CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant correlations between changes in neurocognitive and work functioning measures in this study. However, meaningful improvement in neurocognitive functioning with desvenlafaxine was associated with greater improvement in both mood and occupational outcomes. This suggests that addressing cognitive dysfunction may improve clinical and occupational outcomes in employed patients with MDD. However, the relationship between neurocognitive and work functioning in MDD is complex and requires further study.

Efficacy of Bright Light Treatment, Fluoxetine, and the Combination in Patients With Nonseasonal Major Depressive Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Bright light therapy is an evidence-based treatment for seasonal depression, but there is limited evidence for its efficacy in nonseasonal major depressive disorder (MDD). OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of light treatment, in monotherapy and in combination with fluoxetine hydrochloride, compared with a sham-placebo condition in adults with nonseasonal MDD. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo- and sham-controlled, 8-week trial in adults (aged 19-60 years) with MDD of at least moderate severity in outpatient psychiatry clinics in academic medical centers. Data were collected from October 7, 2009, to March 11, 2014. Analysis was based on modified intent to treat (randomized patients with ≥1 follow-up rating). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to (1) light monotherapy (active 10,000-lux fluorescent white light box for 30 min/d in the early morning plus placebo pill); (2) antidepressant monotherapy (inactive negative ion generator for 30 min/d plus fluoxetine hydrochloride, 20 mg/d); (3) combination light and antidepressant; or (4) placebo (inactive negative ion generator plus placebo pill). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Change score on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from baseline to the 8-week end point. Secondary outcomes included response (≥50% reduction in MADRS score) and remission (MADRS score ≤10 at end point). RESULTS: A total of 122 patients were randomized (light monotherapy, 32; fluoxetine monotherapy, 31; combination therapy, 29; placebo, 30). The mean (SD) changes in MADRS score for the light, fluoxetine, combination, and placebo groups were 13.4 (7.5), 8.8 (9.9), 16.9 (9.2), and 6.5 (9.6), respectively. The combination (effect size [d] = 1.11; 95% CI, 0.54 to 1.64) and light monotherapy (d = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.28 to 1.31) were significantly superior to placebo in the MADRS change score, but fluoxetine monotherapy (d = 0.24; 95% CI, -0.27 to 0.74) was not superior to placebo. For the respective placebo, fluoxetine, light, and combination groups at the end point, response was achieved by 10 (33.3%), 9 (29.0%), 16 (50.0%), and 22 (75.9%) and remission was achieved by 9 (30.0%), 6 (19.4%), 14 (43.8%), and 17 (58.6%). Combination therapy was superior to placebo in MADRS response (ß = 1.70; df = 1; P = .005) and remission (ß = 1.33; df = 1; P = .02), with numbers needed to treat of 2.4 (95% CI, 1.6 to 5.8) and 3.5 (95% CI, 2.0 to 29.9), respectively. All treatments were generally well tolerated, with few significant differences in treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Bright light treatment, both as monotherapy and in combination with fluoxetine, was efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of adults with nonseasonal MDD. The combination treatment had the most consistent effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00958204.

Enhanced inflammatory and T-helper-1 type responses but suppressed lymphocyte proliferation in patients with seasonal affective disorder and treated by light therapy.

BACKGROUND: Animals show seasonal changes in the endocrine and immune system in response to winter stressors. Even though increased inflammation has been implicated in the pathophysiology of depression, whether immune disorder is a key mediator in seasonal affective depression (SAD) is unknown. Here, we hypothesized that short photoperiods in winter may induce inflammatory response, which contributes to SAD, and that light treatments should normalize immune function and improve depressive symptoms. METHODS: Twenty patients with a diagnosis of SAD, and a score on the HAM-29 of 20 or higher were recruited for this study. Twenty-one healthy subjects with no personal and family history of psychiatric disorder were matched to patients according to age and sex. Patients and controls were sampled during winter between November and January, inclusive. A subset of SAD patients (N=13) was re-sampled after 4 weeks of light therapy. Blood samples were assayed for macrophage activity, lymphocyte proliferation and cytokine release. RESULTS: SAD patients showed significantly higher macrophage activity and lower lymphocyte proliferation in winter compared to healthy subjects. The concentrations of macrophage-produced proinflammatory cytokines interleukin-1ß and tumour necrosis factor-α, and T-helper (Th)-1 produced cytokine, interferon-γ were all significantly increased. In contrast, no significant changes in Th2-produced cytokines were observed. Light therapy significantly improved depressive scores, which was associated with attenuation of decreased lymphocyte functions, increased macrophage activity and level of proinflammatory cytokines. CONCLUSION: SAD patients have increased macrophage and Th1 type responses in winter, and light therapy normalized immune functions and depressive symptoms. These results support an inflammatory hypothesis for SAD and an immunomodulatory role of light therapy.

Effects of combined pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy for improving work functioning in major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder is associated with significant impairment in occupational functioning and reduced productivity, which represents a large part of the overall burden of depression. AIMS: To examine symptom-based and work functioning outcomes with combined pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy treatment of major depressive disorder. METHOD: Employed patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of major depressive disorder were treated with escitalopram 10-20 mg/day and randomised to: (a) telephone-administered cognitive-behavioural therapy (telephone CBT) (n = 48); or (b) adherence-reminder telephone calls (n = 51). Outcomes included the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), administered by masked evaluators via telephone, and self-rated work functioning scales completed online. (Registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00702598.) RESULTS: After 12 weeks, there were no significant between-group differences in change in MADRS score or in response/remission rates. However, participants in the telephone-CBT group had significantly greater improvement on some measures of work functioning than the escitalopram-alone group. CONCLUSIONS: Combined treatment with escitalopram and telephone-administered CBT significantly improved some self-reported work functioning outcomes, but not symptom-based outcomes, compared with escitalopram alone.

Which depressive symptoms and medication side effects are perceived by patients as interfering most with occupational functioning?

Background. Major depressive disorder (MDD) is associated with significant impairment in occupational functioning. This study sought to determine which depressive symptoms and medication side effects were perceived by patients with MDD to have the greatest interference on work functioning. Methods. 164 consecutive patients with MDD by DSM-IV criteria completed a standard assessment that included a self-rated questionnaire about the degree to which symptoms and side effects interfered with work functioning. Results. The symptoms perceived by patients as interfering most with work functioning were fatigue and low energy, insomnia, concentration and memory problems, anxiety, and irritability. The medication side effects rated as interfering most with work functioning were daytime sedation, insomnia, headache, and agitation/anxiety. There were no differences between men and women in symptoms or side effects that were perceived as interfering with work functioning. Limitations. This was a cross-sectional study; only subjective assessments of work functioning were obtained; the fact that patients were using varied medications acts as a potential confound. Conclusions. Specific depressive symptoms and medication side effects were perceived by patients as interfering more with occupational functioning than others. These factors should be considered in treatment selection (e.g., in the choice of antidepressant) in working patients with MDD.

Relief of chronic or resistant depression (Re-ChORD): a pragmatic, randomized, open-treatment trial of an integrative program intervention for chronic depression.

BACKGROUND: Chronic depression is a particularly disabling mood disorder and treatment outcomes are poor with either psychotherapy or pharmacotherapy alone. There is growing evidence that an integrative treatment approach may be optimal. A novel multi-modal, multi-disciplinary treatment program, Re-ChORD, was developed at the University of British Columbia and evaluated in this pilot study. METHODS: Re-ChORD consisted of guidelines-based medication management, and group-based interpersonal psychotherapy and occupational therapy. A randomized, parallel-groups, open-treatment trial was conducted comparing Re-ChORD to treatment as usual (TAU). Inclusion criteria were current depression (17-item Ham-D > or = 15) and a diagnosis of a chronic depressive disorder. The primary outcome variable was clinical remission (17-item Ham-D < or = 7) at 4 month assessment. RESULTS: A total of 64 patients were randomised to Re-ChORD (N=34) and TAU (N=30). Under both intention to treat (ITT) and completer analyses, the remission rate was significantly higher in the Re-ChORD than TAU groups. Treatment effect size for remission was of medium magnitude (22.2% and 29.6% over TAU under ITT and completer analyses). LIMITATIONS: We did not collect sufficient follow-up data to investigate maintenance of gains. Re-ChORD shares elements with other combined treatments, and the present positive findings cannot be interpreted as being specific to the Re-ChORD program. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with growing evidence that integrative treatments are necessary for chronic depressive disorders, Re-ChORD was demonstrated in this pilot study to produce significantly greater rates of remission than treatment as usual. A larger-scale trial is warranted.

A controlled trial of the Litebook light-emitting diode (LED) light therapy device for treatment of Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD).

BACKGROUND: Recent research has emphasized that the human circadian rhythm system is differentially sensitive to short wavelength light. Light treatment devices using efficient light-emitting diodes (LEDs) whose output is relatively concentrated in short wavelengths may enable a more convenient effective therapy for Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD). METHODS: The efficacy of a LED light therapy device in the treatment of SAD was tested in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center trial. Participants aged 18 to 65 with SAD (DSM-IV major depression with seasonal pattern) were seen at Baseline and Randomization visits separated by 1 week, and after 1, 2, 3 and 4 weeks of treatment. Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores (SIGH-SAD) were obtained at each visit. Participants with SIGH-SAD of 20 or greater at Baseline and Randomization visits were randomized to active or control treatment: exposure to the Litebook LED treatment device (The Litebook Company Ltd., Alberta, Canada) which delivers 1,350 lux white light (with spectral emission peaks at 464 nm and 564 nm) at a distance of 20 inches or to an inactivated negative ion generator at a distance of 20 inches, for 30 minutes a day upon awakening and prior to 8 A.M. RESULTS: Of the 26 participants randomized, 23 completed the trial. Mean group SIGH-SAD scores did not differ significantly at randomization. At trial end, the proportions of participants in remission (SIGH-SAD less than 9) were significantly greater (Fisher's exact test), and SIGH-SAD scores, as percent individual score at randomization, were significantly lower (t-test), with active treatment than with control, both in an intent-to-treat analysis and an observed cases analysis. A longitudinal repeated measures ANOVA analysis of SIGH-SAD scores also indicated a significant interaction of time and treatment, showing superiority of the Litebook over the placebo condition. CONCLUSION: The results of this pilot study support the hypothesis that light therapy with the Litebook is an effective treatment for SAD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00139997.

Quality of life as an outcome indicator in patients with seasonal affective disorder: results from the Can-SAD study.

BACKGROUND: Although a host of studies have now examined the relationship between quality of life (QoL) and non-seasonal depression, few have measured QoL in seasonal affective disorder (SAD). We report here on results from the Can-SAD trial, which assessed the impact of treatment with either antidepressant medication or light therapy upon QoL in patients diagnosed with SAD. METHOD: This Canadian double-blind, multicentre, randomized controlled trial included 96 patients who met strict diagnostic criteria for SAD. Eligible patients were randomized to 8 weeks of treatment with either: (1) 10000 lux light treatment and a placebo capsule or (2) 100 lux light treatment (placebo light) and 20 mg fluoxetine. QoL was measured with the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q) and the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) Short-Form General Health Survey (SF-20) at baseline and 8 weeks. RESULTS: Both intervention groups showed significant improvement in QoL over time with no significant differences being detected by treatment condition. Q-LES-Q scores increased significantly in seven of eight domains, with the average scores rising from 48 x 0 (S.D.=10 x 7) at baseline to 69 x 1 (S.D.=15 x 6) at week 8. Treatment-related improvement in QoL was strongly associated with improvement in depression symptoms. DISCUSSION: Patients with SAD report markedly impaired QoL during the winter months. Treatment with light therapy or antidepressant medication is associated with equivalent marked improvement in perceived QoL. Studies of treatment interventions for SAD should routinely include broader indices of patient outcome, such as the assessment of psychosocial functioning or life quality.

The Can-SAD study: a randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of light therapy and fluoxetine in patients with winter seasonal affective disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Light therapy and antidepressants have shown comparable efficacy in separate studies of seasonal affective disorder treatment, but few studies have directly compared the two treatments. This study compared the effectiveness of light therapy and an antidepressant within a single trial. METHOD: This double-blind, randomized, controlled trial was conducted in four Canadian centers over three winter seasons. Patients met DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder with a seasonal (winter) pattern and had scores > or = 23 on the 24-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. After a baseline observation week, eligible patients were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with either 1) 10,000-lux light treatment and a placebo capsule, or 2) 100-lux light treatment (placebo light) and fluoxetine, 20 mg/day. Light treatment was applied for 30 minutes/day in the morning with a fluorescent white-light box; placebo light boxes used neutral density filters. RESULTS: A total of 96 patients were randomly assigned to a treatment condition. Intent-to-treat analysis showed overall improvement with time, with no differences between treatments. There were also no differences between the light and fluoxetine treatment groups in clinical response rates (67% for each group) or remission rates (50% and 54%, respectively). Post hoc testing found that light-treated patients had greater improvement at 1 week but not at other time points. Fluoxetine was associated with greater treatment-emergent adverse events (agitation, sleep disturbance, palpitations), but both treatments were generally well-tolerated with no differences in overall number of adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Light treatment showed earlier response onset and lower rate of some adverse events relative to fluoxetine, but there were no other significant differences in outcome between light therapy and antidepressant medication. Although limited by lack of a double-placebo condition, this study supports the effectiveness and tolerability of both treatments for seasonal affective disorder and suggests that other clinical factors, including patient preference, should guide selection of first-line treatment.

Quality of life in patients with seasonal affective disorder: summer vs winter scores.

OBJECTIVE: To compare perceived quality of life (QoL) in patients diagnosed with seasonal affective disorder (SAD) during the winter and summer months. METHODS: Twenty-six patients who were enrolled in an ongoing multicentre study in Canada completed 2 measures of QoL (the 20-item Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey [SF-20] and the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire, [Q-LES-Q]) during the winter, when suffering from depression, and again during the summer months. RESULTS: Both general and health-related QoL scores were significantly improved in patients with SAD during the summer months, with scores for the most part falling within normal range. CONCLUSIONS: Perceived QoL in patients with SAD is markedly impaired during the winter months but shows a substantial rebound during the summer months. The findings of this study provide further evidence that SAD is a distinct diagnostic entity.

A comparison of personality function among patients with seasonal depression, nonseasonal depression, and nonclinical participants.

Although a large body of research has accumulated concerning the relationship between nonseasonal depression and personality, comparatively few studies have examined the relationship between seasonal affective disorder (SAD) and personality. This study compared dimensional aspects of personality in patients diagnosed with SAD (N = 60), nonseasonal depression (N = 273), and nonclinical controls (N = 297) using the Dimensional Assessment of Personality Pathology (DAPP-BQ; Livesley & Jackson, in press). Analysis by ANCOVA indicated that significant between-group differences occurred in several of the 18 DAPP-BQ dimensions, with patients with SAD exhibiting personality psychopathology that was intermediate between the nonclinical sample and patients with nonseasonal depression. The results demonstrated that the traits associated with seasonal and nonseasonal depression differ in degree, not kind.

Generic and health-related quality of life in patients with seasonal and nonseasonal depression.

Although a relatively large body of research has now accumulated concerning the relationship between quality of life (QoL) and nonseasonal depression, there is a dearth of information about QoL in seasonal affective disorder (SAD). The aim of this study was to compare perceived levels of broad ('generic') and health-related QoL in patients with seasonal and nonseasonal depression. Participants were 72 patients with SAD enrolled in an on-going multicentre study in Canada, and 72 patients with nonseasonal major depressive disorder (MDD) matched for severity of depression attending an outpatient psychiatric clinic in Vancouver, British Columbia. All participants completed two measures of QoL (the 20-item Medical Outcomes Study [MOS] Short-Form General Health Survey [SF-20] and the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire [Q-LES-Q]) at baseline prior to treatment. The results of the study indicated that both generic and health-related QoL were compromised in patients with SAD compared with general population norms. For example, mean Q-LES-Q scores (range 0-100, where higher scores indicate better QoL) were 44%, compared with scores of 83% reported for the general population. Patients with nonseasonal depression showed significantly poorer functioning in several domains on the SF-20, but no significant differences in Q-LES-Q scores emerged. Perceived QoL is impaired in patients with SAD. Degree of impairment between seasonal and nonseasonal depressives is equivalent when assessed using the Q-LES-Q, but significant inter-group differences are apparent in SF-20 domain scores. Future research is required to determine whether perceived QoL is improved by treatment interventions for seasonal depression such as light therapy or antidepressant medication.

Hard times and good friends: negative life events and social support in patients with seasonal and nonseasonal depression.

OBJECTIVE: Although a relatively large body of research has now accumulated concerning the relation between negative life events, social support, and major depressive disorder (MDD), little is known about the relation between seasonal affective disorder and these psychosocial variables. This study aimed to compare baseline levels of negative life events (NLEs) and perceived social support (SS) in patients with seasonal and nonseasonal depression. METHOD: Canadian patients with winter seasonal affective disorder (SAD) (n = 26) and nonseasonal recurrent MDD (n = 66) completed measures of recent NLEs (the List of Threatening Experiences) and perceived SS (the Social Support Survey) prior to treatment. RESULTS: No significant between-group differences were observed in mean number of NLEs experienced or in quality of SS. Perceived SS was impaired in both groups, compared with patients with chronic medical conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study complement those of previous research reporting increased incidence of NLEs and decreased SS in primary care patients with high seasonality in the UK. Future research is required to determine the causal relation between these psychosocial risk factors and SAD and to assess whether they have an effect on, or are affected by, treatment interventions for SAD.