Psychiatry - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 155
-
ItemSmartphone-delivered multicomponent lifestyle medicine intervention for improving mental health in a nonclinical population: a randomized controlled trial.(Frontiers Media SA, 2023)OBJECTIVE: To prevent the exacerbation of mental health burdens, a growing body of research has recommended a balanced approach that emphasizes both the delivery of mental health treatments to individuals with common mental disorders (CMDs) and the strengthening of protective factors for CMDs among nonclinical populations. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated the efficacy of a smartphone-delivered multicomponent lifestyle medicine (LM) intervention, Lifestyle Hub, for improving mental health among a nonclinical population of Chinese adults. METHODS: A total of 106 participants with Patient Health Questionnaire-9 total score < 10 and Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-Item Scale <8 were randomly assigned to either the Lifestyle Hub intervention group (LH, n = 53) or the waitlist control group (WL, n = 53). Lifestyle Hub is an 8-week smartphone-delivered multicomponent LM intervention developed based on the transtheoretical model. The intervention components included lifestyle psychoeducation, physical activity, diet and nutrition, stress management, sleep management, and motivation and goal-setting techniques. Assessments were conducted at baseline, immediate post-intervention, and 1-month follow-up (LH only). RESULTS: The linear mixed effect model based on the intention-to-treat principle indicated that Lifestyle Hub significantly improved overall mental health, depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, stress, insomnia severity, overall health-promoting behaviors, dietary quality, and stress management compared to the WL group at immediate post-intervention (d = 0.13-0.56). No significant between-group differences were observed in terms of functional impairment, health-related quality of life, health responsibility, physical activity level, spiritual growth, and interpersonal relations. The intervention gains in the LH group were maintained at 1-month follow-up. The LH participants indicated that Lifestyle Hub was an acceptable intervention for improving mental health, although a significantly higher level of study attrition was observed in the LH group (20.8%) relative to the WL group (5.7%). CONCLUSION: Lifestyle Hub may serve as an efficacious and acceptable intervention for improving mental health in nonclinical adult populations. To extend the benefits of LM interventions at the population level, future studies are warranted to examine a stepped-care approach to delivering LM interventions.Trial registration: This randomized controlled trial was pre-registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04295369).
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableUnraveling the associations between unhealthy lifestyle behaviors and mental health in the general adult Chinese population: A cross-sectional study.(Elsevier BV, 2024-03-15)BACKGROUND: This study examined the cumulative risk of unhealthy lifestyle behaviors and the associations between overall lifestyle and common mental disorders (CMDs), insomnia, stress, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and functional impairment. Additionally, the treatment preferences for managing CMDs and insomnia were examined. METHODS: A survey was conducted on 1487 Chinese Hong Kong adults, assessing their lifestyle behaviors (i.e., diet and nutrition, substance use, physical activity, stress management, restorative sleep, social support, and environmental exposures), mental health-related outcomes, and treatment preferences via a vignette. RESULTS: The findings revealed significant additive relationships between the number of 'worse' lifestyle domains and the risk of all outcomes. A healthier overall lifestyle was significantly associated with reduced risks of all outcomes (AORs = 0.88 to 0.93). Having healthier practices in diet and nutrition, substance use, stress management, restorative sleep, and social support domains were significantly associated with lower risks of all outcomes (AORs = 0.93 to 0.98), except that substance use was not significantly associated with stress. Physical activity was inversely associated with only depressive symptoms (AOR = 0.98), anxiety symptoms (AOR = 0.99), and stress (AOR = 0.99). Environmental exposures were not significantly associated with functional impairment but with all other outcomes (AORs = 0.98 to 0.99). Besides, lifestyle interventions (55 %) were significantly more preferred for managing CMDs and insomnia relative to psychotherapy (35.4 %) and pharmacotherapy (9.6 %). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings underscore the importance of considering lifestyle factors when managing CMDs, insomnia, stress, HRQOL, and functional impairment, with a particular emphasis on adopting a multicomponent treatment approach.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableDoes Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Impact Treatment Outcomes within a Randomised Controlled Trial of Mitochondrial Agents for Bipolar Depression?(KOREAN COLL NEUROPSYCHOPHARMACOLOGY, 2023-08)OBJECTIVE: Bipolar disorder often co-occurs with post-traumatic stress disorder, yet few studies have investigated the impact of post-traumatic stress disorder in bipolar disorder on treatment outcomes. The aim of this sub-analysis was to explore symptoms and functioning outcomes between those with bipolar disorder alone and those with comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. METHODS: Participants (n = 148) with bipolar depression were randomised to: (i) N-acetylcysteine alone; (ii) a combination of nutraceuticals; (iii) or placebo (in addition to treatment as usual) for 16 weeks (＋4 weeks discontinuation). Differences between bipolar disorder and comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder on symptoms and functioning at five timepoints, as well as on the rate of change from baseline to week 16 and baseline to week 20, were examined. RESULTS: There were no baseline differences between bipolar disorder alone and comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder apart from the bipolar disorder alone group being significantly more likely to be married (p = 0.01). There were also no significant differences between bipolar disorder alone and comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder on symptoms and functioning. CONCLUSION: There were no differences in clinical outcomes over time within the context of an adjunctive randomised controlled trial between those with bipolar disorder alone compared to those with comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder. However, differences in psychosocial factors may provide targets for areas of specific support for people with comorbid bipolar disorder and post-traumatic stress disorder.
-
ItemEffects of a high-prebiotic diet versus probiotic supplements versus synbiotics on adult mental health: The "Gut Feelings" randomised controlled trial(FRONTIERS MEDIA SA, 2023-02-06)BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence supports the use of dietary interventions and gut microbiota-targeted interventions such as probiotic or prebiotic supplementation for improving mental health. We report on the first randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine the effects of a high-prebiotic dietary intervention and probiotic supplements on mental health. METHODS: "Gut Feelings" was an 8-week, 2 × 2 factorial RCT of 119 adults with moderate psychological distress and low prebiotic food intake. Treatment arms: (1) probiotic supplement and diet-as-usual (probiotic group); (2) high-prebiotic diet and placebo supplement (prebiotic diet group); (3) probiotic supplement and high-prebiotic diet (synbiotic group); and (4) placebo supplement and diet-as-usual (placebo group). The primary outcome was assessment of total mood disturbance (TMD; Profile of Mood States Short Form) from baseline to 8 weeks. Secondary outcomes included anxiety, depression, stress, sleep, and wellbeing measures. RESULTS: A modified intention-to-treat analysis using linear mixed effects models revealed that the prebiotic diet reduced TMD relative to placebo at 8 weeks [Cohen's d = -0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) = -1.18, -0.03; p = 0.039]. There was no evidence of symptom improvement from the probiotic (d = -0.19, 95% CI = -0.75, 0.38; p = 0.51) or synbiotic treatments (d = -0.03, 95% CI = -0.59, 0.53; p = 0.92). Improved anxiety, stress, and sleep were noted in response to the prebiotic diet while the probiotic tentatively improved wellbeing, relative to placebo. No benefit was found in response to the synbiotic intervention. All treatments were well tolerated with few adverse events. CONCLUSION: A high-prebiotic dietary intervention may improve mood, anxiety, stress, and sleep in adults with moderate psychological distress and low prebiotic intake. A synbiotic combination of high-prebiotic diet and probiotic supplement does not appear to have a beneficial effect on mental health outcomes, though further evidence is required. Results are limited by the relatively small sample size. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=372753, identifier ACTRN12617000795392.
-
ItemBrain-gut axis and psychiatric disorders: A perspective from bibliometric and visual analysis.(Frontiers Media SA, 2022)BACKGROUND: The Brain-Gut Axis, a bidirectional signaling pathway that connects the intestinal and central nervous systems, plays an important role in the development of psychiatric disorders. However, the overall research trends in this field are unclear. This study explored the patterns of research on the brain-gut axis and psychiatric disorders from a bibliometric perspective. METHODS: Relevant data were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection, with search terms on psychiatric disorders and the brain-gut axis. R (version 4.2.0), VOSviewer (version 1.6.17), CiteSpace software, and the online bibliometric platform were used in the data analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2,298 articles published between 1993 and 2022 were identified, showing an increasing trend over time. China (1,859; 20.70%) was the country that contributed the most publications. The journal Nutrients (95; 4.13%) published the most publications. Cryan JF (153; H-index=73) and University College Cork (559; 22.54%) were the most influential author and the most productive institution, respectively. The high-frequency keywords were clustered into six themes, including neurodegenerative diseases, stress-related diseases, immune, brain behavior, depression, and probiotic-related topics; of which, depression (880; 2019), anxiety (207; 2018) and autism (191; 2019) were the most studied psychiatric disorders in the past 5 years. "Depressive symptom" (2019-2020) and "probiotic treatment" (2019-2020) were the main areas addressed in recent years. CONCLUSION: Research on the brain-gut axis and psychiatric disorders has attracted increasing attention in the past decade, with most publications originating from high-income level countries. This study provides a useful perspective on understanding the research trends, key hot topics, and research gaps in this expanding field.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableEfficacy of lifestyle medicine on sleep quality: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.(Elsevier BV, 2023-06-01)OBJECTIVES: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy of multicomponent lifestyle medicine (LM) interventions for improving sleep quality have yielded inconsistent findings. This study marks the first meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of multicomponent LM interventions in improving sleep quality. METHODS: We searched six online databases for RCTs that compared multicomponent LM interventions to an active or inactive control group in an adult population and assessed subjective sleep quality as a primary or secondary outcome using validated sleep measures at any post-intervention time-point. RESULTS: A total of 23 RCTs with 26 comparisons involving 2534 participants were included in the meta-analysis. After excluding outliers, the analysis revealed that multicomponent LM interventions significantly improved sleep quality at immediate post-intervention (d = 0.45) and at short-term follow-up (i.e.,
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableLifestyle medicine for anxiety symptoms: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.(Elsevier BV, 2022-08-01)BACKGROUND: Lifestyle medicine (LM) is gaining increasing attention as a treatment option for anxiety, but the current state of evidence has not yet been systematically examined. METHODS: Six electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to February 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of multicomponent LM interventions on anxiety symptoms with either care-as-usual, waitlist, no intervention, or attention control group on anxiety symptoms were identified. RESULTS: A total of 53 RCTs with 18,894 participants were included for qualitative synthesis, in which 45 RCTs with data available were included for meta-analysis. Multicomponent LM intervention was significantly more effective than the control groups in reducing anxiety symptoms at immediate posttreatment (d = 0.19, p < .001) and at short-term follow-up (d = 0.29, p < .001). However, no significant difference at medium-term was found (p = .14), whereas more studies are needed to study the long-term effects. The subgroup analyses suggested that baseline anxiety symptoms was a significant moderator, suggesting that those with moderate level of baseline anxiety symptoms appeared to have greater improvements (d = 0.66, p < .05). LIMITATIONS: Minimal anxiety symptoms at baseline contributed to the floor effect and influenced the degree of improvement. The included RCTs had a high risk of bias in general with potential publication bias detected. CONCLUSION: The findings of this meta-analysis provided support for the positive effects of multicomponent LM interventions for anxiety symptoms. Future research is needed to determine the long-term effects of multicimponent LM and the optimal baseline anxiety severity.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableAssessing dietary, exercise, and non-pharmacological modalities within psychiatric hospitals(ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC, 2022)
-
ItemClinician guidelines for the treatment of psychiatric disorders with nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals: The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) and Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) Taskforce(TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD, 2022-07-03)OBJECTIVES: The therapeutic use of nutrient-based 'nutraceuticals' and plant-based 'phytoceuticals' for the treatment of mental disorders is common; however, despite recent research progress, there have not been any updated global clinical guidelines since 2015. To address this, the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) and the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Disorders (CANMAT) convened an international taskforce involving 31 leading academics and clinicians from 15 countries, between 2019 and 2021. These guidelines are aimed at providing a definitive evidence-informed approach to assist clinicians in making decisions around the use of such agents for major psychiatric disorders. We also provide detail on safety and tolerability, and clinical advice regarding prescription (e.g. indications, dosage), in addition to consideration for use in specialised populations. METHODS: The methodology was based on the WFSBP guidelines development process. Evidence was assessed based on the WFSBP grading of evidence (and was modified to focus on Grade A level evidence - meta-analysis or two or more RCTs - due to the breadth of data available across all nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals across major psychiatric disorders). The taskforce assessed both the 'level of evidence' (LoE) (i.e. meta-analyses or RCTs) and the assessment of the direction of the evidence, to determine whether the intervention was 'Recommended' (+++), 'Provisionally Recommended' (++), 'Weakly Recommended' (+), 'Not Currently Recommended' (+/-), or 'Not Recommended' (-) for a particular condition. Due to the number of clinical trials now available in the field, we firstly examined the data from our two meta-reviews of meta-analyses (nutraceuticals conducted in 2019, and phytoceuticals in 2020). We then performed a search of additional relevant RCTs and reported on both these data as the primary drivers supporting our clinical recommendations. Lower levels of evidence, including isolated RCTs, open label studies, case studies, preclinical research, and interventions with only traditional or anecdotal use, were not assessed. RESULTS: Amongst nutraceuticals with Grade A evidence, positive directionality and varying levels of support (recommended, provisionally recommended, or weakly recommended) was found for adjunctive omega-3 fatty acids (+++), vitamin D (+), adjunctive probiotics (++), adjunctive zinc (++), methylfolate (+), and adjunctive s-adenosyl methionine (SAMe) (+) in the treatment of unipolar depression. Monotherapy omega-3 (+/-), folic acid (-), vitamin C (-), tryptophan (+/-), creatine (+/-), inositol (-), magnesium (-), and n-acetyl cysteine (NAC) (+/-) and SAMe (+/-) were not supported for this use. In bipolar disorder, omega-3 had weak support for bipolar depression (+), while NAC was not currently recommended (+/-). NAC was weakly recommended (+) in the treatment of OCD-related disorders; however, no other nutraceutical had sufficient evidence in any anxiety-related disorder. Vitamin D (+), NAC (++), methylfolate (++) were recommended to varying degrees in the treatment of the negative symptoms in schizophrenia, while omega-3 fatty acids were not, although evidence suggests a role for prevention of transition to psychosis in high-risk youth, with potential pre-existing fatty acid deficiency. Micronutrients (+) and vitamin D (+) were weakly supported in the treatment of ADHD, while omega-3 (+/-) and omega-9 fatty acids (-), acetyl L carnitine (-), and zinc (+/-) were not supported. Phytoceuticals with supporting Grade A evidence and positive directionality included St John's wort (+++), saffron (++), curcumin (++), and lavender (+) in the treatment of unipolar depression, while rhodiola use was not supported for use in mood disorders. Ashwagandha (++), galphimia (+), and lavender (++) were modestly supported in the treatment of anxiety disorders, while kava (-) and chamomile (+/-) were not recommended for generalised anxiety disorder. Ginkgo was weakly supported in the adjunctive treatment of negative symptoms of schizophrenia (+), but not supported in the treatment of ADHD (+/-). With respect to safety and tolerability, all interventions were deemed to have varying acceptable levels of safety and tolerability for low-risk over-the-counter use in most circumstances. Quality and standardisation of phytoceuticals was also raised by the taskforce as a key limiting issue for firmer confidence in these agents. Finally, the taskforce noted that such use of nutraceuticals or phytoceuticals be primarily recommended (where supportive evidence exists) adjunctively within a standard medical/health professional care model, especially in cases of more severe mental illness. Some meta-analyses reviewed contained data from heterogenous studies involving poor methodology. Isolated RCTs and other data such as open label or case series were not included, and it is recognised that an absence of data does not imply lack of efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current data and clinician input, a range of nutraceuticals and phytoceuticals were given either a supportive recommendation or a provisional recommendation across a range of various psychiatric disorders. However several had only a weak endorsement for potential use; for a few it was not possible to reach a clear recommendation direction, largely due to mixed study findings; while some other agents showed no obvious therapeutic benefit and were clearly not recommended for use. It is the intention of these guidelines to inform psychiatric/medical, and health professional practice globally.
-
ItemPost COVID-19 mental health symptoms and quality of life among COVID-19 frontline clinicians: a comparative study using propensity score matching approach(SPRINGERNATURE, 2022-09-09)BACKGROUND: The extent and severity of post-COVID-19 mental health symptoms among frontline clinicians are not clear. This study compared mental health symptoms (i.e., depression, anxiety, and insomnia symptoms) and global quality of life (QOL) after the first COVID-19 outbreak between the COVID-19 treating and non-COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians. METHODS: This cross-sectional, comparative, convenient-sampling study was conducted between October 13 and 22, 2020, which was five months after the first COVID-19 outbreak in China was brought under control. The severity of depression, anxiety, insomnia symptoms, and global QOL of the clinicians were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 items (PHQ-9), Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale-7 items (GAD-7), Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), and the World Health Organization Quality of Life Questionnaire-brief version (WHOQOL-BREF), respectively. The propensity score matching (PSM) method was used to identify comparable COVID-19 treating and non-COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians. A generalized linear model (GLM) was used to assess the differences in PHQ-9, GAD-7, ISI, and QOL scores between the COVID-19 treating and non-COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians. RESULTS: In total, 260 COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians and 260 matched non- COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians were included. Non-COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians experienced more frequent workplace violence (WPV) than the COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians (χ2 = 7.6, p = 0.006). COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians reported higher QOL compared to their non-COVID-19 treating frontline counterparts (b = 0.3, p = 0.042), after adjusting for WPV experience. COVID-19 treating and non- COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians reported similar PHQ-9, GAD-7, and ISI total scores (all p values > 0.05). CONCLUSION: This study did not reveal more severe post-COVID-19 mental health symptoms in COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians compared to non-COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians. It is possible that the implementation of timely and appropriate mental health, social and financial supports could have prevented the worsening of mental health symptoms among the COVID-19 treating frontline clinicians after the first COVID-19 outbreak in China.