-
Something wrong with this record ?
Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation (tDCS) Versus Venlafaxine ER In The Treatment Of Depression: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Single-Center Study With Open-Label, Follow-Up
M. Bares, M. Brunovsky, P. Stopkova, M. Hejzlar, T. Novak,
Language English Country New Zealand
Document type Journal Article
Grant support
NV15-29900A
MZ0
CEP Register
Digital library NLK
Full text - Article
NLK
Directory of Open Access Journals
from 2009
Free Medical Journals
from 2005
PubMed Central
from 2005
Europe PubMed Central
from 2005
ProQuest Central
from 2005-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
from 2005-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
from 2009-01-01
Taylor & Francis Open Access
from 2010-12-01
Nursing & Allied Health Database (ProQuest)
from 2005-01-01
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
from 2005-01-01
Psychology Database (ProQuest)
from 2005-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
from 2005
PubMed
31695391
DOI
10.2147/ndt.s226577
Knihovny.cz E-resources
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
Objective: Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS), a relatively new neuromodulation approach, provides some evidence of an antidepressant effect. This randomized, 4-week, double-blind study with 8-week, open-label, follow-up compared the efficacy and tolerability of left anodal tDCS with venlafaxine ER (VNF) in the treatment of depression and prevention of early relapse. Methods: Subjects (n = 57) received tDCS (2 mA, 20 sessions, 30 mins) plus placebo (n = 29) or VNF plus sham tDCS (n = 28). Responders to both interventions entered the open-label follow-up. The primary outcome was score change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) at week 4 of the study. Secondary outcomes were response, remission, dropout rates and relapse rates within the follow-up.The mean change in the MADRS score from baseline to week for patients treated with tDCS was 7.69 (95% CI, 5.09-10.29) points and 9.64 (95% CI, 6.20-13.09) points for patients from the VNF group, a nonsignificant difference (1.95, 95% CI -2.25-6.16; t (55) = 0.93, p= 0.36, Cohen´s d = 0.24). There were no significant between-group differences in the MADRS scores from baseline to endpoint (intention-to-treat analysis). The response/remission rate for tDCS (24%/17%) and VNF (43%/32%) as well as the dropout rate (tDCS/VNF; 6/6) did not differ significantly between groups. In the follow-up, relapse (tDCS/VNF; 1/2) and dropout (tDCS/VNF; 2/3) rates were low and comparable. Limitations: A relatively small sample size and short duration of the antidepressant treatment; no placebo arm. Conclusion: Overall, this study found a similar efficacy of tDCS and VNF in the acute treatment of depression and prevention of early relapse. The real clinical usefulness of tDCS and its optimal parameters in the treatment of depression should be further validated.
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc19044079
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20200109095510.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 200107s2019 nz f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.2147/NDT.S226577 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)31695391
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a nz
- 100 1_
- $a Bares, Martin $u NIMH Clinical Center, National Institute of Mental Health Czech Republic, Topolova 748, Klecany, Czech Republic. The Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 245 10
- $a Transcranial Direct-Current Stimulation (tDCS) Versus Venlafaxine ER In The Treatment Of Depression: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Single-Center Study With Open-Label, Follow-Up / $c M. Bares, M. Brunovsky, P. Stopkova, M. Hejzlar, T. Novak,
- 520 9_
- $a Objective: Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS), a relatively new neuromodulation approach, provides some evidence of an antidepressant effect. This randomized, 4-week, double-blind study with 8-week, open-label, follow-up compared the efficacy and tolerability of left anodal tDCS with venlafaxine ER (VNF) in the treatment of depression and prevention of early relapse. Methods: Subjects (n = 57) received tDCS (2 mA, 20 sessions, 30 mins) plus placebo (n = 29) or VNF plus sham tDCS (n = 28). Responders to both interventions entered the open-label follow-up. The primary outcome was score change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) at week 4 of the study. Secondary outcomes were response, remission, dropout rates and relapse rates within the follow-up.The mean change in the MADRS score from baseline to week for patients treated with tDCS was 7.69 (95% CI, 5.09-10.29) points and 9.64 (95% CI, 6.20-13.09) points for patients from the VNF group, a nonsignificant difference (1.95, 95% CI -2.25-6.16; t (55) = 0.93, p= 0.36, Cohen´s d = 0.24). There were no significant between-group differences in the MADRS scores from baseline to endpoint (intention-to-treat analysis). The response/remission rate for tDCS (24%/17%) and VNF (43%/32%) as well as the dropout rate (tDCS/VNF; 6/6) did not differ significantly between groups. In the follow-up, relapse (tDCS/VNF; 1/2) and dropout (tDCS/VNF; 2/3) rates were low and comparable. Limitations: A relatively small sample size and short duration of the antidepressant treatment; no placebo arm. Conclusion: Overall, this study found a similar efficacy of tDCS and VNF in the acute treatment of depression and prevention of early relapse. The real clinical usefulness of tDCS and its optimal parameters in the treatment of depression should be further validated.
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Brunovsky, Martin $u NIMH Clinical Center, National Institute of Mental Health Czech Republic, Topolova 748, Klecany, Czech Republic. The Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Stopkova, Pavla $u NIMH Clinical Center, National Institute of Mental Health Czech Republic, Topolova 748, Klecany, Czech Republic. The Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Hejzlar, Martin $u NIMH Clinical Center, National Institute of Mental Health Czech Republic, Topolova 748, Klecany, Czech Republic. The Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Novak, Tomas $u NIMH Clinical Center, National Institute of Mental Health Czech Republic, Topolova 748, Klecany, Czech Republic. The Department of Psychiatry and Medical Psychology, 3rd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00183034 $t Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment $x 1176-6328 $g Roč. 15, č. - (2019), s. 3003-3014
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31695391 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20200107 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20200109095839 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ind $b bmc $g 1480668 $s 1082749
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2019 $b 15 $c - $d 3003-3014 $e 20191023 $i 1176-6328 $m Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment $n Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat $x MED00183034
- GRA __
- $a NV15-29900A $p MZ0
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20200107