View clinical trials related to Mild to Moderate Depression.
Filter by:Internet-based cognitive behavioral therapy for anxiety and depression have far-reaching potential to overcome common barriers to accessing evidence-based treatment, such as waiting lists, travel distance and costs. Despite the undeniable promise of iCBT, several aspects remain poorly understood and warrants further study. The INTERMENTAL project is a joint effort between Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Norwegian Directorate of Health and six Prompt Mental Health Care (PMHC) services, situated in 11 municipalities, to evaluate the iCBT interventions developed by the technology company "Assistert Selvhjelp" (AS-iCBT). We will conduct a large-scale hybrid effectiveness-implementation randomized controlled non-inferiority trial that will provide new knowledge on the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and implementation of AS-iCBT in primary care. Primary objective: Examine the non-inferiority of guided internet-based cognitive behavioural treatment "Assistert Selvhjelp" (AS-iCBT) compared to treatment as usual in the primary care service Prompt Mental Health Care (TAU-PMHC) with regard to effects on symptoms of anxiety and depression. Secondary objectives: (i) Examine the non-inferiority of AS-iCBT compared to TAU-PMHC on other outcomes such as quality of life, functional level, specific anxiety measures (social anxiety, panic disorder), sleep and employment status; (ii) Examine the cost-effectiveness of AS-iCBT compared to TAU-PMHC; (iii) Examine to what extent moderators and mediators of change are associated with treatment effectiveness of AS-iCBT; (iv) Assess whether AS-iCBT is as acceptable and appropriate for treatment of anxiety and depression as TAU-PMHC, and examine barriers/facilitators for their further implementation.
One multi-center, randomized controlled clinical trial is designed to examine whether transcutaneous electrical cranial-auricular acupoint stimulation (TECAS) is non-inferior to the antidepressant drug (Escitalopram) in treating mild-to-moderate depression, to evaluate the depressive subtypes who are suitable for the TECAS treatment. To achieve this objective, 470 patients with mild-to-moderate depression will be recruited and assigned to receive TECAS treatment (n =235) or Escitalopram (n =235, 10-20mg/day, q.d.) for 8 weeks. The primary outcome is the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS); other outcomes include the17-item Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD-17), the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI), the Short Form 36 Health Survey and TCM diagnosis of depression. In addition, the safety index will be measured throughout the whole study.
This pilot study uses TESA-HB therapy for treatment of depressive symptoms associated with mild and moderate depression episodes. Primary objectives of this pilot study are to demonstrate the safety of TESA-HB Therapy, and to investigate the efficacy of TESA-HB Therapy for depressive symptoms.
Anxiety and depression are among the most common mental disorders in the population. Anxiety and depression have significant consequences at the individual, family and community level, and mental illness is estimated to cost the Norwegian society 180 billion Norwegian kroner annually. The majority of this amount is accounted for by anxiety and depression disorders. Meanwhile, access to mental health services to treat these disorders is limited. The proportion of people who do not receive treatment of those who are in need of treatment is estimated to be over 50%. Prompt Mental Health Care (PMHC) is a pilot project initiated in 2012 by the Directorate of Health commissioned by the Ministry of Health, with the goal of increasing access to evidence-based treatment for adults with anxiety disorders and mild-to-moderate levels of depression. The treatment offered is cognitive behavioural therapy and should lead to reduced levels of symptoms of anxiety and depression, improved quality of life and better employability. PMHC is based on the English program "Improving Access to Psychological Therapy (IAPT)", which is established in virtually all health communities in England. The evaluations of IAPT and PMHC have until now been based on relatively weak research designs which make it difficult to know to what extent the initiative really has the desired effect. In this study, PMHC is compared with a control group that receives treatment as usual (often provided by the general practioner) in two PMHC pilot sites (Kristiansand and Sandnes). Participants are randomly assigned to either the PMHC or the control group. The investigators aim to include 1100 clients in the study. The key objectives of this study are to investigate whether PMHC treatment is more effective as compared to treatment in the control group with regard to symptoms of anxiety and depression, work participation, functional status, and mental well-being. Cost-effectiveness of PMHC is also examined.
The purpose of the study is to describe, over 6 weeks, the evolution of depressive symptoms in patients with mild to moderate major depression in a strategy with Phytostandard® Rhodiola-Saffron supplementation
Major Depression (MD) is highly prevalent and has associated a high burden and economic costs. Mild levels of MD could be treated without antidepressants at Primary Care (PC). Main objectives: 1) To calculate the cost-effectiveness of active monitoring (recommended by NICE) vs pharmacological antidepressant treatment to treat mild MD at PC level. Methods: 300 patients (≥18 years) with MD (diagnosed by the GP) will be recruited at the PC center. Depending on the level of symptoms, the GP will choose between: A) Active Monitoring (n=150) and B) pharmacological treatment (n=150). Patients will be followed-up for one year and data will be collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Severity will be assessed by Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9), quality of life with the EuroQoL-5D (5 health dimensions), and the use of services with an adapted version of the Client Service Receipt Inventory (including lost productivity). Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis will be calculated and 5000 bootstrapping replications will be conducted to asses uncertainty. Cost-acceptability curves will be done using two perspectives: the National Health Service perspective and the Societal perspective. The Propensity Score technique will minimize the absence of randomization, matching cases from both treatment options.