These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Open-label non-randomized versus double-blind randomized antidepressive treatment: what are the advantages of clinical decision over randomization?
    Author: Deuschle M, Krumm B, Bindeballe N, Colla M, Hamann B, Lederbogen F, Gilles M, Heuser I.
    Journal: Pharmacopsychiatry; 2004 Nov; 37(6):299-302. PubMed ID: 15551197.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To study, whether and how the results from open and double-blind randomized trials on antidepressants differ. METHODS: Seventy-one patients were included in a study comparing open, non-randomized, standardized treatment with paroxetine (PAROX) and amitriptyline (AMI) after a minimum of six drug-free days (OPEN). A second group of 56 patients received the same treatment under blind-randomized conditions (BLIND-RANDOM). The course of psychopathology as assessed by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale was compared using repeated measurements ANOVA-(rm). RESULTS: While the rate of adverse events was higher in the BLIND-RANDOM compared to the OPEN condition, completer-analyses revealed no differences in psychopathological outcome. CONCLUSIONS: With similar clinical outcome BLIND-RANDOM trials of antidepressants may expose depressed patients to an increased risk of adverse events, when compared to OPEN conditions. However, the clinical outcome in study completers did not differ between the BLIND-RANDOM and the OPEN condition. Thus, the psychiatrist's choice may have impact on adverse events rather than on clinical outcome of antidepressant treatment.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]