To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Many mental disorders, including depression, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, are associated with poor dietary quality and nutrient intake. There is, however, a deficit of research looking at the relationship between obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) severity, nutrient intake and dietary quality.
This study aims to explore the relationship between OCD severity, nutrient intake and dietary quality.
A post hoc regression analysis was conducted with data combined from two separate clinical trials that included 85 adults with diagnosed OCD, using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5. Nutrient intakes were calculated from the Dietary Questionnaire for Epidemiological Studies version 3.2, and dietary quality was scored with the Healthy Eating Index for Australian Adults – 2013.
Nutrient intake in the sample largely aligned with Australian dietary guidelines. Linear regression models adjusted for gender, age and total energy intake showed no significant associations between OCD severity, nutrient intake and dietary quality (all P > 0.05). However, OCD severity was inversely associated with caffeine (β = −15.50, 95% CI −28.88 to −2.11, P = 0.024) and magnesium (β = −6.63, 95% CI −12.72 to −0.53, P = 0.034) intake after adjusting for OCD treatment resistance.
This study showed OCD severity had little effect on nutrient intake and dietary quality. Dietary quality scores were higher than prior studies with healthy samples, but limitations must be noted regarding comparability. Future studies employing larger sample sizes, control groups and more accurate dietary intake measures will further elucidate the relationship between nutrient intake and dietary quality in patients with OCD.
Obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) is often challenging to treat and resistant to psychological interventions and prescribed medications. The adjunctive use of nutraceuticals with potential neuromodulatory effects on underpinning pathways such as the glutamatergic and serotonergic systems is one novel approach.
To assess the effectiveness and safety of a purpose-formulated combination of nutraceuticals in treating OCD: N-acetyl cysteine, L-theanine, zinc, magnesium, pyridoxal-5′ phosphate, and selenium.
A 20-week open label proof-of-concept study was undertaken involving 28 participants with treatment-resistant DSM-5-diagnosed OCD, during 2017 to 2020. The primary outcome measure was the Yale-Brown Obsessive–Compulsive Scale (YBOCS), administered every 4 weeks.
An intention-to-treat analysis revealed an estimated mean reduction across time (baseline to week-20) on the YBOCS total score of −7.13 (95% confidence interval = −9.24, −5.01), with a mean reduction of −1.21 points per post-baseline visit (P ≤ .001). At 20-weeks, 23% of the participants were considered “responders” (YBOCS ≥35% reduction and “very much” or “much improved” on the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scale). Statistically significant improvements were also revealed on all secondary outcomes (eg, mood, anxiety, and quality of life). Notably, treatment response on OCD outcome scales (eg, YBOCS) was greatest in those with lower baseline symptom levels, while response was limited in those with relatively more severe OCD.
While this pilot study lacks placebo-control, the significant time effect in this treatment-resistant OCD population is encouraging and suggests potential utility especially for those with lower symptom levels. Our findings need to be confirmed or refuted via a follow-up placebo-controlled study.
Despite strong evidence recommending supportive care as the mainstay of management for most infants with bronchiolitis, prior studies show that patients still receive low-value care (e.g., respiratory viral testing, salbutamol, chest radiography). Our objective was to decrease low-value care by delivering individual physician reports, in addition to group-facilitated feedback sessions to pediatric emergency physicians.
Our cohort included 3,883 patients ≤ 12 months old who presented to pediatric emergency departments in Calgary, Alberta, with a diagnosis of bronchiolitis from April 1, 2013, to April 30, 2018. Using administrative data, we captured baseline characteristics and therapeutic interventions. Consenting pediatric emergency physicians received two audit and feedback reports, which included their individual data and peer comparators. A multidisciplinary group-facilitated feedback session presented data and identified barriers and enablers of reducing low-value care. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who received any low-value intervention and was analysed using statistical process control charts.
Seventy-eight percent of emergency physicians consented to receive their audit and feedback reports. Patient characteristics were similar in the baseline and intervention period. Following the baseline physician reports and the group feedback session, low-value care decreased from 42.6% to 27.1% (absolute difference: −15.5%; 95% CI: −19.8% to −11.2%) and 78.9% to 64.4% (absolute difference: −14.5%; 95% CI: −21.9% to −7.2%) in patients who were not admitted and admitted, respectively. Balancing measures, such as intensive care unit admission and emergency department revisit, were unchanged.
The combination of audit and feedback and a group-facilitated feedback session reduced low-value care for patients with bronchiolitis.
Reduction of the pulse width has been reported to improve ECT outcomes with unilateral ECT (similar efficacy, fewer cognitive side effects), but has been minimally studied for bitemporal ECT. The only study comparing brief and ultrabrief pulse bitemporal ECT found reduced efficacy for bitemporal ultrabrief compared to bitemporal brief pulse stimulation. This randomised controlled trial (RCT) aimed to test if ultrabrief pulse bitemporal ECT results in fewer cognitive side effects than brief pulse bitemporal ECT, when given at doses adjusted with the aim of achieving comparable efficacy.
Thirty-six participants were randomly assigned to receive ultrabrief (at 3 times seizure threshold) or brief (at 1.5 times seizure threshold) pulse bitemporal ECT given 3 times a week in a double-blind, controlled proof-of-concept trial. Blinded raters assessed mood and cognitive functioning over the ECT course.
Efficacy and cognitive outcomes did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups over the ECT course. The ultrabrief pulse group performed better on a test of visual memory assessed acutely after an ECT treatment.
This study suggests there may be a small cognitive advantage in giving bitemporal ECT with an ultrabrief pulse when dosage is increased to match the efficacy of brief pulse bitemporal ECT, but the study was underpowered to fully examine this issue.