1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Resistance training for Black men with depressive symptoms: a pilot randomized controlled trial to assess acceptability, feasibility, and preliminary efficacy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Depression is under-recognized in Black men, who are less likely to seek or have access to psychiatric treatment. Resistance training (RT; i.e., weight lifting) can improve depressive symptoms and may be more acceptable to Black men, but its effects have not been examined for Black men with depressive symptoms.

          Methods

          Fifty Black men with depressive symptoms were randomized to either (a) 12 weeks of RT (coupled with Behavioral Activation techniques to promote adherence) or (b) an attention-control group (Health, Wellness, and Education; HWE). Both groups met twice/week for 12 weeks, and follow-up assessments were done at end-of-treatment (EOT) and 6 months after enrollment. Changes in physical activity and muscular strength were collected as a manipulation check. The primary outcome was interviewer assessed symptoms of depression using the Quick Inventory of Depression Symptomology (QIDS). Secondary outcomes included self-reported depressive symptoms, anxiety, and stress. The association between change in QIDS from baseline to EOT and concurrent changes in physical activity and muscular strength in the RT group were explored as an initial assessment of mechanism. Longitudinal mixed effects regression models with subject-specific intercepts were used to examine intervention effects.

          Results

          A sample with high rates of medical comorbidities (e.g., 44% HIV positive), substance use (e.g., 34% smoking), and negative social determinates of health (e.g., 50% unemployed) was enrolled. Recruitment, engagement, and retention data indicate that the intervention and design were feasible. The RT group showed greater gains in self-reported exercise (b = 270.94, SE = 105.69, p = .01) and muscular strength (b = 11.71, SE = 4.23, p = .01 for upper body and b = 4.24, SE = 2.02, p = .04 for lower body) than the HWE group. The RT group had greater reductions in QIDS scores at both EOT (b = -3.00, SE = 1.34, p = .01) and 6 months (b = -2.63, SE = 1.81, p = .04). The RT group showed a greater reduction in anxiety at EOT (b = -2.67, SE = 1.06, p = .02). Findings regarding self-reported depressive symptoms and stress were non-significant, but in the expected direction with effect sizes in the small to medium range. In the RT group, improvement on the QIDS between baseline and EOT was associated with concurrent improvements in physical activity (b = 21.03, SE = 11.16, p = .02) and muscular strength (b = 1.27, SE = .44, p = .03 for upper body and b = .75, SE = .14, p = .03 for lower body).

          Conclusions

          Results suggest that RT is feasible and may be efficacious for reducing depressive symptoms among underserved urban Black men.

          Trial Registration

          ClinicalTrial.gov #: NCT03107039 (Registered 11/04/2017).

          Related collections

          Most cited references37

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7.

          Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most common mental disorders; however, there is no brief clinical measure for assessing GAD. The objective of this study was to develop a brief self-report scale to identify probable cases of GAD and evaluate its reliability and validity. A criterion-standard study was performed in 15 primary care clinics in the United States from November 2004 through June 2005. Of a total of 2740 adult patients completing a study questionnaire, 965 patients had a telephone interview with a mental health professional within 1 week. For criterion and construct validity, GAD self-report scale diagnoses were compared with independent diagnoses made by mental health professionals; functional status measures; disability days; and health care use. A 7-item anxiety scale (GAD-7) had good reliability, as well as criterion, construct, factorial, and procedural validity. A cut point was identified that optimized sensitivity (89%) and specificity (82%). Increasing scores on the scale were strongly associated with multiple domains of functional impairment (all 6 Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey scales and disability days). Although GAD and depression symptoms frequently co-occurred, factor analysis confirmed them as distinct dimensions. Moreover, GAD and depression symptoms had differing but independent effects on functional impairment and disability. There was good agreement between self-report and interviewer-administered versions of the scale. The GAD-7 is a valid and efficient tool for screening for GAD and assessing its severity in clinical practice and research.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure.

            While considerable attention has focused on improving the detection of depression, assessment of severity is also important in guiding treatment decisions. Therefore, we examined the validity of a brief, new measure of depression severity. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ) is a self-administered version of the PRIME-MD diagnostic instrument for common mental disorders. The PHQ-9 is the depression module, which scores each of the 9 DSM-IV criteria as "0" (not at all) to "3" (nearly every day). The PHQ-9 was completed by 6,000 patients in 8 primary care clinics and 7 obstetrics-gynecology clinics. Construct validity was assessed using the 20-item Short-Form General Health Survey, self-reported sick days and clinic visits, and symptom-related difficulty. Criterion validity was assessed against an independent structured mental health professional (MHP) interview in a sample of 580 patients. As PHQ-9 depression severity increased, there was a substantial decrease in functional status on all 6 SF-20 subscales. Also, symptom-related difficulty, sick days, and health care utilization increased. Using the MHP reinterview as the criterion standard, a PHQ-9 score > or =10 had a sensitivity of 88% and a specificity of 88% for major depression. PHQ-9 scores of 5, 10, 15, and 20 represented mild, moderate, moderately severe, and severe depression, respectively. Results were similar in the primary care and obstetrics-gynecology samples. In addition to making criteria-based diagnoses of depressive disorders, the PHQ-9 is also a reliable and valid measure of depression severity. These characteristics plus its brevity make the PHQ-9 a useful clinical and research tool.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs for the acute treatment of adults with major depressive disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

              Summary Background Major depressive disorder is one of the most common, burdensome, and costly psychiatric disorders worldwide in adults. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments are available; however, because of inadequate resources, antidepressants are used more frequently than psychological interventions. Prescription of these agents should be informed by the best available evidence. Therefore, we aimed to update and expand our previous work to compare and rank antidepressants for the acute treatment of adults with unipolar major depressive disorder. Methods We did a systematic review and network meta-analysis. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Embase, LILACS database, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, PsycINFO, the websites of regulatory agencies, and international registers for published and unpublished, double-blind, randomised controlled trials from their inception to Jan 8, 2016. We included placebo-controlled and head-to-head trials of 21 antidepressants used for the acute treatment of adults (≥18 years old and of both sexes) with major depressive disorder diagnosed according to standard operationalised criteria. We excluded quasi-randomised trials and trials that were incomplete or included 20% or more of participants with bipolar disorder, psychotic depression, or treatment-resistant depression; or patients with a serious concomitant medical illness. We extracted data following a predefined hierarchy. In network meta-analysis, we used group-level data. We assessed the studies' risk of bias in accordance to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, and certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework. Primary outcomes were efficacy (response rate) and acceptability (treatment discontinuations due to any cause). We estimated summary odds ratios (ORs) using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42012002291. Findings We identified 28 552 citations and of these included 522 trials comprising 116 477 participants. In terms of efficacy, all antidepressants were more effective than placebo, with ORs ranging between 2·13 (95% credible interval [CrI] 1·89–2·41) for amitriptyline and 1·37 (1·16–1·63) for reboxetine. For acceptability, only agomelatine (OR 0·84, 95% CrI 0·72–0·97) and fluoxetine (0·88, 0·80–0·96) were associated with fewer dropouts than placebo, whereas clomipramine was worse than placebo (1·30, 1·01–1·68). When all trials were considered, differences in ORs between antidepressants ranged from 1·15 to 1·55 for efficacy and from 0·64 to 0·83 for acceptability, with wide CrIs on most of the comparative analyses. In head-to-head studies, agomelatine, amitriptyline, escitalopram, mirtazapine, paroxetine, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine were more effective than other antidepressants (range of ORs 1·19–1·96), whereas fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, reboxetine, and trazodone were the least efficacious drugs (0·51–0·84). For acceptability, agomelatine, citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, sertraline, and vortioxetine were more tolerable than other antidepressants (range of ORs 0·43–0·77), whereas amitriptyline, clomipramine, duloxetine, fluvoxamine, reboxetine, trazodone, and venlafaxine had the highest dropout rates (1·30–2·32). 46 (9%) of 522 trials were rated as high risk of bias, 380 (73%) trials as moderate, and 96 (18%) as low; and the certainty of evidence was moderate to very low. Interpretation All antidepressants were more efficacious than placebo in adults with major depressive disorder. Smaller differences between active drugs were found when placebo-controlled trials were included in the analysis, whereas there was more variability in efficacy and acceptability in head-to-head trials. These results should serve evidence-based practice and inform patients, physicians, guideline developers, and policy makers on the relative merits of the different antidepressants. Funding National Institute for Health Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                andrew.busch@hcmed.org
                Journal
                BMC Psychiatry
                BMC Psychiatry
                BMC Psychiatry
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-244X
                21 April 2022
                21 April 2022
                2022
                : 22
                : 283
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.21729.3f, ISNI 0000000419368729, Department of Biobehavioral Sciences, , Teachers College, Columbia University, ; 525 West 120th Street, New York, NY 10027 USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.410370.1, ISNI 0000 0004 4657 1992, VA Boston Healthcare System, ; 150 South Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02130 USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.512558.e, Behavioral Health Equity Research Group, Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute, ; 701 Park Ave, Suite PP7.700, Minneapolis, MN 55415 USA
                [4 ]GRID grid.40263.33, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9094, Department of Behavioral and Social Sciences, , Brown University School of Public Health, ; 121 South Main Street, Providence, RI 02903 USA
                [5 ]GRID grid.40263.33, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9094, Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, , Alpert Medical School Brown University, ; 700 Butler Dr, Providence, RI 02906 USA
                [6 ]GRID grid.240267.5, ISNI 0000 0004 0443 5079, Centers for Behavioral and Preventive Medicine, , The Miriam Hospital, ; 164 Summit Avenue, Providence, RI 02906 USA
                [7 ]Department of Medicine, Hennepin Healthcare, 715 South 8th Street, Minneapolis, MN 55404 USA
                [8 ]GRID grid.17635.36, ISNI 0000000419368657, Department of Medicine, , University of Minnesota Medical School, ; 401 East River Parkway, Minneapolis, MN 55455 USA
                Article
                3935
                10.1186/s12888-022-03935-x
                9022309
                35448974
                7f4ed362-4206-4480-b129-e3c35db0fb56
                © The Author(s) 2022

                This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 10 August 2021
                : 4 April 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100000056, National Institute of Nursing Research;
                Award ID: R21-NR016112
                Award ID: R21-NR016112
                Award ID: R21-NR016112
                Award ID: R21-NR016112
                Award ID: R21-NR016112
                Award ID: R21-NR016112
                Award ID: R21-NR016112
                Award ID: R21-NR016112
                Award ID: R21-NR016112
                Award ID: R21-NR016112
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                depression,resistance training,weightlifting,behavioral activation

                Comments

                Comment on this article