|
Authors | Design | Sample (criteria) | Intervention | Treatments associated | Criteria | Results |
|
Del Zompo et al. 1990 [88] | Comparative, randomized trial | MDD = 60 (DSM-III) +HDRS > 16 | (i) Minaprine: 6 weeks, 30 patients (ii) Amitriptyline: 6 weeks, 30 patients | Lorazepam | Item “retardation” HDRS | Minaprine: reduction of score on the item “retardation” |
Rampello et al. 1991 [89] | Double blind, randomized, against placebo trial | UP = 40 (DSM III-R) +clinical retardation | (i) Amineptine: 4 weeks, 10 patients (ii) Minaprine: 4 weeks, 10 patients (iii) Placebo: 4 weeks, 10 patients (iv) Clomipramine: 4 weeks, 10 patients | None | HDRS SRRS | Minaprine and amineptine: reduction of score on SRRS |
Burns 1995 [90] | Double blind, comparative trial | MDD = 183 (DSM III-R)
| (i) Lofepramine: 6 weeks, 93 patients (ii) Fluoxetine: 6 weeks, 90 patients | Benzodiazepine | Item “retardation” HDRS | PMR predict lower response to lofepramine |
Entsuah et al. 1995 [91] | Meta-analysis | MDD = 1222 (DSM III-R) | (i) Venlafaxine: 6 weeks (ii) Imipramine: 6 weeks (iii) Placebo | NS | Item “retardation” HDRS | Retarded depression: higher response rate with venlafaxine |
Sabbe et al. 1996 [92] | Comparative trial | MDD = 22 (DSM III-R) +HDRS > 18 Controls = 22 | (i) Fluoxetine: 6 weeks (ii) Drawing tasks | Anxiolytic Neuroleptic | HDRS at day 0 and week 6 SRRS RT and MT | Partial improvement |
Flament et al. 1999 [93] | Comparative, multicenter, randomized, double blind trial | MDD = 286 (DSM III-R)
| (i) Wash out: 1 week (ii) Sertraline: 6 weeks (iii) Fluoxetine: 6 weeks | Hypnotic Temazepam | Item “retardation” HDRS | Sertraline > fluoxetine in melancholic depression with PMR |
Bondareff et al. 2000 [94] | Comparative, randomized, double blind trial | MDD = 144 (DSM III-R) +age > 60 +MMSE > 24 | (i) Wash out: 1 week (ii) Sertraline: 12 weeks (iii) Nortriptyline: 12 weeks | None | HDRS Neuropsychological assessments | Baseline information processing Resp = non-Resp Baseline executive functioning Resp > non-Resp |
Navarro et al. 2001 [95] | Simple blind, randomized trial | MDD = 58 (DSM IV) +age > 60 +MMSE > 25 | (i) Wash out: 2 weeks (ii) Nortriptyline: 12 weeks (iii) Citalopram: 12 weeks | Haloperidol | Item “retardation” HDRS | Severe retardation: response rate nortriptyline (82%) > citalopram (11%) Mild retardation: equal response rates (95 and 100%) |
Ferguson et al. 2003 [96] | Comparative, multicenter, randomized, double blind trial | MDD = 350 (DSM III-R) +HDRS > 20 | (i) Wash out: 4 to 28 days (ii) Reboxetine: 4–8 weeks, 350 patients (iii) Placebo: 353 patients | None | Item “retardation” HDRS | Reboxetine: early psychomotor improvement |
Volkers et al. 2002 [97] | Comparative, randomized, double blind trial | MDD = 52 (DSM IV)
| (i) Wash out: 7 days (ii) Imipramine: 4 weeks, 25 patients (iii) Fluvoxamine: 4 weeks, 27 patients | None | Actimetry SRRS | Imipramine: increase in daytime motor activity Fluvoxamine: no modifications in motor activity |
Caligiuri et al. 2003 [98] | Double blind, randomized trial | MDD = 28 (DSM IV) | (i) Phenelzine: 8 weeks, 12 patients (ii) Sertraline: 8 weeks, 9 patients (iii) Bupropion: 8 weeks, 7 patients | None | Wrist rotation Item “retardation” HDRS | Baseline motor impairment: Resp < non-Resp
|
Sechter et al. 2004 [99] | Double blind, randomized, multicenter trial | MDD = 302 (DSM IV) +MADRS > 20 | (i) Milnacipran: 6 weeks 148 patients (ii) Paroxetine: 6 weeks, 151 patients | None | Item “retardation” HDRS | Baseline PMR predict good response to milnacipran |
Taylor et al. 2006 [100] | Open study | MDD = 47 (DSM IV) | (i) Wash out: 1 week (ii) Fluoxetine: 12 weeks | NS | COWAT FAS Stroop test | Baseline Resp COWAT FAS performance: non-Resp |
Mallinckrodt et al. 2007 [101] | Meta-analysis | MDD = 2463 (DSM IV) | (i) Duloxetine: 8 weeks (ii) Escitalopram: 8 weeks (iii) Paroxetine: 8 weeks | NS | Item “retardation” HDRS | Greater reduction of PMR in duloxetine group |
Herrera-Guzmán et al. 2008 [102] | Open study | MDD = 26 (DSM IV) +age > 60 | Bupropion: 8 weeks | None | HDRS CANTAB | Psychomotor speed predicts response to bupropion |
Singh et al. 2013 [103] | Double blind, randomized, multicenter trial | MDD = 113 (DSM IV) | (i) Venlafaxine: 8 weeks (ii) Escitalopram: 8 weeks | None | Item “retardation” HDRS CORE | Greater reduction of PMR in venlafaxine group PMR does not predict response to carbamazepine |
Jouvent et al. 1998 [104] | Double blind, randomized, multicenter trial | MDD = 124 (DSM IV) +MADRS > 25 +SRRS > 20 | (i) Moclobemide: 4 weeks, 60 patients (ii) Clomipramine: 4 weeks, 59 patients | None | SRRS at days 7, 10, and 14 | Moclobemide: reduction of SRRS score at day 7 |
Joffe et al. 1987 [105] | Open study | Depressed = 19 (RDC) | Carbamazepine | None | Actimetry | PMR does not predict response to carbamazepine |
Álvarez et al. 1997 [106] | Open study | MDD = 105 (DSM III-R) | Lithium | Imipramine or equivalent | Item “retardation” NDI | PMR does not predict response |
Hantouche et al. 2005 [107] | Retrospective study | MDD = 59 (DSM IV) | (i) Lithium (ii) Valpromide (iii) Carbamazepine | NS | Item “retardation” HDRS | Lower response rate to mood stabilizer in motor-retarded patients |
Strian et al. 1979 [108] | Longitudinal study | MDD = 36 (ICD) | ECT | NS | Item “retardation” and “agitation” HDRS | Early improvement in “agitated” group Mood fluctuations in “retarded” group |
Hickie et al. 1990 [109] | Open study | MDD = 36 | ECT: unilateral | Antidepressant Antipsychotic | CORE | CORE predict response to ECT |
Buchan et al. 1992 [110] | Comparative study | MDD = 165 (NS) | (i) Real ECT: 2 sessions per week, 4 weeks (ii) Sham ECT: 2 sessions per week, 4 weeks | Anxiolytic | PSE | Improvement in patients with PMR |
Sobin et al. 1996 [111] | Randomized, double blind study | MDD = 148 (RDC) | (i) Real ECT: 3 sessions per week (ii) Sham ECT: 3 sessions per week | Lorazepam | HDRS day 0 and every week | Response rate: “retarded” = “non retarded” |
Hickie et al. 1996 [112] | Open study | MDD = 81 (NS) | ECT: 10 sessions | Antidepressant Antipsychotic Benzodiazepine Mood stabilizer | CORE | CORE predicts response to ECT |
Höppner et al. 2003 [113] | Randomized, against placebo trial | MDD = 30 (DSM IV) +MADRS > 18 Controls: 30 | (i) TMS: high frequency over the right DLPFC, 10 sessions (ii) TMS: low frequency over the left DLPFC, 10 sessions (iii) Sham TMS | Antidepressant | MARS | Early improvement of psychomotor performance in the “high frequency” group |
Höppner et al. 2010 [114] | Comparative, randomized, double blind trial | MDD = 30 (DSM IV) +MADRS > 18 Controls: 30 | (i) TMS: low frequency over the left DLPFC, 10 sessions (ii) Sham TMS | Venlafaxine Mirtazapine Lorazepam | MARS | No effect of TMS on PMR |
Baeken et al. 2010 [115] | Open study | UP = 20 (DSM IV) +resistance criteria | TMS: over the left DLPFC, 10 sessions | Benzodiazepine Neuroleptic | SRRS | Improvement of psychomotor performance |
Ullrich et al. 2012 [116] | Double blind, placebo controlled randomized | MDD = 43 (DSM IV) | TMS: over the left DLPFC, 15 sessions, ultrahigh frequency | Lithium Venlafaxine Mirtazapine Antipsychotic Benzodiazepine | Item “retardation” HDRS | Improvement of psychomotor performance |
Loo et al. 2010 [117] | Double blind, placebo controlled randomized | MDD = 40 (DSM IV) | tDCS: 10 sessions of anodal tDCS over the left DLPFC, at 1 mA | None | CORE MADRS | No significant difference in depression scores after real compared with sham tDCS No improvement in CORE score |
Loo et al. 2012 [118] | Double blind, placebo controlled randomized | MDD = 64 (DSM IV) | tDCS: 15 sessions of anodal tDCS over the left DLPFC, at 2 mA | None | CORE MADRS | Significant difference in depression scores after real compared with sham tDCS No improvement in CORE score |
|