METHODS: Medical students in the clinical years (N = 1063) participated in a cross-sectional study using the Dundee Ready Educational Environment Measure (DREEM). Data were analyzed using SPSS version 22.
RESULTS: There were significant differences between the three medical schools in the total DREEM scores (F [2, 1059] = 38.29, p
METHODS: A comparative cross-sectional study using Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), M.I.N.I (MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview) and ENRICH- EMS (Evaluation and Nurturing Relationship Issues, Communication and Happiness - Marital Satisfaction Scale) were performed in a group of 112 pregnant women.
RESULTS: There were no differences in the prevalence rate of any anxiety disorder among the patient with HG vs comparative group (9% vs 3%, P > 0.05) and depressive disorder in women with HG vs comparative group (16% vs 8%, P > 0.05) respectively. There were associations between HG and gravida, past history of miscarriage, and gestational diabetes (P
METHOD: A total of 382 Malaysian adults completed a Malay translation of the SPQ. Confirmatory factory analysis was used to examine the fit of 3- and 4-factor solutions for the higher-order dimensionality of the SPQ. Ethnic invariance for the best-fitting model was tested at the configural, metric, and scalar levels, and a multivariate analysis of variance was used to examine sex and ethnicity differences in domain scores.
RESULTS: The 4-factor model provided a better fit to the data than did the 3-factor model. The 4-factor model also demonstrated partial measurement invariance across ethnic groups. Latent mean comparisons for sex and ethnicity revealed a number of significant differences for both factors, but effect sizes were small.
DISCUSSION: The 4-factor structure of the SPQ received confirmatory support and can be used in Malay-speaking populations.
METHODS: The AD8 was translated into Malay for Malay-speaking participants. A correlation analysis and a receiver operator characteristic curve were generated to establish the psychometric properties of the AD8 in relation to the MoCA.
RESULTS: One hundred fifty patients and their caretakers completed the AD8 and MoCA. Using a cutoff score of 1/8, the AD8 had 81% sensitivity and 59% specificity for the detection of cognitive impairment in PD. With a cutoff score of 2/8, the AD8 had 83% specificity and 64% sensitivity. The area under the receiver operator characteristic curve was 80%, indicating good-to-excellent discriminative ability.
DISCUSSION: These findings suggest that the AD8 can reliably differentiate between cognitively impaired and cognitively normal patients with PD and is a useful caregiver screening tool for PD.
METHODS: Patients (N = 281) with schizophrenia who had completed a randomized, double-blind (DB), 6-week comparison of lurasidone (40 and 80 mg/day) and placebo were enrolled in a 26-week extension study in which all patients received open-label (OL), flexible doses of lurasidone (40 or 80 mg/day). Effectiveness was measured using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scale.
RESULTS: Fifty-seven percent of patients completed the OL extension study; 16.7% discontinued early due to lack of effectiveness; and 10.3% due to adverse events. The most common adverse events were insomnia (11.3%), akathisia (11.0%), and nasopharyngitis (10.6%). Adverse events related to weight gain, metabolic parameters, prolactin, and ECG measures were uncommon. Mean change in the PANSS total score from the DB baseline to OL endpoint was -28.4, with mean improvement of -7.5 observed from baseline to OL endpoint, and with a PANSS responder rate of 73.7%.
DISCUSSION: The results of the current 26-week extension study found lurasidone to be a generally safe, well-tolerated, and effective long-term treatment for schizophrenia in Asian patients.
METHODS: Patients with schizophrenia from Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, and Taiwan were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with 40 or 80 mg/d of lurasidone or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline to week 6 on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. Efficacy was evaluated using a mixed-model repeated-measures (MMRM) analysis in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population.
RESULTS: On the basis of the analysis for the mITT population, the estimated difference score for lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d vs placebo was -4.8 (P = 0.050) and -4.2 (P = 0.080). For the full intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the difference score for lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d vs placebo was -5.8 (P = 0.017) and -4.2 (P = 0.043). The most frequent adverse events in the lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d and placebo groups, respectively, were akathisia (7.3%, 10.4%, 3.3%), somnolence (6.0%, 2.6%, 0.7%), and vomiting (6.0%, 5.8%, 2.0%). The proportion of patients experiencing clinically significant weight gain (≥7%) was 5.3% for lurasidone 40 mg/d, 1.3% for 80 mg/d, and 1.4% for placebo. End point changes in metabolic parameters and prolactin were comparable for both lurasidone groups and placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: In the ITT (but not the mITT) population, treatment with lurasidone was associated with significant improvement in the PANSS total score in patients with schizophrenia. Lurasidone was generally well tolerated with minimal impact on weight and metabolic parameters.