Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of buspirone as an adjunctive therapy for alleviating anxiety symptoms in patients with depressive disorders who are already taking antidepressants. Methods: This was an open-label prospective multicenter non-interventional observational study conducted over 12 weeks. We enrolled 180 patients diagnosed with depressive disorders according to DSM-5 criteria and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) scores ≥ 18. Participants were already taking selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or serotoninnorepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and were prescribed adjunctive buspirone. Efficacy was assessed using HAMA, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD), Clinical Global Impression Scale-Improvement, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), and WHO-5 Well-Being Index. Results: The efficacy analysis included 161 patients. HAMA scores decreased significantly from 25.2 ± 6.7 at baseline to 15.4 ± 8.6 at 12 weeks (p ＜ 0.001), whereas HAMD scores decreased from 19.4 ± 4.6 to 12.7 ± 5.7 (p ＜ 0.001).WHO-5 and SDS scores showed significant improvements. The HAMA response rate was 39.1% and the remission rate was 13.7% at 12 weeks. Adverse drug reactions were reported in 3.7% of participants. Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in treatment response based on buspirone dosage, baseline anxiety/depression severity, or benzodiazepine use. Conclusion Adjunctive buspirone therapy effectively improved anxiety symptoms in depressed patients taking antidepressants, regardless of baseline symptom severity or buspirone dosage. The treatment was well-tolerated with few adverse events. Future studies using a control group are needed.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychiatric impact of the Seoul Halloween crowd crush on individuals related to the victims compared to the general population. It also explores the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between trauma exposure and psychiatric symptoms. Methods: In total, 2,220 participants completed various post-incident questionnaires (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Hwa-byung symptom scale, post-traumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5, and Brief Resilience Scale) 30 days after the incident. Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in the statistical package for the social sciences. Results: Individuals related to the victims exhibited higher symptom severity and a greater risk for clinically significant levels of depression, anxiety, anger, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (odds ratio=3.28, 3.33, 1.51, and 4.39 respectively). The impact of relevance to victims on anxiety and PTSD symptoms was moderated by resilience, with a stronger effect observed for individuals with low resilience (β=3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.78–4.24 for anxiety and β=14.53, 95% CI 12.43–16.63 for PTSD) than for those with high resilience (β=1.69, 95% CI 0.72–2.65 for anxiety and β=8.33, 95% CI 5.56–11.09 for PTSD). Conclusion When related to the victims, it was found that not only PTSD, but also depression, anxiety, and anger could intensify. Resilience emerged as a potential buffer against these adverse effects, emphasizing its significance in mitigating the psychiatric impact of community trauma.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychiatric impact of the Seoul Halloween crowd crush on individuals related to the victims compared to the general population. It also explores the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between trauma exposure and psychiatric symptoms. Methods: In total, 2,220 participants completed various post-incident questionnaires (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Hwa-byung symptom scale, post-traumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5, and Brief Resilience Scale) 30 days after the incident. Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in the statistical package for the social sciences. Results: Individuals related to the victims exhibited higher symptom severity and a greater risk for clinically significant levels of depression, anxiety, anger, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (odds ratio=3.28, 3.33, 1.51, and 4.39 respectively). The impact of relevance to victims on anxiety and PTSD symptoms was moderated by resilience, with a stronger effect observed for individuals with low resilience (β=3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.78–4.24 for anxiety and β=14.53, 95% CI 12.43–16.63 for PTSD) than for those with high resilience (β=1.69, 95% CI 0.72–2.65 for anxiety and β=8.33, 95% CI 5.56–11.09 for PTSD). Conclusion When related to the victims, it was found that not only PTSD, but also depression, anxiety, and anger could intensify. Resilience emerged as a potential buffer against these adverse effects, emphasizing its significance in mitigating the psychiatric impact of community trauma.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychiatric impact of the Seoul Halloween crowd crush on individuals related to the victims compared to the general population. It also explores the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between trauma exposure and psychiatric symptoms. Methods: In total, 2,220 participants completed various post-incident questionnaires (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Hwa-byung symptom scale, post-traumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5, and Brief Resilience Scale) 30 days after the incident. Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in the statistical package for the social sciences. Results: Individuals related to the victims exhibited higher symptom severity and a greater risk for clinically significant levels of depression, anxiety, anger, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (odds ratio=3.28, 3.33, 1.51, and 4.39 respectively). The impact of relevance to victims on anxiety and PTSD symptoms was moderated by resilience, with a stronger effect observed for individuals with low resilience (β=3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.78–4.24 for anxiety and β=14.53, 95% CI 12.43–16.63 for PTSD) than for those with high resilience (β=1.69, 95% CI 0.72–2.65 for anxiety and β=8.33, 95% CI 5.56–11.09 for PTSD). Conclusion When related to the victims, it was found that not only PTSD, but also depression, anxiety, and anger could intensify. Resilience emerged as a potential buffer against these adverse effects, emphasizing its significance in mitigating the psychiatric impact of community trauma.

Objective: This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone (160 mg/day) compared to quetiapine XR (QXR; 600 mg/day) in the treatment of acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone 160 mg/day (n=105) or QXR 600 mg/day (n=105). Primary efficacy measure was the change from baseline to week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score. Adverse events, body measurements, and laboratory parameters were assessed. Results: Lurasidone demonstrated non-inferiority to QXR on the PANSS total score. Adjusted mean±standard error change at week 6 on the PANSS total score was -26.42±2.02 and -27.33±2.01 in the lurasidone and QXR group, respectively. The mean difference score was -0.91 (95% confidence interval -6.35–4.53). The lurasidone group showed a greater reduction in PANSS total and negative subscale on week 1 and a greater reduction in end-point CGI-S score compared to the QXR group. Body weight, body mass index, and waist circumference in the lurasidone group were reduced, with significantly lower mean change compared to QXR. Endpoint changes in glucose, cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein levels were also significantly lower. The most common adverse drug reactions with lurasidone were akathisia and nausea. Conclusion Lurasidone 160 mg/day was found to be non-inferior to QXR 600 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia with comparable efficacy and tolerability. Adverse effects of lurasidone were generally tolerable, and beneficial effects on metabolic parameters can be expected.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychiatric impact of the Seoul Halloween crowd crush on individuals related to the victims compared to the general population. It also explores the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between trauma exposure and psychiatric symptoms. Methods: In total, 2,220 participants completed various post-incident questionnaires (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Hwa-byung symptom scale, post-traumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5, and Brief Resilience Scale) 30 days after the incident. Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in the statistical package for the social sciences. Results: Individuals related to the victims exhibited higher symptom severity and a greater risk for clinically significant levels of depression, anxiety, anger, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (odds ratio=3.28, 3.33, 1.51, and 4.39 respectively). The impact of relevance to victims on anxiety and PTSD symptoms was moderated by resilience, with a stronger effect observed for individuals with low resilience (β=3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.78–4.24 for anxiety and β=14.53, 95% CI 12.43–16.63 for PTSD) than for those with high resilience (β=1.69, 95% CI 0.72–2.65 for anxiety and β=8.33, 95% CI 5.56–11.09 for PTSD). Conclusion When related to the victims, it was found that not only PTSD, but also depression, anxiety, and anger could intensify. Resilience emerged as a potential buffer against these adverse effects, emphasizing its significance in mitigating the psychiatric impact of community trauma.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the psychiatric impact of the Seoul Halloween crowd crush on individuals related to the victims compared to the general population. It also explores the moderating effect of resilience on the relationship between trauma exposure and psychiatric symptoms. Methods: In total, 2,220 participants completed various post-incident questionnaires (Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Hwa-byung symptom scale, post-traumatic stress disorder checklist for DSM-5, and Brief Resilience Scale) 30 days after the incident. Moderation analyses were conducted using the PROCESS macro in the statistical package for the social sciences. Results: Individuals related to the victims exhibited higher symptom severity and a greater risk for clinically significant levels of depression, anxiety, anger, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (odds ratio=3.28, 3.33, 1.51, and 4.39 respectively). The impact of relevance to victims on anxiety and PTSD symptoms was moderated by resilience, with a stronger effect observed for individuals with low resilience (β=3.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.78–4.24 for anxiety and β=14.53, 95% CI 12.43–16.63 for PTSD) than for those with high resilience (β=1.69, 95% CI 0.72–2.65 for anxiety and β=8.33, 95% CI 5.56–11.09 for PTSD). Conclusion When related to the victims, it was found that not only PTSD, but also depression, anxiety, and anger could intensify. Resilience emerged as a potential buffer against these adverse effects, emphasizing its significance in mitigating the psychiatric impact of community trauma.