Background and objectiveA significant proportion of the adult population in the United States (US) live with some form of mental illness. The more prevalent conditions of depression and anxiety are typically managed in primary care settings rather than specialty care. The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of a novel, measurement-driven psychiatric treatment platform delivered via an online telemental health platform as compared to treatment as usual (TAU). MethodsThe TAU dataset and the telemental health platform (Brightside) dataset were constructed based on the total populations of adult patients receiving care for depression from January 2018 through December 2020 (November 2018 through March 2021 for the Brightside group). Patients in both groups had a primary mental health diagnosis of depression and the presence of a positive screen for depression as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) upon initiation of treatment. HITLAB, an independent digital health verification and testing lab, conducted comparative analyses of the two groups using the Chi-square test of independence. ResultsClose to 80% of telemental health platform patients experienced a reduction of 5 or more points from their baseline PHQ-9 score as compared to 52% of TAU patients. The mean reduction in PHQ-9 score was slightly higher in the Brightside group (-11.5) versus the TAU group (-10.1). Chi-square tests of independence [x2 (1, n=6281) = 256.75, p≤0.001] for meaningful reduction and for remission [x2 (1, n=6281) = 105.50 p≤0.001] were highly significant. ConclusionThe telemental health platform patients performed significantly better than those under psychiatric TAU in terms of reduction in symptoms of depression in adults.

No abstract

UNSTRUCTURED Objective: Over 20% of US adults live with a mental illness, and the more prevalent conditions of depression and anxiety are typically managed in primary care settings rather than specialty care. The aim of this study is to determine the efficacy of a novel, measurement-driven psychiatric treatment platform delivered via an online platform (Brightside) as compared to treatment as usual (TAU). Methods: The TAU dataset and the Brightside dataset were constructed from the total populations of adult patients receiving care for depression from January 2018 through December 2020 (November 2018 through March 2021 for the Brightside group). Patients in both groups had a primary mental health diagnosis of depression and/or anxiety, and presence of a positive screen for depression or anxiety as measured by the PHQ-9 upon initiation of treatment. HITLAB, an independent digital health verification and testing lab, conducted comparative analyses of the two groups using chi square test of independence. Results: Close to 80% of Brightside patients experienced a 5 or more points reduction in their baseline PHQ9 score as compared to 52% of TAU patients. The mean reduction in PHQ9 score was slightly higher in the Brightside group (-11.5) versus the TAU group (-10.1). Chi-square tests of independence x2 (1, N=6281) = 256.75, p<=0.001 for meaningful reduction and for remission (x2 (1, N=6281) = 105.50 p<=0.001 are highly significant. Conclusion: Brightside performed significantly better than psychiatric treatment as usual in reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety in adults.

Background and objective. Evidence based practice (EBP) is based on the combination of the best research finding and clinical skill to ease clinical decision-making procedure. Patients treated with evidence-based practices have much better results as compared to the other patients. In today’s world, EBP has attained global acceptance in physiotherapy sector. The objective of the study was to access the knowledge, attitude and implementation of EBP of physiotherapists in India via a cross sectional study. Method. A cross sectional survey was held with the help of a web based customized questionnaire and was sent to physiotherapists. Results. Most of the subjects were affirmative regarding EBP but did not have enough knowledge and expertise for its implementation. The chief barriers for EBP implementation was lack of time and the cost of information resources. Conclusions. Physiotherapists need to upgrade their perspective, knowledge, understanding and skills regarding EBP. Furthermore, EBP must be added to the academic curriculum for its early recognition among the medical students

Introduction: Ankle sprains are the most common sports injury. Injury to ankle joint causes local as well as distant defects in the central nervous system. The interventions that modulate defects centrally, as well as peripherally, can be of great significance in treating the condition. The present study aims to estimate the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on pain, range of motion, and balance in players with ankle sprain.Material and methods: The present study was a randomized, controlled participant blinded trial. Twenty players aged between 16 to 30 years with a history of ankle sprain were recruited and were assigned in two groups. Group A received active transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and Group B received sham stimulation of 2mA for 20 min for five consecutive days. The outcome variables were pain (VAS), range of motion at the ankle joint, and balance measured by the Y-balance test measured at the baseline and post-intervention.Results: There was a significant reduction in pain (p = 0.039) and significant improvement in range of motion in dorsiflexion (p = 0.043) and plantarflexion (p = 0.019) at the ankle joint when between-group comparisons were done. Whereas, no significant improvement in balance (p = 0.502) was observed when between-group comparisons were done.Conclusions: The application of tDCS is effective in decreasing pain and improving range of motion, but ineffective for improving balance in players with ankle sprains. To improve the balance, foot exercises can also be added along with the tDCS to improve the treatment outcomes in players with ankle sprains.