Search

Background: Ever since a new photoreceptor was discovered with a highest sensitivity to 470-490 nm blue light, it has been speculated that blue light has some advantages in the treatment of Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD) over more traditional treatments. In this study we compared the effects of exposure to narrow-band blue light (BLUE) to those of broad-wavelength white light (BLT) in the treatment of SAD., Methods: In a 15-day design, 45 patients suffering from SAD completed 30-min sessions of light treatment on 5 consecutive days. 21 subjects received white-light treatment (BLT, broad-wavelength without UV, 10 000 lx, irradiance 31.7 W/m 2 ), 24 subjects received narrow-band blue light (BLUE, 100 lx, irradiance 1.0 W/m 2 ). All participants completed weekly questionnaires concerning mood and energy levels, and were also assessed by means of the SIGH-SAD, which is the primary outcome measure., Results: On day 15, SIGH-SAD ratings were significantly lower than on day 1 (BLT 73.2%, effect size 3.37; BLUE 67%, effect size 2.63), which outcomes were not statistically significant different between both conditions., Limitations: Small sample size., Conclusions: Light treatment is an effective treatment for SAD. The use of narrow-band blue light is equally effective as a treatment using bright white-light., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The discovery of a novel photoreceptor in the retinal ganglion cells with a highest sensitivity of 470-490 nm blue light has led to research on the effects of short-wavelength light in humans. Several studies have explored the efficacy of monochromatic blue or blue-enriched light in the treatment of SAD. In this study, a comparison has been made between the effects of broad-wavelength light without ultraviolet (UV) wavelengths compared to narrow-band blue light in the treatment of sub-syndromal seasonal affective disorder (Sub-SAD)., Method: In a 15-day design, 48 participants suffering from Sub-SAD completed 20-minute sessions of light treatment on five consecutive days. 22 participants were given bright white-light treatment (BLT, broad-wavelength light without UV 10 000 lux, irradiance 31.7 Watt/m(2)) and 26 participants received narrow-band blue light (BLUE, 100 lux, irradiance 1.0 Watt/m(2)). All participants completed daily and weekly questionnaires concerning mood, activation, sleep quality, sleepiness and energy. Also, mood and energy levels were assessed by means of the SIGH-SAD, the primary outcome measure., Results: On day 15, SIGH-SAD ratings were significantly lower than on day 1 (BLT 54.8 %, effect size 1.7 and BLUE 50.7 %, effect size 1.9). No statistically significant differences were found on the main outcome measures., Conclusion: Light treatment is an effective treatment for Sub-SAD. The use of narrow-band blue-light treatment is equally effective as bright white-light treatment., Trial Registration: This study was registered in the Dutch Trial Register (Nederlands Trial Register TC =  4342 ) (20-12-2013).

Background: Increasingly, health insurance companies are asking for treatment results in mental health care to be expressed in actual numbers. They base their request on the data supplied by sbg (Stichting Benchmark ggz) and the procedures that sbg has followed. For the purpose of benchmarking, the sbg has accepted a limited number of questionnaires. These tools are not suitable for performing routine outcome monitoring (rom) in clinical practice. There is a urgent need for these questionnaires to be replaced by a widely-used depression questionnaire, namely the ids., Aim: To present arguments supporting the view that the ids is an excellent and useful instrument that the sbg should accept as a measuring tool., Method: We discuss the quality of the ids by reviewing the literature., Results: The ids is a high quality instrument well suited for measuring the severity of depressions and also is sufficiently sensitive for measuring mood improvements.
, Conclusion: The ids is an excellent tool for performing rom measurements and is available free of charge. The authors argue that the sbg should accept this questionnaire as a suitable instrument for benchmarking.