Safety and Tolerability of Intramuscular and Sublingual Ketamine for Psychiatric Treatment in the Roots to Thrive Ketamine Assisted Therapy Program
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction Ketamine has been increasingly used to treat mental health conditions yet there is a lack of safety data on intramuscular (IM) and sublingual (SL) dosing in a community setting. The Roots to Thrive Ketamine assisted Therapy (RTT-KaT) program is a 12-week program with 12 Community of Practice (CoP) group therapy sessions and three ketamine sessions. Objectives To provide preliminary data on RTT-KAT adverse events to subsequently inform safe use of IM and SL ketamine for the treatment of psychiatric disorders. Methods Retrospective chart review of the RTT-KaT Program on four cohorts (n=128) between September 2020 to December 2021. Eligible patients include those with post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, generalized anxiety, burnout/adjustment disorder, substance use disorder, obsessive compulsive disorder, disordered eating, and disordered sleep. Baseline characteristics and adverse events were captured including medication administration before, during, and after RTT-KaT sessions. Chi-squared test with Yates’ continuity correction was used to assess side effects in subgroups from ketamine administration. Results RTT-KaT was well tolerated with no loss to follow up. There were 351 IM (mean dose = 102.553mg) and 96 SL (mean dose = 276.667mg) sessions of ketamine. Of the 448 sessions, the prevalence of elevated blood pressure increased by 12.31% from baseline (36.85%), with all post-treatment elevations being transient. The prevalence of elevated blood pressure post-KaT session was also similar between IM (+11.69% from 37.71% baseline) and SL (+15.12% from 32.98% baseline) administration. Regarding adverse effects, 12.05% of sessions experienced nausea , 2.52% had an episode of vomiting , 3.35% had a headache , and seven sessions experienced dizziness. The incidence of adverse events was not significantly associated with past psychedelic experiences (X2 = 0.0543, p-value = 0.8157), nor past psychiatric diagnosis (X2 = 0.0109, p-value = 0.917). . There was no significant association between administration route and incidence of nausea, which was the most common side effect(X2 = 1.112, p-value = 0.2916). Male gender was also significantly associated with lower incidence of nausea (X2 = 4.2841, p-value = 0.03847). Conclusions The group therapy model described provides a comprehensive approach and presents a promising model for operating a KaT program outside of a clinical trial setting.These findings suggest good safety and acceptability for RTT-KaT among individuals seeking treatment for mental health issues. Majority of participants did not experience adverse reactions and the adverse events that were recorded involved transient symptoms that were resolved with rest and/or medications. Disclosure of Interest None Declared
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».