Nutritional interventions in the field of psychiatry have been explored more intensively in the last two decades, but definitive conclusions based on the retrieved data in the literature about the efficacy of this therapeutic approach are difficult to formulate. This observation has multiple explanations, e.g., these therapeutic interventions are very heterogenous, cohort studies usually enroll different psychiatric populations or healthy subjects with minor psychiatric symptoms, nutritional supplements or special diets are commonly recommended as add-ons to the pharmacological interventions (thus making it difficult to differentiate the impact of each therapy on the outcomes), placebo-controlled randomized studies are still very few, etc. Therefore, a narrative review focused on the main challenges reported during the research in the field of nutritional psychiatry (NP) may be useful for clinicians interested in strategies to augment the efficacy of pharmacological treatments or to find new solutions with low risk of adverse events in patients with organic comorbidities or multiple concomitant medications. Data about the efficacy and tolerability of nutritional interventions explored for psychiatric disorders were searched in four electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane, Clarivate/Web of Science, and EMBASE). Omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids supplementation, healthy diet interventions, folate and vitamin B12, S-adenosyl-L-methionine, N-acetyl cysteine, vitamin B1 and B6, vitamin D, minerals, psychobiotics, inositol, and herbal products were the main interventions identified, and their demonstrated efficacy was quite heterogenous, while their tolerability and safety were good. Therefore, NP is a domain of research that may benefit from more good-quality and longer-duration trials, in order to verify the effectiveness of such augmentation strategies to the already validated treatments.
A unique approach to the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is difficult to support, because of the complexity and heterogeneity of this pathology. Multiple evidence-based guidelines for PTSD treatment exist, elaborated by prestigious institutions around the world, but a certain level of the inconsistency of their recommendations appears when these sources are compared with each other. Therefore, a review of current guidelines and extraction of the most supported by evidence recommendations is considered important for clinical practice, due to the need to approach such complex cases as PTSD-diagnosed patients in a stepwise manner. Structured monitoring of the clinical status during the treatment is also an important and rather neglected aspect of the case management in PTSD, and the necessity of follow-up visits for efficacy and tolerability should be taken into consideration. Psychotherapy (especially cognitive- behavioral oriented therapies and eye movement desensitization and reprocessing therapy) is supported by evidence as a first-line approach, as well as certain antidepressants, like the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and venlafaxine. Many second-line pharmacological agents and psychotherapies are also available, but there is an obvious need for more pragmatic trials with PTSD patients.
Background: Behavioral addictions (BAs), including gambling disorder, gaming disorder, problematic pornography use, compulsive sexual behavior, and problematic internet use, have received increasing attention because of their potential impact on mental health, occupational functioning, and military readiness. Objectives: To identify military-specific risk factors, clinical and operational consequences, barriers to detection and treatment, and gaps in prevention strategies related to BAs among active-duty personnel and veterans, and to propose a framework for prevention and early intervention. Methods: A narrative evidence synthesis was conducted using studies evaluating BAs in military and veteran populations, and data were extracted regarding prevalence, risk factors, psychiatric comorbidities, functional outcomes, help-seeking barriers, and intervention approaches. Findings were analyzed thematically to identify common patterns across different BAs and to inform the development of a military-specific prevention framework. Results: Evidence consistently indicated that military personnel and veterans are at increased risk of confronting multiple vulnerability factors for BAs, including trauma exposure, deployment-related stress, social isolation, boredom, sleep disruption, risk- taking tendencies, and barriers to help-seeking. Gambling disorder and problematic gaming were the most extensively studied conditions and were associated with depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder, substance use disorders, suicidality, impaired occupational functioning, financial difficulties, and reduced operational readiness. Also, emerging evidence suggests similar associations for problematic pornography use, compulsive sexual behavior, and problematic internet use. Across studies, stigma, concerns about career repercussions, and limited awareness of available services represented important obstacles to treatment engagement. Conclusions: BAs represent an under-recognized challenge to military health and force readiness, while the available evidence supports implementing integrated prevention strategies that include routine screening, psychoeducation, commander training, confidential referral pathways, and early intervention programs. A comprehensive military-specific framework targeting behavioral addictions may improve individual well-being while reducing operational and organizational consequences.
