brand logo

Am Fam Physician. 2006;74(5):831-832

Clinical Question: Is light therapy an acceptable alternative to antidepressants for patients with seasonal affective disorder (SAD)?

Setting: Outpatient (specialty)

Study Design: Randomized controlled trial (double-blinded)

Allocation: Concealed

Synopsis: Light therapy and antidepressants are effective in the treatment of SAD, but few studies have directly compared the two treatments. The investigators identified 96 adults (mean age = 42 years) meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. criteria for major depressive disorder with a seasonal (winter) pattern with scores greater than 23 on the 24-item Hamilton depression scale (HAMD). Participants were randomized in double-blind fashion (concealed allocation) to eight weeks of 10,000-lux light treatment plus placebo or 100-lux light treatment (placebo light) plus fluoxetine (Prozac) 20 mg per day. Light treatment occurred for 30 minutes as soon as possible after awakening, between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. Individuals blinded to treatment group assignment assessed outcomes using the HAMD. A significant clinical response included a 50 percent or greater reduction from baseline in HAMD score. Follow-up occurred for 96 percent of participants for eight weeks.

Using intention-to-treat analysis, there were no significant differences between the light and fluoxetine treatment groups in clinical response rates (67 percent for both treatments) or remission rates (50 versus 54 percent, respectively). There also were no significant differences in either outcome noted between the two treatment groups for a subset of patients with severe depression. The placebo light, although dim, may have some clinical effect, possibly by accentuating the benefit of fluoxetine. More fluoxetine-treated patients complained of agitation, sleep disturbance, and palpitations. However, treatment-emergent adverse event rates and drop-out rates were similar in both groups.

Bottom Line: Light therapy and fluoxetine are equally effective treatment options for patients with SAD. Patient preference and an individual assessment of risks and benefits should guide treatment selection. (Level of Evidence: 1b)

POEMs (patient-oriented evidence that matters) are provided by Essential Evidence Plus, a point-of-care clinical decision support system published by Wiley-Blackwell. For more information, see Copyright Wiley-Blackwell. Used with permission.

For definitions of levels of evidence used in POEMs, see

To subscribe to a free podcast of these and other POEMs that appear in AFP, search in iTunes for “POEM of the Week” or go to

This series is coordinated by Sumi Sexton, MD, editor-in-chief.

A collection of POEMs published in AFP is available at

Continue Reading

More in AFP

Copyright © 2006 by the American Academy of Family Physicians.

This content is owned by the AAFP. A person viewing it online may make one printout of the material and may use that printout only for his or her personal, non-commercial reference. This material may not otherwise be downloaded, copied, printed, stored, transmitted or reproduced in any medium, whether now known or later invented, except as authorized in writing by the AAFP.  See for copyright questions and/or permission requests.