Displaying publications 21 - 26 of 26 in total

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Chen CK, Yang SY, Park SC, Jang OJ, Zhu X, Xiang YT, et al.
    Asian J Psychiatr, 2023 Jul;85:103613.
    PMID: 37163943 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajp.2023.103613
    OBJECTIVE: Mood stabilizers are psychotropic drugs mainly used to treat bipolar disorder in the acute phase or for maintenance therapy to prevent relapse. In clinical practice, mood stabilizers are commonly prescribed for conditions other than bipolar disorder. This study investigated the distribution of mood stabilizer prescriptions for different psychiatric diagnoses and studied differences in the drugs, dosage, and plasma concentration in 10 Asian countries including Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, China, Thailand, India, Pakistan, Singapore, Indonesia, and Myanmar.

    METHODS: Patients prescribed mood stabilizers (lithium, carbamazepine, valproic acid, or lamotrigine) for a psychiatric condition other than bipolar disorder (codes F31.0-F31.9 in the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Edition, Clinical Modification) were recruited through convenience sampling. A website-based data entry system was used for data collection.

    RESULTS: In total, 1557 psychiatric patients were enrolled. Schizophrenia, schizotypal, delusional, and other non-mood psychotic disorders (F20-F29, 55.8 %) was the most common diagnosis, followed by non-bipolar mood disorders (F30, F31- F39, 25.3 %), organic mental disorder (F00-F09, 8.8 %), mental retardation (F70-F79, 5.8 %) and anxiety, dissociative, stress-related, somatoform and other nonpsychotic mental disorders (F40-F48, 4.4 %). The most frequently targeted symptoms (>20 %) were irritability (48 %), impulsivity (32.4 %), aggression (29.2 %), anger (20.8 %), and psychosis (24.1 %). Valproic acid was the most frequently used medication.

    CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians typically prescribe mood stabilizers as empirically supported treatment to manage mood symptoms in patients with diagnoses other than bipolar disorders, though there is on official indication for these disorders. The costs and benefits of this add-on symptomatic treatment warrant further investigation.

  2. Shuy YK, Santharan S, Chew QH, Lin SK, Ouyang WC, Chen CK, et al.
    J Clin Psychopharmacol, 2024 01 16;44(2):117-123.
    PMID: 38230861 DOI: 10.1097/JCP.0000000000001813
    BACKGROUND: As clinical practices with lithium salts for patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder (BD) are poorly documented in Asia, we studied the prevalence and clinical correlates of lithium use there to support international comparisons.

    METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of use and dosing of lithium salts for BD patients across 13 Asian sites and evaluated bivariate relationships of lithium treatment with clinical correlates followed by multivariate logistic regression modeling.

    RESULTS: In a total of 2139 BD participants (52.3% women) of mean age 42.4 years, lithium salts were prescribed in 27.3% of cases overall, varying among regions from 3.20% to 59.5%. Associated with lithium treatment were male sex, presence of euthymia or mild depression, and a history of seasonal mood change. Other mood stabilizers usually were given with lithium, often at relatively high doses. Lithium use was associated with newly emerging and dose-dependent risk of tremors as well as risk of hypothyroidism. We found no significant differences in rates of clinical remission or of suicidal behavior if treatment included lithium or not.

    CONCLUSIONS: Study findings clarify current prevalence, dosing, and clinical correlates of lithium treatment for BD in Asia. This information should support clinical decision-making regarding treatment of BD patients and international comparisons of therapeutic practices.

  3. Loo LWJ, Chew QH, Lin SK, Yang SY, Ouyang WC, Chen CK, et al.
    PMID: 37068038 DOI: 10.1097/JCP.0000000000001693
    BACKGROUND: Pharmacoepidemiological studies of clozapine use to treat bipolar disorder (BD), especially in Asia, are rare, although they can provide insights into associated clinical characteristics and support international comparisons of indications and drug dosing.

    METHODS: We examined the prevalence and clinical correlates of clozapine treatment for BD in 13 Asian countries and regions (China, Hong Kong SAR, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, and Thailand) within an Asian Prescription Patterns Research Consortium. We compared BD patients treated with clozapine or not in initial bivariate comparisons followed by multivariable logistic regression modeling.

    RESULTS: Clozapine was given to 2.13% of BD patients overall, at a mean daily dose of 275 (confidence interval, 267-282) chlorpromazine-equivalent mg/day. Patients receiving clozapine were older, more likely males, hospitalized, currently manic, and given greater numbers of mood-stabilizing and antipsychotic drugs in addition to clozapine. Logistic regression revealed that older age, male sex, current mania, and greater number of other antipsychotics remained significantly associated with clozapine treatment. Clozapine use was not associated with depressed mood, remission of illness, suicidal risk, or electroconvulsive treatment within the previous 12 months.

    CONCLUSIONS: The identified associations of clozapine use with particular clinical features call for vigilance in personalized clinical monitoring so as to optimize clinical outcomes of BD patients and to limit risks of adverse effects of polytherapy.

  4. Wu Y, Levis B, Daray FM, Ioannidis JPA, Patten SB, Cuijpers P, et al.
    Psychol Assess, 2023 Feb;35(2):95-114.
    PMID: 36689386 DOI: 10.1037/pas0001181
    The seven-item Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale Depression subscale (HADS-D) and the total score of the 14-item HADS (HADS-T) are both used for major depression screening. Compared to the HADS-D, the HADS-T includes anxiety items and requires more time to complete. We compared the screening accuracy of the HADS-D and HADS-T for major depression detection. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis and fit bivariate random effects models to assess diagnostic accuracy among participants with both HADS-D and HADS-T scores. We identified optimal cutoffs, estimated sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals, and compared screening accuracy across paired cutoffs via two-stage and individual-level models. We used a 0.05 equivalence margin to assess equivalency in sensitivity and specificity. 20,700 participants (2,285 major depression cases) from 98 studies were included. Cutoffs of ≥7 for the HADS-D (sensitivity 0.79 [0.75, 0.83], specificity 0.78 [0.75, 0.80]) and ≥15 for the HADS-T (sensitivity 0.79 [0.76, 0.82], specificity 0.81 [0.78, 0.83]) minimized the distance to the top-left corner of the receiver operating characteristic curve. Across all sets of paired cutoffs evaluated, differences of sensitivity between HADS-T and HADS-D ranged from -0.05 to 0.01 (0.00 at paired optimal cutoffs), and differences of specificity were within 0.03 for all cutoffs (0.02-0.03). The pattern was similar among outpatients, although the HADS-T was slightly (not nonequivalently) more specific among inpatients. The accuracy of HADS-T was equivalent to the HADS-D for detecting major depression. In most settings, the shorter HADS-D would be preferred. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
  5. Wu Y, Levis B, Sun Y, Krishnan A, He C, Riehm KE, et al.
    J Psychosom Res, 2020 02;129:109892.
    PMID: 31911325 DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2019.109892
    OBJECTIVE: Two previous individual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) found that different diagnostic interviews classify different proportions of people as having major depression overall or by symptom levels. We compared the odds of major depression classification across diagnostic interviews among studies that administered the Depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D).

    METHODS: Data accrued for an IPDMA on HADS-D diagnostic accuracy were analysed. We fit binomial generalized linear mixed models to compare odds of major depression classification for the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID), Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), controlling for HADS-D scores and participant characteristics with and without an interaction term between interview and HADS-D scores.

    RESULTS: There were 15,856 participants (1942 [12%] with major depression) from 73 studies, including 15,335 (97%) non-psychiatric medical patients, 164 (1%) partners of medical patients, and 357 (2%) healthy adults. The MINI (27 studies, 7345 participants, 1066 major depression cases) classified participants as having major depression more often than the CIDI (10 studies, 3023 participants, 269 cases) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.70 (0.84, 3.43)) and the semi-structured SCID (36 studies, 5488 participants, 607 cases) (aOR = 1.52 (1.01, 2.30)). The odds ratio for major depression classification with the CIDI was less likely to increase as HADS-D scores increased than for the SCID (interaction aOR = 0.92 (0.88, 0.96)).

    CONCLUSION: Compared to the SCID, the MINI may diagnose more participants as having major depression, and the CIDI may be less responsive to symptom severity.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links