Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Ransing R, Vadivel R, Halabi SE, Jatchavala C, Shalbafan M, Noël C, et al.
    Indian J Psychol Med, 2023 Jan;45(1):65-68.
    PMID: 36778626 DOI: 10.1177/02537176211052071
  2. Kamalzadeh L, de Filippis R, El Hayek S, Heidari Mokarar M, Jatchavala C, Koh EBY, et al.
    Front Psychiatry, 2023;14:1307277.
    PMID: 38193134 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1307277
  3. Ransing R, de la Rosa PA, Pereira-Sanchez V, Handuleh JIM, Jerotic S, Gupta AK, et al.
    PMID: 34735077 DOI: 10.47626/2237-6089-2021-0263
    INTRODUCTION: Varying public views on cannabis use across countries may explain the variation in the prevalence of use, policies and research in individual countries, and global regulation of cannabis. This paper aims to describe the current state of cannabis use, policies, and research across sixteen countries.

    METHODS: PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for published studies from 2010 to 2020. Searches were conducted by using the relevant country of interest as a search term (e.g. "Iran"), as well as relevant predefined keywords such as "cannabis", "marijuana", "hashish", "bhang "dual diagnosis", "use", "addiction", "prevalence", "co-morbidity", "substance use disorder", "legalization" or "policy" (English and non-English). These keywords were used in multiple combinations to create the search string in studies records' titles and abstracts. Official websites of respective governments and international organizations were also searched in English and non-English (national language country) languages to identify the current state of cannabis use, policies, and research in each of those countries.

    RESULTS: Inconsistent and heterogeneous reporting of cannabis use, variation in policies (e.g., legalization), and intervention strategies across the reviewed countries were the main findings. European countries have dominated cannabis research output in PubMed, as compared to Asian countries (Thailand, Malaysia, India, Iran and Nepal).

    CONCLUSIONS: Although global cannabis regulation is ongoing, the existing heterogeneities across countries in terms of policies and epidemiology can increase the burden of cannabis use disorders disproportionately and unpredictably. There is an urgent need to develop global strategies to address these cross-country barriers to improve early detection, prevention, and interventions for cannabis use and related disorders.

  4. 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.

  5. 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.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links