[Health professionals facing the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: What are the mental health risks?] / Les professionnels de santé face à la pandémie de la maladie à coronavirus (COVID-19) : quels risques pour leur santé mentale ?

OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has caused major sanitary crisis worldwide. Half of the world has been placed in quarantine. In France, this large-scale health crisis urgently triggered the restructuring and reorganization of health service delivery to support emergency services, medical intensive care units and continuing care units. Health professionals mobilized all their resources to provide emergency aid in a general climate of uncertainty. Concerns about the mental health, psychological adjustment, and recovery of health care workers treating and caring for patients with COVID-19 are now arising. The goal of the present article is to provide up-to-date information on potential mental health risks associated with exposure of health professionals to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Authors performed a narrative review identifying relevant results in the scientific and medical literature considering previous epidemics of 2003 (SARS-CoV-1) and 2009 (H1N1) with the more recent data about the COVID-19 pandemic. We highlighted most relevant data concerning the disease characteristics, the organizational factors and personal factors that may contribute to developing psychological distress and other mental health symptoms. RESULTS: The disease characteristics of the current COVID-19 pandemic provoked a generalized climate of wariness and uncertainty, particularly among health professionals, due to a range of causes such as the rapid spread of COVID-19, the severity of symptoms it can cause in a segment of infected individuals, the lack of knowledge of the disease, and deaths among health professionals. Stress may also be caused by organizational factors, such as depletion of personal protection equipment, concerns about not being able to provide competent care if deployed to new area, concerns about rapidly changing information, lack of access to up-to-date information and communication, lack of specific drugs, the shortage of ventilators and intensive care unit beds necessary to care for the surge of critically ill patients, and significant change in their daily social and family life. Further risk factors have been identified, including feelings of being inadequately supported, concerns about health of self, fear of taking home infection to family members or others, and not having rapid access to testing through occupational health if needed, being isolated, feelings of uncertainty and social stigmatization, overwhelming workload, or insecure attachment. Additionally, we discussed positive social and organizational factors that contribute to enhance resilience in the face of the pandemic. There is a consensus in all the relevant literature that health care professionals are at an increased risk of high levels of stress, anxiety, depression, burnout, addiction and post-traumatic stress disorder, which could have long-term psychological implications. CONCLUSIONS: In the long run, this tragic health crisis should significantly enhance our understanding of the mental health risk factors among the health care professionals facing the COVID-19 pandemic. Reporting information such as this is essential to plan future prevention strategies. Protecting health care professionals is indeed an important component of public health measures to address large-scale health crisis. Thus, interventions to promote mental well-being in health care professionals exposed to COVID-19 need to be immediately implemented, and to strengthen prevention and response strategies by training health care professionals on mental help and crisis management.

Clinical guidelines for the management of treatment-resistant depression: French recommendations from experts, the French Association for Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology and the fondation FondaMental.

BACKGROUND: Clear guidance for successive antidepressant pharmacological treatments for non-responders in major depression is not well established. METHOD: Based on the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method, the French Association for Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology and the fondation FondaMental developed expert consensus guidelines for the management of treatment-resistant depression. The expert guidelines combine scientific evidence and expert clinicians' opinions to produce recommendations for treatment-resistant depression. A written survey comprising 118 questions related to highly-detailed clinical presentations was completed on a risk-benefit scale ranging from 0 to 9 by 36 psychiatrist experts in the field of major depression and its treatments. Key-recommendations are provided by the scientific committee after data analysis and interpretation of the results of the survey. RESULTS: The scope of these guidelines encompasses the assessment of pharmacological resistance and situations at risk of resistance, as well as the pharmacological and psychological strategies in major depression. CONCLUSION: The expert consensus guidelines will contribute to facilitate treatment decisions for clinicians involved in the daily assessment and management of treatment-resistant depression across a number of common and complex clinical situations.

Clinical guidelines for the management of depression with specific comorbid psychiatric conditions French recommendations from experts (the French Association for Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology and the fondation FondaMental).

BACKGROUND: Recommendations for pharmacological treatments of major depression with specific comorbid psychiatric conditions are lacking. METHOD: The French Association for Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology and the fondation FondaMental developed expert consensus guidelines for the management of depression based on the RAND/UCLA Appropriatneness Method. Recommendations for lines of treatment are provided by the scientific committee after data analysis and interpretation of the results of a survey of 36 psychiatrist experts in the field of major depression and its treatments. RESULTS: The expert guidelines combine scientific evidence and expert clinician's opinion to produce recommendations for major depression with comorbid anxiety disorders, personality disorders or substance use disorders and in geriatric depression. CONCLUSION: These guidelines provide direction addressing common clinical dilemmas that arise in the pharmacologic treatment of major depression with comorbid psychiatric conditions.

[French Society for Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology and Fondation FondaMental task force: Formal Consensus for the management of treatment-resistant depression]. / Prise en charge des troubles dépressifs résistants : recommandations françaises formalisées par des experts de l'AFPBN et de la fondation FondaMental.

Major depression represents among the most frequent psychiatric disorders in the general population with an estimated lifetime prevalence of 16-17%. It is characterized by high levels of comorbidities with other psychiatric conditions or somatic diseases as well as a recurrent or chronic course in 50 to 80% of the cases leading to negative repercussions on the daily functioning, with an impaired quality of life, and to severe direct/indirect costs. Large cohort studies have supported that failure of a first-line antidepressant treatment is observed in more than 60% of patients. In this case, several treatment strategies have been proposed by classical evidence-based guidelines from internationally recognized scientific societies, referring primarily on: I) the switch to another antidepressant of the same or different class; II) the combination with another antidepressant of complementary pharmacological profile; III) the addition of a wide range of pharmacological agents intending to potentiate the therapeutic effects of the ongoing antidepressant medication; IV) the association with appropriate psychological therapies; and, V) the use of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques. However, although based on the most recently available data and rigorous methodology, standard guidelines have the significant disadvantage of not covering a large variety of clinical conditions, while currently observed in everyday clinical practice. From these considerations, formalized recommendations by a large panel of French experts in the management of depressed patients have been developed under the shared sponsorship of the French Association of Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology (AFPBN) and the Fondation FondaMental. These French recommendations are presented in this special issue in order to provide relevant information about the treatment choices to make, depending particularly on the clinical response to previous treatment lines or the complexity of clinical situations (clinical features, specific populations, psychiatric comorbidities, etc.). Thus, the present approach will be especially helpful for the clinicians enabling to substantially facilitate and guide their clinical decision when confronted to difficult-to-treat forms of major depression in the daily clinical practice. This will be expected to significantly improve the poor prognosis of the treatment-resistant depression thereby lowering the clinical, functional and costly impact owing directly to the disease.

Evolution and characteristics of the use of valproate in women of childbearing age with bipolar disorder: Results from the FACE-BD cohort.

BACKGROUND: Valproate is associated with teratogenic and neurodevelopmental effects. Several agencies have restricted the conditions of its prescription in bipolar disorders (BD). We aimed to assess the evolution of valproate prescription and the clinical profile of BD women of childbearing age receiving valproate. METHODS: Based on a large national cohort, we included all BD women 16-50 years old. Sociodemographic, clinical and pharmacological data were recorded. Logistic regression analyses were used to describe variables associated with valproate prescription. RESULTS: Of the 1018 included women 16-50 years old, 26.9% were treated with valproate with a mean daily dosage of 968 mg. The prevalence of BD women using valproate was 32.6% before May 2015 and 17.3% after May 2015 (p<0.001), the date of French regulatory publication of restriction of valproate prescription. The multivariate analysis revealed that the inclusion period after May 2015 (OR=0.54, CI 95% 0.37-0.78, p=0.001), the age lower than 40 years (OR=0.65, CI 95% 0.43-0.98, p=0.040) and the number of lifetime mood episodes (OR=0.98, CI 95% 0.95-0.99, p=0.040) were the variables negatively associated with the use of valproate. LIMITATIONS: Study could be underpowered to determine a clinical profile associated with valproate prescription. CONCLUSIONS: The regulatory change in BD women of childbearing age had a significant impact on valproate prescription, even if the prescription rate remains high. Important efforts are needed to help clinicians and patients to improve quality of care in BD women of childbearing age.

Adherence to treatment guidelines in clinical practice for using electroconvulsive therapy in major depressive episode.

BACKGROUND: ECT is the most effective treatment of major depressive episode (MDE) but remains a neglected treatment. The French Society for Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology aimed to determine whether prescribing practice of ECT followed guidelines recommendations. METHODS: This multicenter, retrospective study included adult patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BD), who have been treated with ECT for MDE. Duration of MDE and number of lines of treatment received before ECT were collected. The reasons for using ECT, specifically first-line indications (suicidality, urgency, presence of catatonic and psychotic features, previous ECT response, patient preference) were recorded. Statistical comparisons between groups used standard statistical tests. RESULTS: Seven hundred and forty-five individuals were included. The mean duration of MDE before ECT was 10.1 months and the mean number of lines of treatment before ECT was 3.4. It was significantly longer for MDD single episode than recurrent MDD and BD. The presence of first-line indications for using ECT was significantly associated to shorter duration of MDE (9.1 vs 13.1 months, p<0.001) and lower number of lines of treatment before ECT (3.3 vs 4.1, p<0.001). LIMITATIONS: This is a retrospective study and not all facilities practicing ECT participated that could limit the extrapolation of the results. CONCLUSION: Compared to guidelines, ECT was not used as first-line strategy in clinical practice. The presence of first-line indications seemed to reduce the delay before ECT initiation. The improvements of knowledge and access of ECT are needed to decrease the gap between guidelines and clinical practice.

Pilot study of feasibility of the effect of treatment with tDCS in patients suffering from treatment-resistant depression treated with escitalopram.

OBJECTIVE: This double-blind, sham-controlled trial investigated the effects of two daily tDCS sessions over a 5-day period in treatment-resistant depression. METHOD: Twenty-four treatment-resistant depressed patients received two daily sessions of active or sham anodal tDCS to the left prefrontal cortex (2 mA, 10 sessions over 1 week). Depression severity, psychomotor retardation and cognitive function were assessed. RESULTS: Active tDCS was not significantly superior to sham tDCS on the HDRS at week 4, as well as on the MADRS and SRRS scales, and on neuropsychological tests. Response rates were not significantly higher with active tDCS. tDCS was well tolerated, with mild adverse events limited to transient scalp discomfort. CONCLUSION: tDCS did not induce clinically relevant antidepressant effect in active and sham stimulation groups. There was no impact on psychomotor and neuropsychological functioning. SIGNIFICANCE: tDCS efficacy on specific symptom profiles in pharmacotherapy-resistant depression is limited. The use of optimized stimulation protocol and longer period of follow up may valuably contribute to specify the place of tDCS in treatment-resistant depression.

Risk factors for treatment resistance in unipolar depression: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Treatment resistant depression is a complex disorder and an important source of morbidity and mortality. Identification of risk factors of resistance may be useful to improve early recognition as well as treatment selection and prediction of outcome in patients with depression. METHODS: The aim of this paper was to review the current status of knowledge regarding risk factors of treatment resistance in unipolar depression, in patients who failed to respond to at least two successive and adequate antidepressant treatments. RESULTS: Systematic literature search yielded 8 publications exploring clinical and biological factors. Specific psychiatric comorbidities, psychosocial factors, clinical characteristics of the depressive episode and biological markers emerge as possible risk factor for treatment resistant depression. LIMITATIONS: Due to the lack of objective definition and diagnostic criteria for treatment resistant depression, and the paucity of reports on risk factors, our review only summarized a small number of studies. CONCLUSION: Future investigations of risk factors should help to improve the understanding of the mechanisms underlying resistance in mood disorders and contribute to improve their therapeutic management.