RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with severe mental disorders (SMD) have been classically considered as a particularly high-risk population for bloodborne virus infections. We performed a systematic screening of hepatitis B and C virus among the population with SMD in the area of influence of Hospital Clínic (Barcelona) in order to evaluate the real prevalence of these infections and achieve HCV microelimination in this subpopulation. METHODS: We screened two cohorts for anti-HCV and HBsAg: Cohort A (hospitalized patients with SMD, done systematically) and Cohort B (outpatients, mental health centre-CSMA, done voluntarily). Risk factors and socio-demographic variables were collected. In positive cases, telematic review was activated by Hepatology, calculation of FIB-4 and prescription of direct-acting agents (DAA) in HCV or follow-up in HBV. RESULTS: In Cohort A, 404 patients were screened. 3 HBV patients were detected (0.7%). In all of them, there was a history of drug use. 12 anti-HCV positive patients were detected (3%); 8 of them had a history of drug use. Among the HCV positive, only 2 patients were viraemic (received DAA, both achieving SVR) as most of them (n = 6) had already been cured with DAA. In cohort B, 305 patients were screened, after 542 (64% of the target population) declined to participate. No cases of HCV or HBV were detected. CONCLUSIONS: HCV/HBV prevalence among SMD population with no history of drug use does not seem to be different from the general population. These data may be of interest for defining health policies.
Asunto(s)
Hepatitis B , Trastornos Mentales , Humanos , Antivirales/uso terapéutico , Hepatitis B/complicaciones , Hepatitis B/epidemiología , Hepatitis B/tratamiento farmacológico , Antígenos de Superficie de la Hepatitis B , Virus de la Hepatitis B , Trastornos Mentales/epidemiología , Trastornos Mentales/complicaciones , Trastornos Mentales/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions that have been conducted in comorbid bipolar disorder (BD) and substance use disorders (SUDs) while also providing clinical recommendations about which intervention elements are helpful for addressing substance use versus mood symptoms in patients with these co-occurring conditions. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Very few of the randomized trials performed so far have provided consistent evidence for the management of both mood symptoms and substance use in patients with a BD. No clinical trials are available for bipolar patients using cannabis. Some treatments have shown benefit for mood symptoms without benefits for alcohol or illicit substance use. Our results suggest that 1) we can (weakly) recommend the use of adjuvant valproate or naltrexone to improve symptoms of alcohol use disorder; 2) Lamotrigine add-on therapy seems to reduce cocaine-related symptoms and is therefore recommended (moderate strength); and 3) Varenicline is (weakly) recommended to improve nicotine abstinence. Integrated group therapy is the most-well validated and efficacious approach on substance use outcomes if substance use is targeted in an initial treatment phase.
Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicos y psicosociales que se han realizado en trastorno bipolar (TB) y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de cuáles elementos de intervención son útiles para hacer frente a los síntomas del uso de sustancias versus los síntomas de estado de ánimo en pacientes con estas afecciones concurrentes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Muy pocos de los ensayos aleatorizados realizados hasta la fecha han proporcionado evidencia consistente para el manejo tanto de los síntomas de estado de ánimo como del uso de sustancias en pacientes con TB. No hay disponibilidad de ensayos clínicos para pacientes con TB que utilizan el cannabis. Algunos tratamientos han mostrado beneficios para los síntomas de estado de ánimo sin beneficios para el uso de alcohol o sustancias ilícitas. Nuestros resultados sugieren que 1) podemos (débilmente) recomendar el uso de ácido valproico o naltrexona adyuvante para aliviar los síntomas del trastorno por consumo de alcohol; 2) el tratamiento complementario con lamotrigina parece reducir los síntomas relacionados con la cocaína y, por tanto, es recomendable (fuerza moderada); y 3) la vareniclina es recomendable (débilmente) para mejorar la abstinencia de la nicotina. La terapia grupal integrada es el enfoque con más validación y eficacia sobre los resultados en el uso de sustancias cuando este uso es abordado durante la fase inicial de tratamiento.
Asunto(s)
Alcoholismo , Trastorno Bipolar , Psicoterapia de Grupo , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Adulto , Alcoholismo/complicaciones , Alcoholismo/epidemiología , Alcoholismo/terapia , Trastorno Bipolar/complicaciones , Trastorno Bipolar/terapia , Comorbilidad , Humanos , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/complicaciones , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/epidemiología , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/terapiaRESUMEN
This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions that have been conducted in comorbid anxiety disorders and SUDs while also providing clinical recommendations about which intervention elements are helpful for addressing substance use versus anxiety symptoms in patients with these co-occurring conditions. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Clinical trials are only available for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and for social anxiety. Concerning the comorbid substance use, all the studies have included patients with alcohol use, none of them have dealt with cocaine, cannabis or nicotine use. Although some treatments have shown benefit for anxiety symptoms without benefits for alcohol or other substance use, only limited pharmacological approaches have been assayed (sertraline, desipramine, paroxetine, buspirone, naltrexone and disulfiram). Our results suggest that 1) we can (weakly) recommend the use of desipramine over paroxetine to alleviate symptoms of anxiety in patients with a PTSD and alcohol use; 2) In these patients, the use of naltrexone to reduce symptoms of anxiety is also recommended (weak strength); and 3) SSRI antidepressants vs placebo can be recommended to reduce alcohol use (weak recommendation). Our review highlights the need for more research in this area and for larger, multisite studies with generalizable samples to provide more definite guidance for clinical practice.
Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicos y psicosociales que han sido llevadas a cabo en trastornos de ansiedad con un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de cuáles elementos de intervención son útiles para hacer frente a los síntomas del uso de sustancias y los síntomas de ansiedad en pacientes con estas afecciones concurrentes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Hay ensayos clínicos disponibles únicamente para el trastorno por estrés postraumático (TEPT) y para el trastorno de ansiedad. En cuanto al diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias, todos los estudios han incluido pacientes con consumo de alcohol, ninguno de ellos ha abordado el consumo de cocaína, cannabis o nicotina. Aunque algunos tratamientos han mostrado beneficios para los síntomas de ansiedad sin beneficios para el consumo de alcohol u otras sustancias, solo se han ensayado enfoques farmacológicos limitados (sertralina, desipramina, paroxetina, buspirona, naltrexona y disulfiram). Nuestros resultados sugieren que 1) podemos (débilmente) recomendar el uso de desipramina sobre la paroxetina para aliviar los síntomas de ansiedad en pacientes con un TEPT y consumo de alcohol; 2) en estos pacientes, el uso de naltrexona para reducir los síntomas de ansiedad es también recomendable (fuerza débil); y 3) se pueden recomendar antidepresivos ISRS frente a placebo para reducir el consumo de alcohol (recomendación débil). Nuestra revisión pone de relieve la necesidad de realizar más investigaciones en esta área y de estudios más grandes, multisitio con muestras generalizables para proporcionar evidencia más definitiva para la práctica clínica.
Asunto(s)
Paroxetina , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Adulto , Trastornos de Ansiedad/complicaciones , Trastornos de Ansiedad/terapia , Desipramina/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Naltrexona/uso terapéutico , Paroxetina/uso terapéutico , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/complicaciones , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/terapiaRESUMEN
Substantial evidence has confirmed the high comorbidity between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and a substance use disorder (SUD). This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions conducted in ADHD and SUDs, and provides clinical recommendations using the GRADE approach. Our results suggest: 1) In patients with ADHD and alcohol use, atomoxetine is recommended to reduce ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation) and alcohol craving (weak recommendation). 2) In patients with ADHD and cannabis use disorder, atomoxetine is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce cannabis use (weak recommendation). 3) In patients with ADHD and cocaine use disorder, methylphenidate is not recommended to improve ADHD symptoms or to reduce cocaine use (weak recommendation). 4) In patients with ADHD and comorbid nicotine use disorder, methylphenidate is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation). Psychoestimulants, such as methylphenidate or lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, are not recommended to reduce nicotine use (weak recommendation). 5) Regarding patients with ADHD and any SUD, the use of psychostimulants is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce substance use (weak recommendation) or to improve retention to treatment (strong recommendation). In these patients, the use of atomoxetine is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to decrease substance use (weak recommendation) or to improve retention to treatment (strong recommendation). Atomoxetine and psychostimulants appear to be safe in patients with any SUD (strong recommendation). Our review suggests the need for more research in this area and for larger, multisite, randomized studies to provide more definite and conclusive evidence.
La evidencia actual confirma la alta comorbilidad entre el trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad (TDAH) y trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS). Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicas y psicosociales que se han evaluado en pacientes con TDAH y TUS, y ofrece recomendaciones mediante el enfoque GRADE. Nuestros resultados sugieren: 1) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de alcohol, la atomoxetina es recomendable para reducir los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil) y el craving de alcohol (recomendación débil). 2) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cannabis, la atomoxetina es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de cannabis (recomendación débil). 3) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cocaína, el metilfenidato no es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH o para reducir el uso de cocaína (recomendación débil). 4) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de nicotina, es recomendable el metilfenidato para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil). Los psicoestimulantes, como metilfenidato o lisdexanfetamina, no son recomendables para reducir el uso de nicotina (recomendación débil). 5) Respecto de los pacientes con TDAH y cualquier TUS, el uso de los psicoestimulantes es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de sustancias (recomendación débil) o para mejorar la retención del tratamiento (recomendación fuerte). En estos pacientes, el uso de atomexetina es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de sustancias (recomendación débil) o para mejorar la retención del tratamiento (recomendación fuerte). La atomoxetina y los psicoestimulantes parecen ser seguros en pacientes con cualquier TUS (recomendación fuerte). Nuestra revisión sugiere la necesidad de realizar más investigaciones en esta área y de estudios aleatorizados, multicéntricos y de mayor tamaño muestral para proporcionar más evidencia definitiva y concluyente.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central , Cocaína , Metilfenidato , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Adulto , Clorhidrato de Atomoxetina/uso terapéutico , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/complicaciones , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/tratamiento farmacológico , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/uso terapéutico , Comorbilidad , Humanos , Metilfenidato/efectos adversos , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/complicaciones , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/terapiaRESUMEN
Although correct diagnosis and management of patients with schizophrenia and a comorbid substance use disorder (SUD) would determine a decrease in morbidity and mortality in these patients, development of efficient therapeutic strategies is still pending. We present recommendations on the pharmacological and psychological management of these patients following the 'PICO' structure (Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcomes). Evaluation of the quality of studies and summary of the evidence for each question was performed following the recommendations of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) working group. Our results suggest: 1) In patients with schizophrenia and cannabis use disorder, it is not possible to recommend one antipsychotic drug over another (between olanzapine, risperidone or haloperidol) for improving psychotic symptoms, reducing cannabis use, or improving pragmatic variables (weak recommendation). Clozapine cannot be recommended to reduce cannabis use (weak recommendation). 2) In patients with schizophrenia and cocaine use disorder we recommend haloperidol over olanzapine to reduce craving (moderate recommendation), and olanzapine over haloperidol to improve motor side effects in these patients (moderate recommendation). 3) In patients with schizophrenia and alcohol use disorder while naltrexone is recommended to reduce alcohol use (in terms of reducing alcohol craving) (weak recommendation), there is insufficient evidence to make any recommendation on the use of adjuvant acamprosate (weak recommendation). 4) In patients with schizophrenia and nicotine use disorder, adjuvant bupropion and varenicline are recommended for reducing nicotine use and nicotine abstinence (strong/moderate recommendation). 5) In patients with schizophrenia and polydrug use disorder, second-generation over first-generation antipsychotic drugs and olanzapine over other second-generation antipsychotics are recommended to improve psychotic symptoms (moderate/weak recommendation).
Aunque el correcto diagnóstico y manejo de los pacientes con esquizofrenia y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) determinaría una disminución de la morbilidad y mortalidad en estos pacientes, el desarrollo de estrategias terapéuticas eficientes es todavía una asignatura pendiente. Presentamos recomendaciones sobre el manejo farmacológico y psicológico de estos pacientes siguiendo la estructura PICO (Paciente-Intervención-Comparación-Outcome/resultados). Realizamos una evaluación de la calidad de los estudios y un resumen de la evidencia para cada pregunta siguiendo las recomendaciones del grupo de trabajo GRADE («Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation¼). Nuestros resultados sugieren: 1) En pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastorno por consumo de cannabis, no es posible recomendar un fármaco antipsicótico sobre otro (entre olanzapina, risperidona o haloperidol) para mejorar los síntomas psicóticos, reducir el consumo de cannabis o mejorar las variables pragmáticas (recomendación débil). No se puede recomendar la clozapina para reducir el consumo de cannabis (recomendación débil). 2) En pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastorno por consumo de cocaína, recomendamos haloperidol sobre olanzapina para reducir el craving (recomendación moderada) y olanzapina sobre haloperidol para mejorar los efectos secundarios motores en estos pacientes (recomendación moderada). 3) En pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastorno por consumo de alcohol, mientras que se recomienda naltrexona para reducir el consumo de alcohol (en términos de reducción del craving de alcohol) (recomendación débil), no hay evidencia suficiente para hacer ninguna recomendación sobre el uso de acamprosato como adyuvante (recomendación débil). 4) En pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastorno por consumo de nicotina, se recomiendan bupropión y vareniclina adyuvantes para reducir el consumo y la abstinencia de nicotina (recomendación fuerte/moderada). 5) En pacientes con esquizofrenia y trastorno por policonsumo, se recomiendan antipsicóticos de segunda generación sobre los de primera generación y olanzapina sobre otros antipsicóticos de segunda generación para mejorar los síntomas psicóticos (recomendación moderada/débil).
Asunto(s)
Antipsicóticos , Esquizofrenia , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Adulto , Antipsicóticos/uso terapéutico , Benzodiazepinas/uso terapéutico , Haloperidol/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Nicotina , Olanzapina/uso terapéutico , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Esquizofrenia/complicaciones , Esquizofrenia/tratamiento farmacológico , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/complicaciones , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
Co-occurrence of depression and a substance use disorder (SUD) in patients who present dual diagnoses has been long recognized as an important consideration in clinical practice. This review synthesizes the evidence of pharmacological and psychosocial interventions for comorbid depressive disorders and SUDs while providing clinical recommendations about the best interventions to address these patients. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Our results suggest that 1) In patients with depression and alcohol consumption, the administration of non-selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants instead of SSRI is recommended for improvement of depressive symptoms (strong recommendation). Neither SSRI (strong recommendation) nor non-SSRI (weak recommendation) antidepressants are recommended for reduction in alcohol consumption. 2) In patients with depression and cannabis use, the use of venlafaxine is not recommended (weak recommendation). 3) In patients with depression and cocaine consumption, the use of SSRI antidepressants for improving depressive symptoms (weak recommendation) or to reduce cocaine use is not recommended (strong recommendation). The use of non-SSRI antidepressants is only recommended for improving depressive symptoms (strong recommendation). 4) The administration of bupropion to reduce nicotine consumption is not recommended (strong recommendation). 5) Regarding psychological treatment, in patients with depression and co-occurring alcohol disorder, both pharmacotherapy and cognitive behavioural therapy have positive effects on internalizing symptoms and in reducing alcohol consumption (weak recommendation). Our review suggests the need for more research in this area and for larger, multisite, randomized studies to provide more definite evidence.
La concurrencia de depresión y un trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) en pacientes que presentan patología dual ha sido reconocida desde hace mucho tiempo como una consideración importante en la práctica clínica. Esta revisión sintetiza la evidencia de intervenciones farmacológicas y psicosociales para trastornos comórbidos de depresión y uso de sustancias y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de las mejores intervenciones para tratar a estos pacientes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Nuestros resultados sugieren que: 1) en pacientes con depresión y consumo de alcohol, se recomienda la administración de antidepresivos inhibidores de la recaptación de serotonina (ISRS) no selectivos en lugar de los ISRS para mejorar los síntomas depresivos (recomendación fuerte). No se recomiendan antidepresivos ISRS (recomendación fuerte) ni antidepresivos no ISRS (recomendación débil) para reducir el consumo de alcohol; 2) en pacientes con depresión y consumo de cannabis, no se recomienda el uso de venlafaxina (recomendación débil); 3) en pacientes con depresión y consumo de cocaína, no se recomienda el uso de antidepresivos ISRS para mejorar los síntomas depresivos (recomendación débil) o para reducir el consumo de cocaína (recomendación fuerte). El uso de antidepresivos no ISRS solo se recomienda para mejorar los síntomas depresivos (recomendación fuerte); 4) no se recomienda la administración de bupropión para reducir el consumo de nicotina (recomendación fuerte), y 5) en cuanto al tratamiento psicológico, en pacientes con depresión y trastorno de alcohol concurrente, tanto la farmacoterapia como la terapia cognitivo-conductual tienen efectos positivos en la internalización de los síntomas y en la reducción del consumo de alcohol (recomendación débil). Nuestra revisión sugiere la necesidad de realizar más investigaciones en esta área y de estudios aleatorizados, multisitio y más grandes para proporcionar más evidencia definitiva.
Asunto(s)
Cocaína , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Adulto , Antidepresivos/uso terapéutico , Depresión , Humanos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Inhibidores Selectivos de la Recaptación de Serotonina/uso terapéutico , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/complicaciones , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/terapiaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Seasonal pattern (SP) is a bipolar disorder (BD) specifier that indicates a tendency towards affective relapses during specific moments of the year. SP affects 15%-25% of BD patients. In the past, SP was applied only to depressive relapses while, in DSM-5, SP may be applied to both depressive and (hypo)manic episodes. We examined the association between different clinical correlates of BD and SP according to its current definition in a cohort of patients with BD type I (BDI) and II (BDII). METHODS: Patients were recruited from a specialized unit and assessed according to the season of relapse and type of episode per season. SP and non-SP patients were compared looking into sociodemographic and clinical correlates. Significant variables at univariate comparisons were included in multivariate logistic regression with SP as the dependent variable. RESULTS: 708 patients were enrolled (503 BDI, 205 BDII), and 117 (16.5%) fulfilled DSM-5 criteria for SP. The mean age was 45.3 years (SD = 14.18), and 389 were female (54.9%). The logistic regression model included a significant contribution of BDII (OR = 2.23, CI 1.4-3.55), family history of mood disorder (OR = 1.97, CI 1.29-3.01), undetermined predominant polarity (OR = 0.44, CI 0.28-0.70), and aggressive behavior (OR = 0.42, CI 0.23-0.75). CONCLUSION: Our results outline a novel positive association of SP with undetermined predominant polarity, BDII, family history of mood disorder, and with fewer aggressiveness-related symptoms. Seasonality is associated with a biphasic pattern with similar dominance of (hypo)mania and depression and is more frequent in BDII as compared to BDI. Seasonal episodes may be easier to predict, but difficult to prevent.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno Bipolar , Trastorno Bipolar/epidemiología , Manual Diagnóstico y Estadístico de los Trastornos Mentales , Femenino , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Trastornos del Humor , Recurrencia , Estaciones del AñoRESUMEN
Studies highlight that the functional deficits in different areas of a subject's life are an important characteristic that define adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). On the other hand, in the scientific literature, there are no evaluation instruments with psychometric studies concerning their reliability and validity for this variable in adults with ADHD. The aim of the present study is to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST), regarding its reliability and validity, as a measure of adult ADHD functioning. A case-control study was carried out in a sample of 152 adult subjects (88 with ADHD diagnosis and 64 healthy controls). The psychometric properties of the instrument were analyzed regarding feasibility, internal consistency, concurrent validity, discriminant validity (ADHD vs. controls) and factor analysis. For the total scale, Cronbach's alpha was of 0.83, and strong values in the measures of its discriminant capacity were obtained, AUC ROC = 0.98, IC (0.96-0.99). The test is reliable as the internal consistency was high. Significant differences are observed in the correlation between domains, between healthy subjects and subjects with ADHD. ADHD subjects showed impairments in all areas of their life, especially in the cognitive functioning domain, followed by the autonomy, occupational functioning and interpersonal relationships domains. The FAST is an easily administered short interview and has good psychometric properties, in terms of reliability and validity, as a measure of the functional level in adults with ADHD. The study also showed that subjects with adult ADHD may be functionally impaired.
Asunto(s)
Escalas de Valoración Psiquiátrica/normas , Psicometría/instrumentación , Adolescente , Adulto , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Despite the high morbidity and mortality associated with bipolar depression, the optimal treatment for this phase is still a matter of debate. The aim of the current review was to provide updated evidence about the efficacy and tolerability of anticonvulsants in the treatment of acute bipolar depression. A comprehensive review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the use of anticonvulsants for the treatment of acute bipolar depression up to June 2011 was conducted by means of the PubMed-Medline database. Eligibility criteria included active comparator-controlled or placebo-controlled randomized studies involving monotherapy or combination therapy. A total of 18 RCTs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Studies supported the efficacy of divalproex as monotherapy in acute bipolar depression but small sample size was a common methodological limitation. Findings were inconclusive for lamotrigine and carbamazepine although overall lamotrigine may have a beneficial but modest effect. Negative results were found for levetiracetam and gabapentin but the evidence base on these agents is scant. All anticonvulsants were generally well tolerated. No double-blind RCTs were found for the use of other anticonvulsants such as oxcarbazepine, licarbazepine, zonisamide, retigabine, pregabalin, tiagabine, felbamate and vigabatrine in the acute treatment of bipolar depression. To sum up, taking into consideration the efficacy and tolerability profiles of anticonvulsants, current evidence supports the use of divalproex and lamotrigine in the treatment of acute bipolar depression. However, available data for most other anticonvulsants are inconclusive and further RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed before drawing firm conclusions.
Asunto(s)
Anticonvulsivantes/uso terapéutico , Trastorno Bipolar/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad Aguda , Bases de Datos Factuales/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) often have co-occurring substance use disorders (SUDs), which substantially impoverish the course of illness. Despite the importance of this dual diagnosis, the evidence of the efficacy and safety of adjuvant treatments is mostly unknown. OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjuvant drugs in patients with co-occurring BD and SUD. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Knowledge until 30th April 2022 for randomized clinical trials (RCT) evaluating the efficacy and safety of adjuvant drugs compared to placebo in patients with a dual diagnosis of BD and SUD. We meta-analyzed the effect of adjuvant drugs on general outcomes (illness severity, mania, depression, anxiety, abstinence, substance craving, substance use, gamma-GT, adherence, and adverse events) and used the results to objectively assess the quality of the evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. For completeness, we also report the specific effects of specific adjuvant drugs in patients with specific substance disorders. RESULTS: We included 15 RCT studies (9 alcohol, 3 cocaine, 2 nicotine, and 1 cannabis) comprising 628 patients allocated to treatment and 622 to placebo. There was low-quality evidence that adjuvant drugs may reduce illness severity (g=-0.25, 95% CI: -0.44, -0.06), and very-low quality evidence that they may decrease substance use (g=-0.23, 95% CI: -0.44, -0.02) and increase substance abstinence (g=0.21, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.38). DISCUSSION: There is low-quality evidence that adjuvant drugs may help reduce illness severity, probably via facilitating abstinence and lower substance use. However, the evidence is weak; thus, these results should be considered cautiously until better evidence exists.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Clinicians need brief and valid instruments to monitor the psychosocial impact of weight gain in persons with psychiatric disorders. We examined the psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Body Weight, Image and Self-Esteem Evaluation (B-WISE) questionnaire in patients with severe mental disorders. METHOD: The data come from a naturalistic, cross-sectional, validation study conducted at 6 centres in Spain. A total of 211 outpatients with severe mental disorders, 118 with schizophrenia and 93 with bipolar disorder, were evaluated using the B-WISE, the Visual Analogue Scale for Weight and Body Image, and the Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S). The body mass index was also obtained. RESULTS: The principal component analysis confirms 3 components explaining 50.93% of the variance. The Cronbach α values for B-WISE scales ranged between .55 and .73. Significant Pearson correlations were found between B-WISE total score and CGI-S (r = -0.25; P < .001) and Visual Analogue Scale for Weight and Body Image (r = 0.47; P < .001). The B-WISE discriminates among patients with mild, moderate, and severe mental disorders according to CGI-S scores (F = 6.52; P < .005). Body mass index categorization significantly influenced total B-WISE scores (F = 3.586, P < .050). The B-WISE score corresponding to the 5th and 10th percentiles was 22. CONCLUSIONS: We were able to demonstrate that the Spanish version of the B-WISE is a valid instrument for assessing psychosocial impact of weight gain in patients with severe mental disorders in daily clinical practice.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno Bipolar/diagnóstico , Trastorno Bipolar/psicología , Imagen Corporal , Peso Corporal , Comparación Transcultural , Esquizofrenia/diagnóstico , Psicología del Esquizofrénico , Autoimagen , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Adulto , Antipsicóticos/efectos adversos , Antipsicóticos/uso terapéutico , Trastorno Bipolar/tratamiento farmacológico , Índice de Masa Corporal , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Obesidad/inducido químicamente , Obesidad/diagnóstico , Obesidad/psicología , Psicometría/estadística & datos numéricos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Esquizofrenia/tratamiento farmacológico , Traducción , Aumento de Peso/efectos de los fármacosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Sexual dysfunction in patients with severe mental disorders is often underestimated or overlooked by psychiatrists. A brief and valid self-report instrument for assessing sexual functioning may well contribute to changing this situation. AIMS: To validate the Short Form of the Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire (CSFQ-14) in Spanish patients with severe mental disorders. METHODS: Naturalistic, cross-sectional, multicenter, validation study. Eighty-nine patients with schizophrenia and 82 with bipolar disorder were evaluated using the CSFQ-14, the Visual Analogue Scale for Sexual Functioning Satisfaction (VAS-SFS), and the Clinical Global Impression-Severity scales for mental disorders (CGI-S) and for Sexual Dysfunction (CGI-SSD). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The 14-item Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire. RESULTS: Internal reliability (Cronbach's alpha) = 0.90. Construct validity = 3 principal components, of which the first, arousal-orgasm, explained 46.4% of the total variance. Convergent validity: Pearson correlation coefficients between CSFQ-14 and VAS-SFS = 0.33 (P < 0.01) and between CSFQ-14 and CGI-SDS = -0.71 (P < 0.01). Discriminant validity: The CSFQ-14 was able to discriminate among patients with no, mild, moderate, and severe sexual dysfunction according to CGI-SDS scores, both in males (P < 0.001) and females (P < 0.001). In males, the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.833 and a cutoff point of 49 provided a sensitivity of 92.9% and a specificity of 59.5%. In females, the AUC was 0.834 and a cutoff point of 43 provided a sensitivity of 91.9% and a specificity of 62.5%. CONCLUSION: The Spanish version of the CSFQ-14 is a reliable and valid instrument for assessing sexual functioning in patients with severe mental disorders. As a brief, self-rated instrument, the CSFQ-14 scale seems to be appropriate for use in everyday clinical practice as a means of identifying and monitoring changes in sexual functioning.
Asunto(s)
Trastornos Mentales/psicología , Conducta Sexual/psicología , Adulto , Trastorno Bipolar/psicología , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Psicometría , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Psicología del Esquizofrénico , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Disfunciones Sexuales Psicológicas/diagnóstico , Disfunciones Sexuales Psicológicas/psicología , España , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated efficacy for second-generation antipsychotics in the treatment of acute mania in bipolar disorder. Despite depression being considered the hallmark of bipolar disorder, there are no published systematic reviews or meta-analyses to evaluate the efficacy of modern atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression. We systematically reviewed published or registered randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) of modern antipsychotics in adult bipolar I and/or II depressive patients (DSM-IV criteria). Efficacy outcomes were assessed based on changes in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) during an 8-wk period. Data were combined through meta-analysis using risk ratio as an effect size with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) and with a level of statistical significance of 5% (p<0.05). We identified five RCTs; four involved antipsychotic monotherapy and one addressed both monotherapy and combination with an antidepressant. The two quetiapine trials analysed the safety and efficacy of two doses: 300 and 600 mg/d. The only olanzapine trial assessed olanzapine monotherapy within a range of 5-20 mg/d and olanzapine-fluoxetine combination within a range of 5-20 mg/d and 6-12 mg/d, respectively. The two aripiprazole placebo-controlled trials assessed doses of 5-30 mg/d. Quetiapine and olanzapine trials (3/5, 60%) demonstrated superiority over placebo (p<0.001). Only 2/5 (40%) (both aripiprazole trials) failed in the primary efficacy measure after the first 6 wk. Some modern antipsychotics (quetiapine and olanzapine) have demonstrated efficacy in bipolar depressive patients from week 1 onwards. Rapid onset of action seems to be a common feature of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression.
Asunto(s)
Antipsicóticos/uso terapéutico , Trastorno Bipolar/tratamiento farmacológico , Antidepresivos/uso terapéutico , Aripiprazol , Benzodiazepinas/uso terapéutico , Dibenzotiazepinas/uso terapéutico , Combinación de Medicamentos , Quimioterapia Combinada , Fluoxetina/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Olanzapina , Piperazinas/uso terapéutico , Placebos , Fumarato de Quetiapina , Quinolonas/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of adjunctive group psychoeducation in bipolar disorder has been proven although treatment response differ among individuals. The aim of this study was to characterize responders and non-responders to group psychoeducation in order to identify baseline variables that could predict treatment response. METHODS: The sample was composed of 103 medicated euthymic patients with bipolar disorder referred to 21 sessions of group psychoeducation (6 months). Sociodemographic and clinical variables, temperament, circadian rhythms, BDNF, cognitive and psychosocial functioning were collected. At the 18-month endpoint, the patients were split in two groups on the basis of having suffered any recurrence. Significant group differences were included in a logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Ninety patients out of 103 engaged in group psychoeducation, 47 of whom (52.2%) responded to psychoeducation and 43 (47.8%) did not. Recurrences occurred more often in the follow-up, the most common being depression. Responders and non-responders differed in gender, age at diagnosis, latency of diagnosis, temperament, attention composite score and BDNF. Lower age at diagnosis of bipolar disorder, lower cyclothimic temperament scores and being male -which was associated with bipolar type I and a trend to more previous manic episodes- were significantly related to a better response to psychoeducation in the regression analysis. LIMITATIONS: No control group. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies age at diagnosis as a significant modifiable risk factor of treatment response, highlighting the need for early identification of bipolar disorder. Existing programs should be adjusted to the characteristics of specific subpopulations in the framework of a personalized approach.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno Bipolar , Trastorno Bipolar/terapia , Humanos , Estudios Longitudinales , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Recurrencia , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics (LAIs) are used to overcome non-compliance in psychoses, mainly schizophrenia spectrum disorders. We aimed to summarize available evidence of studies comparing the efficacy of LAIs to placebo or oral medications for Bipolar Disorder (BD) and/or Schizoaffective Disorder (SAD). We searched six databases from inception to 28-March-2018, using the strategy: long-acting antipsychotics AND (bipolar disorder OR schizoaffective disorder OR mania OR manic OR bipolar depression). We included peer-reviewed double-blind comparisons of LAIs for any clinical outcome occurrence in BD, or open mirror studies with same prospective as retrospective assessment periods. We excluded studies reporting on mixed schizophrenia/SAD populations without reporting results separately. The pooled records amounted to 642. After duplicate removal and inclusion/exclusion criteria application, we included 15 studies, 6 double-blind and 9 open, 13 assessing BD and 2 SAD. Depot neuroleptics prevented manic, but not depressive recurrences and may worsen depressive symptoms. Risperidone long-acting injectable was found to be effective in protecting from any mood/manic symptom compared to placebo, but not from depressive recurrences. Add-on or monotherapy paliperidone palmitate in SAD patients protected from psychotic, depressive, and manic symptoms. In patients with BD-I with a manic episode at study enrolment, aripiprazole monohydrate significantly delayed time to recurrence of manic episodes without inducing depressive episodes. LAIs are effective and well-tolerated maintenance treatments for BD and SAD. They showed better efficacy in preventing mania than depression. LAIs may be first-line for BD-I and SAD patients with a manic predominant polarity and with non-adherence problems.
Asunto(s)
Antipsicóticos/uso terapéutico , Trastorno Bipolar/tratamiento farmacológico , Trastornos Psicóticos/tratamiento farmacológico , Antipsicóticos/administración & dosificación , Preparaciones de Acción Retardada/administración & dosificación , Preparaciones de Acción Retardada/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Inyecciones Intramusculares , RecurrenciaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Cortical surface area and thickness abnormalities have been observed in patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorders; however, no study thus far has examined cortical morphologic measurements in children and adolescents at genetic risk for the disorders comparatively. METHOD: One hundred thirty-seven participants, including 36 offspring of patients with schizophrenia (SzO), 54 offspring of patients with bipolar disorder (BpO), and 47 offspring of community controls (CcO), 6 to 17 years old, were assessed with clinical and neuroimaging methods. Sixty-nine percent of the sample was reassessed at a 27.6-month (mean) follow-up. Cortical surface reconstruction was applied to measure cortical area and thickness using FreeSurfer; mixed-effects models were used to investigate cross-sectional and longitudinal differences in global and lobar morphologic measurements. RESULTS: The SzO group exhibited a cross-sectional decrease in global, parietal, and occipital lobe surface area compared with the CcO group, and in the occipital lobe compared with the BpO group. In the SzO group, global and parietal surface area values were inversely associated with attenuated positive and negative prodromal symptom scores. No cross-sectional differences in cortical thickness were observed. Division of the sample by pubertal status showed group-by-time interactions in the pubertal and postpubertal SzO subgroup, with less longitudinal decrease in cortical surface area and thickness than in the CcO and BpO subgroups, respectively. CONCLUSION: The SzO, but not the BpO, group was characterized by cross-sectional decreases in surface area, and this was associated with prodromal symptoms. Longitudinal changes in cortical morphology associated with risk for schizophrenia may be expressed differently according to developmental stage.
Asunto(s)
Trastorno Bipolar/patología , Corteza Cerebral/patología , Hijo de Padres Discapacitados , Síntomas Prodrómicos , Esquizofrenia/patología , Adolescente , Adulto , Trastorno Bipolar/diagnóstico por imagen , Trastorno Bipolar/fisiopatología , Corteza Cerebral/diagnóstico por imagen , Niño , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Esquizofrenia/diagnóstico por imagen , Esquizofrenia/fisiopatologíaRESUMEN
Aunque el correcto diagnóstico y manejo de los pacientes con esquizofrenia y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) determinaría una disminución de la morbilidad y mortalidad en estos pacientes, el desarrollo de estrategias terapéuticas eficientes es todavía una asignatura pendiente. Presentamos recomendaciones sobre el manejo farmacológico y psicológico de estos pacientes siguiendo la estructura PICO (Paciente-Intervención-Comparación-Outcome/resultados). Realizamos una evaluación de la calidad de los estudios y un resumen de la evidencia para cada pregunta siguiendo las recomendaciones del grupo de trabajo GRADE («Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation»).(AU)
Although correct diagnosis and management of patients with schizophrenia and a comorbid substance use disorder (SUD) would determine a decrease in morbidity and mortality in these patients, development of efficient therapeutic strategies is still pending. We present recommendations on the pharmacological and psychological management of these patients following the PICO structure (Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcomes). Evaluation of the quality of studies and summary of the evidence for each question was performed following the recommendations of the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) working group.(AU)
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Adulto , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Farmacología , Esquizofrenia , Trastornos Relacionados con SustanciasRESUMEN
Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicos y psicosociales que se han realizado en trastorno bipolar (TB) y un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS) y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de cuáles elementos de intervención son útiles para hacer frente a los síntomas del uso de sustancias versus los síntomas de estado de ánimo en pacientes con estas afecciones concurrentes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Muy pocos de los ensayos aleatorizados realizados hasta la fecha han proporcionado evidencia consistente para el manejo tanto de los síntomas de estado de ánimo como del uso de sustancias en pacientes con TB. No hay disponibilidad de ensayos clínicos para pacientes con TB que utilizan el cannabis. Algunos tratamientos han mostrado beneficios para los síntomas de estado de ánimo sin beneficios para el uso de alcohol o sustancias ilícitas.(AU)
This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions that have been conducted in comorbid bipolar disorder (BD) and substance use disorders (SUDs) while also providing clinical recommendations about which intervention elements are helpful for addressing substance use versus mood symptoms in patients with these co-occurring conditions. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Very few of the randomized trials performed so far have provided consistent evidence for the management of both mood symptoms and substance use in patients with a BD. No clinical trials are available for bipolar patients using cannabis. Some treatments have shown benefit for mood symptoms without benefits for alcohol or illicit substance use.(AU)
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Adulto , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Farmacología , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Trastorno BipolarRESUMEN
Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicos y psicosociales que han sido llevadas a cabo en trastornos de ansiedad con un diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias y además proporciona recomendaciones clínicas respecto de cuáles elementos de intervención son útiles para hacer frente a los síntomas del uso de sustancias y los síntomas de ansiedad en pacientes con estas afecciones concurrentes. Se utilizó la mejor evidencia de ensayos controlados aleatorizados para evaluar las opciones de tratamiento. La fuerza de las recomendaciones se describió mediante el enfoque GRADE. Hay ensayos clínicos disponibles únicamente para el trastorno por estrés postraumático (TEPT) y para el trastorno de ansiedad. En cuanto al diagnóstico comórbido de trastorno por uso de sustancias, todos los estudios han incluido pacientes con consumo de alcohol, ninguno de ellos ha abordado el consumo de cocaína, cannabis o nicotina. Aunque algunos tratamientos han mostrado beneficios para los síntomas de ansiedad sin beneficios para el consumo de alcohol u otras sustancias, solo se han ensayado enfoques farmacológicos limitados (sertralina, desipramina, paroxetina, buspirona, naltrexona y disulfiram).(AU)
This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions that have been conducted in comorbid anxiety disorders and SUDs while also providing clinical recommendations about which intervention elements are helpful for addressing substance use versus anxiety symptoms in patients with these co-occurring conditions. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations was described using the GRADE approach. Clinical trials are only available for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and for social anxiety. Concerning the comorbid substance use, all the studies have included patients with alcohol use, none of them have dealt with cocaine, cannabis or nicotine use. Although some treatments have shown benefit for anxiety symptoms without benefits for alcohol or other substance use, only limited pharmacological approaches have been assayed (sertraline, desipramine, paroxetine, buspirone, naltrexone and disulfiram).(AU)
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Adulto , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Farmacología , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Trastornos de AnsiedadRESUMEN
La evidencia actual confirma la alta comorbilidad entre el trastorno por déficit de atención con hiperactividad (TDAH) y trastorno por uso de sustancias (TUS). Esta revisión resume las intervenciones farmacológicas y psicosociales que se han evaluado en pacientes con TDAH y TUS, y ofrece recomendaciones mediante el enfoque GRADE. Nuestros resultados sugieren: 1) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de alcohol, la atomoxetina es recomendable para reducir los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil) y el craving de alcohol (recomendación débil). 2) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cannabis, la atomoxetina es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de cannabis (recomendación débil). 3) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de cocaína, el metilfenidato no es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH o para reducir el uso de cocaína (recomendación débil). 4) En pacientes con TDAH y trastorno por uso de nicotina, es recomendable el metilfenidato para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil). Los psicoestimulantes, como metilfenidato o lisdexanfetamina, no son recomendables para reducir el uso de nicotina (recomendación débil). 5) Respecto de los pacientes con TDAH y cualquier TUS, el uso de los psicoestimulantes es recomendable para mejorar los síntomas de TDAH (recomendación débil), no para reducir el uso de sustancias (recomendación débil) o para mejorar la retención del tratamiento (recomendación fuerte).(AU)
Substantial evidence has confirmed the high comorbidity between Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and a substance use disorder (SUD). This review synthesizes the pharmacological and psychosocial interventions conducted in ADHD and SUDs, and provides clinical recommendations using the GRADE approach. Our results suggest: 1) In patients with ADHD and alcohol use, atomoxetine is recommended to reduce ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation) and alcohol craving (weak recommendation). 2) In patients with ADHD and cannabis use disorder, atomoxetine is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce cannabis use (weak recommendation). 3) In patients with ADHD and cocaine use disorder, methylphenidate is not recommended to improve ADHD symptoms or to reduce cocaine use (weak recommendation). 4) In patients with ADHD and comorbid nicotine use disorder, methylphenidate is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation). Psychoestimulants, such as methylphenidate or lisdexamfetamine dimesylate, are not recommended to reduce nicotine use (weak recommendation). 5) Regarding patients with ADHD and any SUD, the use of psychostimulants is recommended to improve ADHD symptoms (weak recommendation), not to reduce substance use (weak recommendation) or to improve retention to treatment (strong recommendation).(AU)