The European psychiatric association (EPA) - early career psychiatrists committee survey on trainees' and early-career psychiatrists' attitudes towards therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) use and utility during antipsychotic treatment.

OBJECTIVES: This survey assessed psychiatry residents'/early-career psychiatrists' attitudes towards the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of antipsychotics. METHODS: A previously developed questionnaire on attitudes on TDM utility during antipsychotic treatment was cross-sectionally disseminated by national coordinators between 01/01/2022-31/12/2023. The frequency of using TDM for antipsychotics other than clozapine was the main outcome in a linear regression analysis, including sex, clinical setting, caseload, and factors generated by an exploratory factor analysis. Comparisons between residents and early-career psychiatrists, respondents working in in- and outpatient settings, and low-/middle- and high-income countries were performed. RESULTS: Altogether, 1,237 respondents completed the survey, with 37.9% having never used TDM for antipsychotics. Seven factors explained 41% of response variance; six of them were associated with frequency of TDM use (p < 0.05). Items with highest loadings for factors included clinical benefits of TDM (factors A and E: 0.7), negative expectations for beliefs of patients towards TDM (factor B: 0.6-0.7), weak TDM scientific evidence (factor C: 0.8), and TDM availability (factor D: -0.8). Respondents from low-/middle-income countries were less likely to frequently/almost always use TDM compared to high-income countries (9.4% vs. 21.5%, p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: TDM use for antipsychotics was poor and associated with limited knowledge and insufficient availability.

Non-binary gender, vulnerable populations and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: Data from the COVID-19 MEntal health inTernational for the general population (COMET-G) study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought significant mental health challenges, particularly for vulnerable populations, including non-binary gender individuals. The COMET international study aimed to investigate specific risk factors for clinical depression or distress during the pandemic, also in these special populations. METHODS: Chi-square tests were used for initial screening to select only those variables which would show an initial significance. Risk Ratios (RR) were calculated, and a Multiple Backward Stepwise Linear Regression Analysis (MBSLRA) was followed with those variables given significant results at screening and with the presence of distress or depression or the lack of both of them. RESULTS: The most important risk factors for depression were female (RR = 1.59-5.49) and non-binary gender (RR = 1.56-7.41), unemployment (RR = 1.41-6.57), not working during lockdowns (RR = 1.43-5.79), bad general health (RR = 2.74-9.98), chronic somatic disorder (RR = 1.22-5.57), history of mental disorders (depression RR = 2.31-9.47; suicide attempt RR = 2.33-9.75; psychosis RR = 2.14-10.08; Bipolar disorder RR = 2.75-12.86), smoking status (RR = 1.15-5.31) and substance use (RR = 1.77-8.01). The risk factors for distress or depression that survived MBSLRA were younger age, being widowed, living alone, bad general health, being a carer, chronic somatic disorder, not working during lockdowns, being single, self-reported history of depression, bipolar disorder, self-harm, suicide attempts and of other mental disorders, smoking, alcohol, and substance use. CONCLUSIONS: Targeted preventive interventions are crucial to safeguard the mental health of vulnerable groups, emphasizing the importance of diverse samples in future research. LIMITATIONS: Online data collection may have resulted in the underrepresentation of certain population groups.

Somatic multicomorbidity and disability in patients with psychiatric disorders in comparison to the general population: a quasi-epidemiological investigation in 54,826 subjects from 40 countries (COMET-G study).

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of medical illnesses is high among patients with psychiatric disorders. The current study aimed to investigate multi-comorbidity in patients with psychiatric disorders in comparison to the general population. Secondary aims were to investigate factors associated with metabolic syndrome and treatment appropriateness of mental disorders. METHODS: The sample included 54,826 subjects (64.73% females; 34.15% males; 1.11% nonbinary gender) from 40 countries (COMET-G study). The analysis was based on the registration of previous history that could serve as a fair approximation for the lifetime prevalence of various medical conditions. RESULTS: About 24.5% reported a history of somatic and 26.14% of mental disorders. Mental disorders were by far the most prevalent group of medical conditions. Comorbidity of any somatic with any mental disorder was reported by 8.21%. One-third to almost two-thirds of somatic patients were also suffering from a mental disorder depending on the severity and multicomorbidity. Bipolar and psychotic patients and to a lesser extent depressives, manifested an earlier (15-20 years) manifestation of somatic multicomorbidity, severe disability, and probably earlier death. The overwhelming majority of patients with mental disorders were not receiving treatment or were being treated in a way that was not recommended. Antipsychotics and antidepressants were not related to the development of metabolic syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: The finding that one-third to almost two-thirds of somatic patients also suffered from a mental disorder strongly suggests that psychiatry is the field with the most trans-specialty and interdisciplinary value and application points to the importance of teaching psychiatry and mental health in medical schools and also to the need for more technocratically oriented training of psychiatric residents.