Anxiety disorders, benzodiazepine prescription, and incident dementia.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing benzodiazepines to older patients is controversial. Anxiety disorders and benzodiazepines have been associated with dementia, but literature is inconsistent. It is unknown if anxiety treated with a benzodiazepine, compared to anxiety disorder alone is associated with dementia risk. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study (n = 72,496) was conducted using electronic health data from 2014 to 2021. Entropy balancing controlled for bias by indication and other confounding factors. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients were ≥65 years old, had clinic encounters before and after index date and were free of dementia for 2 years prior to index date. Of the 72,496 eligible patients, 85.6% were White and 59.9% were female. Mean age was 74.1 (SD ± 7.1) years. EXPOSURE: Anxiety disorder was a composite of generalized anxiety disorder, anxiety not otherwise specified, panic disorder, and social phobia. Sustained benzodiazepine use was defined as at least two separate prescription orders in any 6-month period. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: ICD-9 or ICD-10 dementia diagnoses. RESULTS: Six percent of eligible patients had an anxiety diagnosis and 3.6% received sustained benzodiazepine prescriptions. There were 6640 (9.2%) incident dementia events. After controlling for confounders, both sustained benzodiazepine use (HR 1.28, 95% CI: 1.11-1.47) and a diagnosis of anxiety (HR 1.19, 95% CI: 1.06-1.33) were associated with incident dementia in patients aged 65-75. Anxiety disorder with sustained benzodiazepine, compared to anxiety disorder alone, was not associated with incident dementia (HR 1.18, 95% CI: 0.92-1.51) after controlling for confounding. Results were not significant when limiting the sample to those ≥75 years of age. CONCLUSIONS: Benzodiazepines and anxiety disorders are associated with increased risk for dementia. In patients with anxiety disorders, benzodiazepines were not associated with additional dementia risk. Further research is warranted to determine if benzodiazepines are associated with a reduced or increased risk for dementia compared to other anxiolytic medications in patients with anxiety disorders.

Achievement of glycemic control and antidepressant medication use in comorbid depression and type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Existing studies designed to determine if depression treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is associated with improved glycemic control have produced inconsistent results. The present study investigated the link between acute phase antidepressant medication treatment and achievement of glycemic control in patients with T2D using nationally distributed electronic health record data. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study (n = 7332) was conducted using nationally distributed Optum® de-identified electronic health record data from 2010 to 2018. Eligible patients were 18-64 years old and had T2D, depression, and poor glycemic control. Antidepressant medication treatment was categorized into acute phase treatment (≥12 weeks), less than acute phase (<12 weeks) or no treatment. Glycemic control was defined as HbA1c < 7.0 % (53 mmol/mol). Propensity scores (PS) and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) controlled for confounding. Extended Cox models measured the association between duration of antidepressant medication treatment and glycemic control at 0 to 36 months, 36 to 72 months and ≥72 months. RESULTS: After controlling for confounding, compared to no treatment, acute phase treatment was significantly associated with achieving glycemic control within 36 months (HR 1.17, 95 % CI 1.02-1.34). No association was observed beyond 36 months. There was no association between acute vs. less than acute phase treatment and glycemic control. LIMITATIONS: We were unable to measure decreased depression severity which could contribute to glycemic control. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with T2D and hyperglycemia, acute phase antidepressant medication may enable glycemic control. Further research is needed to establish mechanisms for this association.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Bipolar Illness in the Primary Care Office.

Bipolar Affective Disorder (BPAD) is frequently encountered in the primary care office and must be considered in the differential diagnosis of all patients with mood dysregulation. Appreciation for the range of bipolar illness has evolved in recent years, and the overlap of bipolar illness with trauma-based diagnosis such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Borderline Personality Disorder must be considered. Treatment of BPAD is divided into manic, depressive, and maintenance phases, each with different pharmacologic considerations. First line agents for the acute manic phase include lithium, valproic acid, and second generation antipsychotics (SGAs). First line agents for depressive phase include lamotrigine, lithium, and the SGAs lurasidone and quetiapine. For bipolar maintenance therapy, lamotrigine, valproic acid, and lithium are first line options. Finally, nonpharmacologic interventions including psychoeducation can be extremely helpful for patients and their families to successfully participate in the management of their disease.

Working adeptly to diagnose and treat adult ADHD.

Rely on DSM-5 criteria and an appropriate rating scale to assess how an individual's inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity interfere with functioning in different settings.

Integrated Behavioral Health Care in Family Medicine Residencies A CERA Survey.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Behavioral health integration (BHI) in primary care settings is critical to mental health care in the United States. Family medicine resident experience in BHI in family medicine residency (FMR) continuity clinics is essential preparation for practice. We surveyed FMR program directors to characterize the status of BHI in FMR training. METHODS: Using the Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA) 2017 survey, FMR program directors (n=478, 261 respondents, 54.6% response rate) were queried regarding the stage of BHI within the residency family medicine center (FMC), integration activities at the FMC, and the professions of the BH faculty. BHI was characterized by Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Agency (SAMHSA) designations within FMRs, and chi-square or ANOVA with Tukey honest significant difference (HSD) post hoc testing was used to assess differences in reported BHI attributes. RESULTS: Program directors reported a high level of BHI in their FMCs (44.1% full integration, 33.7% colocated). Higher levels of BHI were associated with increased use of warm handoffs, same day consultation, shared health records, and the use of behavioral health (BH) professionals for both mental health and medical issues. Family physicians, psychiatrists, and psychologists were most likely to be training residents in BHI. CONCLUSIONS: Almost half of FMR programs have colocated BH care or fully integrated BH as defined by SAMHSA. Highly integrated FMRs use a diversity of behavioral professionals and activities. Residencies currently at the collaboration stage could increase BH provider types and BHI practices to better prepare residents for practice. Residencies with full BHI may consider focusing on supporting BHI-trained residents transitioning into practice, or disseminating the model in the general primary care community.

Antidepressant medication use and glycaemic control in co-morbid type 2 diabetes and depression.

OBJECTIVE: Depression is prevalent in diabetes and is associated with increased risks of hyperglycaemia, morbidity and mortality. The effect of antidepressant medication (ADM) on glycaemic control is uncertain owing to a paucity of relevant data. We sought to determine whether the use of ADM is associated with glycaemic control in depressed patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study (n = 1399) was conducted using electronic medical record registry data of ambulatory primary care visits from 2008 to 2013. Depression and type 2 diabetes were identified from ICD-9-CM codes; ADM use was determined from prescription orders; and glycaemic control was determined from measures of glycated haemoglobin (A1c). Good glycaemic control was defined as A1c < 7.0% (53 mmol/mol). Generalized estimating equations were used to determine the effect of depression and ADM use on glycaemic control. RESULTS: Good glycaemic control was achieved by 50.9% of depressed subjects receiving ADM versus 34.6% of depressed subjects without ADM. After adjusting for covariates, depressed patients receiving ADM were twice as likely as those not receiving ADM to achieve good glycaemic control (odds ratio = 1.95; 95% confidence interval: 1.02-3.71). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective cohort study of a large sample of primary care patients with type 2 diabetes, ADM use was associated with improved glycaemic control.

Depression leads to incident vascular disease: evidence for the relevance to primary care.

BACKGROUND: Depression is a known risk factor for vascular disease in community cohorts and in large, system-wide, health care databases. It is not known if the association between depression and incident vascular disease exists when patient data is restricted to depression presenting in primary care. METHODS: Data were from a medical record registry capturing all primary care encounters at a large academic medical practice from 2008 to 2013. From 27,225 registry patients, we identified 7383 patients free of vascular disease for 18 months prior to baseline. ICD-9-CM codes were used to define depression and vascular disease. Volume of health care use, demographics and comorbid diagnoses were obtained from the patient data registry. Cox proportional hazard models with time dependent covariates were computed to measure the association between depression and incident vascular disease before and after adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: Of the 7383 patients initially free of vascular disease, 14% were diagnosed with depression and 8.6% developed vascular disease. Incident vascular disease was significantly (P < 0.01) higher among patients with depression (12.7%) compared to those without depression (7.9%). In the unadjusted model, depression was associated with a 49% increased risk of developing vascular disease (odds ratio [OR] = 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-1.86) and this association remained significant after adjusting for all potential confounders (OR = 1.28; 95% CI: 1.02-1.62). CONCLUSIONS: The association between depression and incident vascular disease is observed in patients diagnosed and managed by primary care physicians. Primary care physicians have an opportunity to impact this association. Guidelines for primary care providers are needed to prompt aggressive depression treatment and vascular disease screening.

Differences in prescribing patterns for anxiety and depression between General Internal Medicine and Family Medicine.

INTRODUCTION: Depression and anxiety are routinely managed by physicians in Family Medicine (FM) or General Internal Medicine (GIM). Because FM requires more behavioral health training than GIM, we sought to determine if prescribing patterns for patients with anxiety, depression, or both differed between FM vs. GIM providers. METHODS: In a cross-sectional design, patient data and provider type were obtained from 2008 to 2013 electronic medical record patient data registry (n=27,225 (FM=10,994, GIM=16,231)) Prescription orders were modeled for specific benzodiazepines and antidepressants and by drug class. Covariates included gender, age, race, marital status and comorbidity index. Separate logistic regression models were computed, before and after adjusting for covariates, to estimate the odds of FM vs. GIM providers prescribing benzodiazepine or antidepressant medication to patients with anxiety, depression, and both disorders. RESULTS: After adjusting for covariates, patients with anxiety alone, depression alone, and both had significantly greater odds of receiving an antidepressant (OR=2.08;95%CI:1.46-2.96, OR=2.13;95%CI:1.48-3.06, and OR=2.26;95%CI:1.09-4.66, respectively) if treated by FM vs. GIM. Benzodiazepine prescription did not differ by physician type. LIMITATIONS: It is not known if results will generalize to other regions of the United States. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with anxiety, depression, and both seen by FM providers, as compared to GIM providers, are more likely to receive antidepressant medications. Further investigation into the determinants of these differences is warranted. Under-treatment in GIM may result in less advantageous outcomes.