Allowed Publications
Slot System
Featured Buckets
Featured Buckets Admin

An open-label trial of escitalopram for PPD: Considerations for research

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
An open-label trial of escitalopram for PPD: Considerations for research

Challenges in recruiting women to postpartum depression (PPD) antidepressant treatment trials, which we encountered when conducting a trial of escitalopram, contribute to the limited body of knowledge about PPD treatment. Here we discuss results from a preliminary trial of escitalopram for PPD, and challenges of research in this area.

Escitalopram, the S-enantiomer of citalopram, is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with high selectivity and potency that is FDA-approved for treating major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder. An agent with antidepressant and anxiolytic effects is particularly desirable for PPD because anxiety is more common in postpartum major depressive episodes than non-postpartum MDD.1 Anxiety and depressive disorders commonly are comorbid in postpartum women.2

We conducted an open-label trial of escitalopram for women with PPD and anxiety. We initially attempted to recruit 20 women.

Methods

Patients received 8 weeks of treatment with escitalopram, 10 to 20 mg/d (flexible dose). After completing the initial phone screen, patients had 5 follow-up visits, once every 2 weeks for 8 weeks. The institutional review board at Massachusetts General Hospital approved this study and we obtained written informed consent from all patients at the first visit. Twelve patients completed the phone screen and 7 eligible patients were enrolled in the study over 32 months. Reasons for ineligibility included having a history of psychosis, onset of symptoms >3 months postpartum, or presenting >6 months after onset. Others declined to participate because of concern about the time commitment or because they pursued nonpharmacologic treatments after the evaluation visit. One patient was lost to follow-up. Three patients completed the study. The study was halted because of the slow pace of recruitment.

Patient selection. Patients were screened for a major depressive episode with postpartum onset within 3 months of childbirth; depressive symptoms may have developed during pregnancy and worsened postpartum to meet criteria for MDD. Women were eligible for the study if they:

  • were age 18 to 45
  • experienced a major depressive episode with symptoms developing within 3 months of childbirth
  • presented within 6 months of childbirth
  • had a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score >15
  • had a Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) score >10.

Patients who were pregnant or breast-feeding were excluded from the study per an agreement with the sponsor. In addition, women were excluded if they had taken any psychotropic medication within 2 weeks of enrollment; had active suicidal ideation, homicidal ideation, or presence of psychotic symptoms; had chronic depression or dysthymia; had chronic or treatment-resistant anxiety disorders; had a history of mania or hypomania; or had active alcohol or substance abuse within the past year.

Treatment. Patients received escitalopram, 10 mg/d, after the baseline visit. At the investigator’s discretion, the dose could be increased to 20 mg/d or lowered to 5 mg/d if side effects occurred.

Measures. At the first visit, patients were assessed with the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview to verify MDD and exclude diagnoses that would determine ineligibility. MADRS and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) were used at each visit to measure depressive symptoms.3,4 The BAI was completed at each visit to measure anxiety symptoms. Obsessions and compulsions were measured with the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS)5 at baseline, and at all following visits if the patient scored >8 at baseline. The Clinical Global Impression Scales for severity and improvement were completed at each visit.6

Results

Of 7 patients enrolled, 3 completed the study, 2 were ineligible after the baseline visit, and 2 did not participate after the baseline visit (1 selected to pursue psychotherapy, and 1 was lost to follow-up).

Two of 3 patients responded to escitalopram (≥50% decrease on MADRS), and both were remitters (MADRS score <7). All 3 patients were responders on EPDS and BAI. One patient had Y-BOCS >8 at baseline (Total Y-BOCS score of 9, and final Y-BOCS score of 8) (Table).

Table

Symptom rating scale scores at baseline and study end

 Baseline (Visit 1)Final (Visit 5)
PatientMADRSBAIEPDSMADRSBAIEPDS
Ms. A2118221200
Ms. B282819452
Ms. C37619620
BAI: Beck Anxiety Inventory; EPDS: Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale; MADRS: Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale

Discussion

Patients who stayed in treatment improved during the course of this study. Recruitment was difficult; we were able to recruit only 7 patients out of a projected 20 for the screening visit. We solicited feedback from local obstetrics health care providers and social workers on recruitment and attractiveness of the study as part of our routine collaboration with obstetrical services that screen for PPD. Primary reasons patients were not referred were that they were breast-feeding or they stated they would prefer to receive treatment from their primary care doctor. Recruitment difficulty in this study was in stark contrast to other recent studies completed at our center. For example, we have successfully recruited for menopausal depression and premenstrual dysphoric disorder treatment studies, and have completed large naturalistic studies of women with unipolar depression and bipolar disorder across pregnancy and postpartum. We suspect that many patients who were eligible for the study preferred to seek care from an obstetrician or primary care doctor with whom they already had a therapeutic alliance, and we also suspect that many women with PPD do not seek treatment at all, which is consistent with findings from other research groups.

 

 

Lessons learned from PPD research include:

  • Including women who are breast-feeding is important because many women choose to breast-feed and suffer from PPD. Because antidepressant use during breast-feeding has been closely studied, it is appropriate to include potential research participants who are breast-feeding as long as they receive adequate information and are able to provide informed consent.
  • Participants in PPD studies may require accommodations that take into account their role as a new mother, such as on-site childcare, home visits, or other strategies.
  • Because of recruitment challenges in postpartum patients, multisite trials may be required to include adequate numbers of participants.

Related Resource

  • Freeman MP, Joffe H, Cohen LS. Postpartum depression: Help patients find the right treatment. Current Psychiatry. 2012;11(11):14-21.

Drug Brand Names

  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Escitalopram • Lexapro

Disclosures

Dr. Freeman has received grant or research support from Eli Lilly and Company, Forest Laboratories, and GlaxoSmithKline, is on the advisory boards of Otsuka and Takeda/Lundbeck, and is a consultant for PamLab LLC.

Dr. Joffe has received grant or research support from Cephalon/Teva, and is a consultant to Noven and Sunovion.

Dr. Cohen has received research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Forest Laboratories, GlaxoSmithKline, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Ortho-McNeil Janssen, and Pfizer and has served on an advisory board for PamLab LLC.

This study was funded as an investigator-initiated trial by Forest Pharmaceuticals.

References

1. Bernstein IH, Rush AJ, Yonkers K, et al. Symptom features of postpartum depression: are they distinct? Depress Anxiety. 2008;25(1):20-26.

2. Wenzel A, Haugen EN, Jackson LC, et al. Anxiety symptoms and disorders at eight weeks postpartum. J Anxiety Disord. 2005;19(3):295-311.

3. Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987;150:782-786.

4. Montgomery SA, Åsberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry. 1979;134:382-389.

5. Goodman WK, Price LH, Rasmussen SA, et al. The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. I. Development, use, and reliability. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1989;46(11):1006-1011.

6. Guy W. ECDEU assessment manual for psychopharmacology. Rockville MD: US Department of Health and Human Services; 1976. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Publication (ADM) 76–338.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Marlene P. Freeman, MD
Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Director of Clinical Services, Perinatal and Reproductive Psychiatry Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Hadine Joffe, MD, MSc
Associate Professor, Harvard Medical School, Director of Research, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Lee S. Cohen, MD
Carpenter Chair in Psychiatry and Women’s Mental Health, Harvard Medical School, Director, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E3-E5
Legacy Keywords
escitalopram; postpartum depression; pregnancy; depression
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Marlene P. Freeman, MD
Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Director of Clinical Services, Perinatal and Reproductive Psychiatry Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Hadine Joffe, MD, MSc
Associate Professor, Harvard Medical School, Director of Research, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Lee S. Cohen, MD
Carpenter Chair in Psychiatry and Women’s Mental Health, Harvard Medical School, Director, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Author and Disclosure Information

Marlene P. Freeman, MD
Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Director of Clinical Services, Perinatal and Reproductive Psychiatry Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Hadine Joffe, MD, MSc
Associate Professor, Harvard Medical School, Director of Research, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Lee S. Cohen, MD
Carpenter Chair in Psychiatry and Women’s Mental Health, Harvard Medical School, Director, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Article PDF
Article PDF

Challenges in recruiting women to postpartum depression (PPD) antidepressant treatment trials, which we encountered when conducting a trial of escitalopram, contribute to the limited body of knowledge about PPD treatment. Here we discuss results from a preliminary trial of escitalopram for PPD, and challenges of research in this area.

Escitalopram, the S-enantiomer of citalopram, is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with high selectivity and potency that is FDA-approved for treating major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder. An agent with antidepressant and anxiolytic effects is particularly desirable for PPD because anxiety is more common in postpartum major depressive episodes than non-postpartum MDD.1 Anxiety and depressive disorders commonly are comorbid in postpartum women.2

We conducted an open-label trial of escitalopram for women with PPD and anxiety. We initially attempted to recruit 20 women.

Methods

Patients received 8 weeks of treatment with escitalopram, 10 to 20 mg/d (flexible dose). After completing the initial phone screen, patients had 5 follow-up visits, once every 2 weeks for 8 weeks. The institutional review board at Massachusetts General Hospital approved this study and we obtained written informed consent from all patients at the first visit. Twelve patients completed the phone screen and 7 eligible patients were enrolled in the study over 32 months. Reasons for ineligibility included having a history of psychosis, onset of symptoms >3 months postpartum, or presenting >6 months after onset. Others declined to participate because of concern about the time commitment or because they pursued nonpharmacologic treatments after the evaluation visit. One patient was lost to follow-up. Three patients completed the study. The study was halted because of the slow pace of recruitment.

Patient selection. Patients were screened for a major depressive episode with postpartum onset within 3 months of childbirth; depressive symptoms may have developed during pregnancy and worsened postpartum to meet criteria for MDD. Women were eligible for the study if they:

  • were age 18 to 45
  • experienced a major depressive episode with symptoms developing within 3 months of childbirth
  • presented within 6 months of childbirth
  • had a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score >15
  • had a Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) score >10.

Patients who were pregnant or breast-feeding were excluded from the study per an agreement with the sponsor. In addition, women were excluded if they had taken any psychotropic medication within 2 weeks of enrollment; had active suicidal ideation, homicidal ideation, or presence of psychotic symptoms; had chronic depression or dysthymia; had chronic or treatment-resistant anxiety disorders; had a history of mania or hypomania; or had active alcohol or substance abuse within the past year.

Treatment. Patients received escitalopram, 10 mg/d, after the baseline visit. At the investigator’s discretion, the dose could be increased to 20 mg/d or lowered to 5 mg/d if side effects occurred.

Measures. At the first visit, patients were assessed with the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview to verify MDD and exclude diagnoses that would determine ineligibility. MADRS and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) were used at each visit to measure depressive symptoms.3,4 The BAI was completed at each visit to measure anxiety symptoms. Obsessions and compulsions were measured with the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS)5 at baseline, and at all following visits if the patient scored >8 at baseline. The Clinical Global Impression Scales for severity and improvement were completed at each visit.6

Results

Of 7 patients enrolled, 3 completed the study, 2 were ineligible after the baseline visit, and 2 did not participate after the baseline visit (1 selected to pursue psychotherapy, and 1 was lost to follow-up).

Two of 3 patients responded to escitalopram (≥50% decrease on MADRS), and both were remitters (MADRS score <7). All 3 patients were responders on EPDS and BAI. One patient had Y-BOCS >8 at baseline (Total Y-BOCS score of 9, and final Y-BOCS score of 8) (Table).

Table

Symptom rating scale scores at baseline and study end

 Baseline (Visit 1)Final (Visit 5)
PatientMADRSBAIEPDSMADRSBAIEPDS
Ms. A2118221200
Ms. B282819452
Ms. C37619620
BAI: Beck Anxiety Inventory; EPDS: Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale; MADRS: Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale

Discussion

Patients who stayed in treatment improved during the course of this study. Recruitment was difficult; we were able to recruit only 7 patients out of a projected 20 for the screening visit. We solicited feedback from local obstetrics health care providers and social workers on recruitment and attractiveness of the study as part of our routine collaboration with obstetrical services that screen for PPD. Primary reasons patients were not referred were that they were breast-feeding or they stated they would prefer to receive treatment from their primary care doctor. Recruitment difficulty in this study was in stark contrast to other recent studies completed at our center. For example, we have successfully recruited for menopausal depression and premenstrual dysphoric disorder treatment studies, and have completed large naturalistic studies of women with unipolar depression and bipolar disorder across pregnancy and postpartum. We suspect that many patients who were eligible for the study preferred to seek care from an obstetrician or primary care doctor with whom they already had a therapeutic alliance, and we also suspect that many women with PPD do not seek treatment at all, which is consistent with findings from other research groups.

 

 

Lessons learned from PPD research include:

  • Including women who are breast-feeding is important because many women choose to breast-feed and suffer from PPD. Because antidepressant use during breast-feeding has been closely studied, it is appropriate to include potential research participants who are breast-feeding as long as they receive adequate information and are able to provide informed consent.
  • Participants in PPD studies may require accommodations that take into account their role as a new mother, such as on-site childcare, home visits, or other strategies.
  • Because of recruitment challenges in postpartum patients, multisite trials may be required to include adequate numbers of participants.

Related Resource

  • Freeman MP, Joffe H, Cohen LS. Postpartum depression: Help patients find the right treatment. Current Psychiatry. 2012;11(11):14-21.

Drug Brand Names

  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Escitalopram • Lexapro

Disclosures

Dr. Freeman has received grant or research support from Eli Lilly and Company, Forest Laboratories, and GlaxoSmithKline, is on the advisory boards of Otsuka and Takeda/Lundbeck, and is a consultant for PamLab LLC.

Dr. Joffe has received grant or research support from Cephalon/Teva, and is a consultant to Noven and Sunovion.

Dr. Cohen has received research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Forest Laboratories, GlaxoSmithKline, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Ortho-McNeil Janssen, and Pfizer and has served on an advisory board for PamLab LLC.

This study was funded as an investigator-initiated trial by Forest Pharmaceuticals.

Challenges in recruiting women to postpartum depression (PPD) antidepressant treatment trials, which we encountered when conducting a trial of escitalopram, contribute to the limited body of knowledge about PPD treatment. Here we discuss results from a preliminary trial of escitalopram for PPD, and challenges of research in this area.

Escitalopram, the S-enantiomer of citalopram, is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with high selectivity and potency that is FDA-approved for treating major depressive disorder (MDD) and generalized anxiety disorder. An agent with antidepressant and anxiolytic effects is particularly desirable for PPD because anxiety is more common in postpartum major depressive episodes than non-postpartum MDD.1 Anxiety and depressive disorders commonly are comorbid in postpartum women.2

We conducted an open-label trial of escitalopram for women with PPD and anxiety. We initially attempted to recruit 20 women.

Methods

Patients received 8 weeks of treatment with escitalopram, 10 to 20 mg/d (flexible dose). After completing the initial phone screen, patients had 5 follow-up visits, once every 2 weeks for 8 weeks. The institutional review board at Massachusetts General Hospital approved this study and we obtained written informed consent from all patients at the first visit. Twelve patients completed the phone screen and 7 eligible patients were enrolled in the study over 32 months. Reasons for ineligibility included having a history of psychosis, onset of symptoms >3 months postpartum, or presenting >6 months after onset. Others declined to participate because of concern about the time commitment or because they pursued nonpharmacologic treatments after the evaluation visit. One patient was lost to follow-up. Three patients completed the study. The study was halted because of the slow pace of recruitment.

Patient selection. Patients were screened for a major depressive episode with postpartum onset within 3 months of childbirth; depressive symptoms may have developed during pregnancy and worsened postpartum to meet criteria for MDD. Women were eligible for the study if they:

  • were age 18 to 45
  • experienced a major depressive episode with symptoms developing within 3 months of childbirth
  • presented within 6 months of childbirth
  • had a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score >15
  • had a Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) score >10.

Patients who were pregnant or breast-feeding were excluded from the study per an agreement with the sponsor. In addition, women were excluded if they had taken any psychotropic medication within 2 weeks of enrollment; had active suicidal ideation, homicidal ideation, or presence of psychotic symptoms; had chronic depression or dysthymia; had chronic or treatment-resistant anxiety disorders; had a history of mania or hypomania; or had active alcohol or substance abuse within the past year.

Treatment. Patients received escitalopram, 10 mg/d, after the baseline visit. At the investigator’s discretion, the dose could be increased to 20 mg/d or lowered to 5 mg/d if side effects occurred.

Measures. At the first visit, patients were assessed with the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview to verify MDD and exclude diagnoses that would determine ineligibility. MADRS and Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) were used at each visit to measure depressive symptoms.3,4 The BAI was completed at each visit to measure anxiety symptoms. Obsessions and compulsions were measured with the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS)5 at baseline, and at all following visits if the patient scored >8 at baseline. The Clinical Global Impression Scales for severity and improvement were completed at each visit.6

Results

Of 7 patients enrolled, 3 completed the study, 2 were ineligible after the baseline visit, and 2 did not participate after the baseline visit (1 selected to pursue psychotherapy, and 1 was lost to follow-up).

Two of 3 patients responded to escitalopram (≥50% decrease on MADRS), and both were remitters (MADRS score <7). All 3 patients were responders on EPDS and BAI. One patient had Y-BOCS >8 at baseline (Total Y-BOCS score of 9, and final Y-BOCS score of 8) (Table).

Table

Symptom rating scale scores at baseline and study end

 Baseline (Visit 1)Final (Visit 5)
PatientMADRSBAIEPDSMADRSBAIEPDS
Ms. A2118221200
Ms. B282819452
Ms. C37619620
BAI: Beck Anxiety Inventory; EPDS: Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale; MADRS: Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale

Discussion

Patients who stayed in treatment improved during the course of this study. Recruitment was difficult; we were able to recruit only 7 patients out of a projected 20 for the screening visit. We solicited feedback from local obstetrics health care providers and social workers on recruitment and attractiveness of the study as part of our routine collaboration with obstetrical services that screen for PPD. Primary reasons patients were not referred were that they were breast-feeding or they stated they would prefer to receive treatment from their primary care doctor. Recruitment difficulty in this study was in stark contrast to other recent studies completed at our center. For example, we have successfully recruited for menopausal depression and premenstrual dysphoric disorder treatment studies, and have completed large naturalistic studies of women with unipolar depression and bipolar disorder across pregnancy and postpartum. We suspect that many patients who were eligible for the study preferred to seek care from an obstetrician or primary care doctor with whom they already had a therapeutic alliance, and we also suspect that many women with PPD do not seek treatment at all, which is consistent with findings from other research groups.

 

 

Lessons learned from PPD research include:

  • Including women who are breast-feeding is important because many women choose to breast-feed and suffer from PPD. Because antidepressant use during breast-feeding has been closely studied, it is appropriate to include potential research participants who are breast-feeding as long as they receive adequate information and are able to provide informed consent.
  • Participants in PPD studies may require accommodations that take into account their role as a new mother, such as on-site childcare, home visits, or other strategies.
  • Because of recruitment challenges in postpartum patients, multisite trials may be required to include adequate numbers of participants.

Related Resource

  • Freeman MP, Joffe H, Cohen LS. Postpartum depression: Help patients find the right treatment. Current Psychiatry. 2012;11(11):14-21.

Drug Brand Names

  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Escitalopram • Lexapro

Disclosures

Dr. Freeman has received grant or research support from Eli Lilly and Company, Forest Laboratories, and GlaxoSmithKline, is on the advisory boards of Otsuka and Takeda/Lundbeck, and is a consultant for PamLab LLC.

Dr. Joffe has received grant or research support from Cephalon/Teva, and is a consultant to Noven and Sunovion.

Dr. Cohen has received research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Forest Laboratories, GlaxoSmithKline, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Ortho-McNeil Janssen, and Pfizer and has served on an advisory board for PamLab LLC.

This study was funded as an investigator-initiated trial by Forest Pharmaceuticals.

References

1. Bernstein IH, Rush AJ, Yonkers K, et al. Symptom features of postpartum depression: are they distinct? Depress Anxiety. 2008;25(1):20-26.

2. Wenzel A, Haugen EN, Jackson LC, et al. Anxiety symptoms and disorders at eight weeks postpartum. J Anxiety Disord. 2005;19(3):295-311.

3. Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987;150:782-786.

4. Montgomery SA, Åsberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry. 1979;134:382-389.

5. Goodman WK, Price LH, Rasmussen SA, et al. The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. I. Development, use, and reliability. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1989;46(11):1006-1011.

6. Guy W. ECDEU assessment manual for psychopharmacology. Rockville MD: US Department of Health and Human Services; 1976. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Publication (ADM) 76–338.

References

1. Bernstein IH, Rush AJ, Yonkers K, et al. Symptom features of postpartum depression: are they distinct? Depress Anxiety. 2008;25(1):20-26.

2. Wenzel A, Haugen EN, Jackson LC, et al. Anxiety symptoms and disorders at eight weeks postpartum. J Anxiety Disord. 2005;19(3):295-311.

3. Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987;150:782-786.

4. Montgomery SA, Åsberg M. A new depression scale designed to be sensitive to change. Br J Psychiatry. 1979;134:382-389.

5. Goodman WK, Price LH, Rasmussen SA, et al. The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. I. Development, use, and reliability. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1989;46(11):1006-1011.

6. Guy W. ECDEU assessment manual for psychopharmacology. Rockville MD: US Department of Health and Human Services; 1976. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare Publication (ADM) 76–338.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Page Number
E3-E5
Page Number
E3-E5
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
An open-label trial of escitalopram for PPD: Considerations for research
Display Headline
An open-label trial of escitalopram for PPD: Considerations for research
Legacy Keywords
escitalopram; postpartum depression; pregnancy; depression
Legacy Keywords
escitalopram; postpartum depression; pregnancy; depression
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Postpartum depression: Help patients find the right treatment

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Postpartum depression: Help patients find the right treatment

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Postpartum depression (PPD)—emergence of a major depressive episode after childbirth—has broad negative consequences for the mother, baby, and other family members. The time of onset after delivery for a depressive episode to be considered postpartum is debatable, but the DSM-IV-TR specifier states that onset within 4 weeks of childbirth is considered postpartum. PPD can impact many aspects of child development, including mother-infant attachment, cognitive development, and behavior.1-3

An estimated 10% of women who have given birth experience PPD.4,5 The risk of PPD is particularly high among women who have had previous episodes of PPD or major depressive disorder (MDD). Other risk factors include stressful life events, depression and/or anxiety during pregnancy, family history of PPD, and obstetrical complications.6-8 Anxiety disorders are common in postpartum women, and anxiety symptoms often are prominent in PPD.9

Despite the prevalence of PPD and its serious consequences, few studies have addressed antidepressant treatment. In this article we discuss screening and treating PPD and considerations for breast-feeding mothers. Click here for results of an open-label trial of escitalopram for PPD we conducted in which patient recruitment was challenging.

Screening for PPD: A good start

Initiatives by state governments and health care providers have led to programs in which universal screening for PPD has been implemented. Screening provides a mechanism for early detection and intervention. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale10 is a self-rated, 10-item scale developed for the postpartum setting, and its use increases identification of PPD at postpartum obstetrics visits.11 Other screening tools such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 also are commonly used. Despite the success of screening programs in attempting the feasibility of screening, it is unclear if the identification of women who may be experiencing PPD increases their engagement in treatment. Studies have demonstrated that even when depressive symptoms suggesting a PPD episode are identified in the postpartum period, many women still do not receive treatment.12,13 Studies of PPD screening programs have not demonstrated that screening itself improves treatment engagement or improves outcomes.12,13

Multiple factors—including accessibility of treatment options and patient preference for specific types of treatment—determine whether mothers with PPD obtain treatment. Patients diagnosed with depression by a primary care clinician may prefer psychotherapy to antidepressants,14 and a postpartum mother’s willingness to accept antidepressant treatment may be influenced by concerns about possible risks during breast-feeding.15

Psychotherapy: An effective option

Psychotherapy is an important first-line option for PPD, particularly because of considerations of medication exposure during breast-feeding and many women are reluctant to take antidepressants while breast-feeding.16 Interpersonal psychotherapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) have been most studied for PPD, and both appear effective for prevention and acute treatment of PPD.17-20 Although psychotherapy alone may be sufficient for some women, for others, medication may be an important first-line treatment, depending on symptom severity, access to psychotherapy, and personal preference.

Evidence for antidepressants

Table 120-27 describes clinical trials that assessed the efficacy of antidepressants for PPD. Two relatively small, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have evaluated selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for PPD. In a randomized, double-blind study of CBT plus fluoxetine or CBT plus placebo (N = 87), fluoxetine was significantly more effective than placebo.20 In a randomized, controlled trial of paroxetine vs placebo for PPD (N = 70), both groups improved as measured by the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression or Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report; those who received paroxetine did not improve significantly more than those who received placebo.21 It is difficult to interpret a negative, underpowered study because placebo response rates in antidepressant trials of MDD tend to be high. Data from placebo-controlled trials in PPD are limited by the number and power of those trials.

Randomization to placebo is rare in PPD trials. Most trials have used open-label designs because placebo arms pose ethical dilemmas considering the impact of PPD on a mother and her baby. In a randomized study of sertraline or nortriptyline for PPD, both drugs were similarly efficacious.22 In another study comparing paroxetine monotherapy and paroxetine plus CBT for PPD, both groups experienced significant improvement in depression and anxiety symptoms, with no difference between groups at endpoint.23 Open-label trials have suggested antidepressants’ efficacy, although some studies have included small sample sizes (Table 1).20-27

Table 1

Antidepressants for PPD: Summary of the evidence

 

 

StudyDesign and sizeMedicationResults
Appleby et al, 19972012-week, placebo-controlled, N = 87FluoxetinePatients taking fluoxetine showed greater improvement than those taking placebo
Yonkers et al, 2008218-week, placebo-controlled, N = 70ParoxetineBoth groups improved over time, but patients taking paroxetine had greater improvement in overall clinical severity
Wisner et al, 2006228-week, RCT, N = 109Sertraline vs nortriptylineProportion of women who responded or remitted did not differ between those taking sertraline or nortriptyline
Misri et al, 20042312-week, RCT, N = 35Paroxetine monotherapy vs paroxetine + CBTBoth groups showed significant improvement in mood and anxiety symptoms
Stowe et al, 1995248-week, open-label, N = 21Sertraline20 patients experienced >50% reduction in SIGH-D score
Cohen et al, 199725Open-label, N = 15Venlafaxine12 patients achieved remission
Suri et al, 2001268-week, open-label, N = 6Fluvoxamine4 patients became euthymic, with HDRS scores ranging from 2 to 5
Nonacs et al, 2005278-week, open-label, N = 8Bupropion6 patients had ≥50% decrease in HDRS score from baseline; 3 achieved remission
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; HDRS: Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; PPD: postpartum depression; RCT: randomized controlled trial; SIGH-D: Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale

Breast-feeding considerations

From a nutritional standpoint, breast-feeding is optimal for a newborn. However, for some women, breast-feeding is difficult and stressful, and new mothers may experience this difficulty as failure. Some women prefer not to breast-feed, and others may prefer to formula feed if they require pharmacotherapy, particularly if the medication has not been well studied in breast-feeding patients. Some women may decline to take medications if they are breast-feeding out of concern for the baby’s exposure via breast milk and prefer to try nonpharmacologic approaches first. Many mothers with PPD need to be reassured that stopping breast-feeding may be exactly what is needed if the experience is contributing to their PPD or making them uncomfortable accepting pharmacotherapy when indicated. Maternal mental health is more important than breast-feeding to the health and wellness of the mother-baby dyad.

Breast-feeding and antidepressants. Any medication used during lactation should be assumed to pass into breast milk, although rigorous studies quantifying amounts of antidepressants in breast milk and infant serum generally have demonstrated low levels of exposure among the better studied antidepressants.28,29 Studies that inform extent of drug exposure during lactation have included mothers who have provided serial samples of breast milk and allowed their infant’s blood levels to be checked for the drug. See Table 229-31 for details regarding specific antidepressants and breast-feeding.

Table 2

Considerations for antidepressant use during breast-feeding

Drug(s)Comments
FluoxetineBecause of long half-life, may be more likely to be detected in infant serum, especially at higher doses. Reasonable for use during breast-feeding if a woman has had a good previous response to the drug or used it during pregnancy
SertralineReports of low levels of exposure. Relatively large amount of data available
Citalopram, escitalopramLess systematic study of mother-infant pairs compared with sertraline and paroxetine. Low levels of exposure to infant via breast-feeding observed
ParoxetineConsistent reports of low levels of exposure and has been relatively well studied without reported adverse events. Use limited by commonly experienced withdrawal symptoms; may be more sedating than other SSRIs
BupropionPaucity of systematic study in newborns of nursing mothers; a few case reports in older infants demonstrated low levels of exposure via breast-feeding. May help women who smoke to quit or to maintain abstinence from smoking. Reasonable to use if a woman had good previous response. One case report of possible infant seizure; no other reported adverse events
Venlafaxine, desvenlafaxineHigher levels of desvenlafaxine than venlafaxine found in breast milk. No adverse events reported. Patients may experience withdrawal with discontinuation or missed doses
Tricyclic antidepressantsConsidered reasonable for breast-feeding mothers if use is clinically warranted; few adverse effects in babies and generally low levels of exposure reported
Mirtazapine, nefazodone, MAOIs, duloxetineSystematic human data not available for breast-feeding patients. May be reasonable if a woman previously has responded best to 1 of these; advise patients that data are not available to guide decisions
MAOIs: monoamine oxidase inhibitors; SSRIs: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors
Source: References 29-31
Lactation exposure to paroxetine and sertraline has been most studied, and both have been nondetectable or found in low amounts in infant drug assays. Because fluoxetine has a longer half-life than other antidepressants, it may be more likely to be detected in infant blood sampling, with higher doses more likely to be detected than lower doses.32 Decisions to breast-feed while taking medication must take into account unknown long-term effects of antidepressant exposure. There are a few case reports of suspected adverse events associated with antidepressant use during lactation.
 

 

28,29

The psychiatrist’s role

PPD has great public health significance because it affects a large number of women and their families. Screening during obstetrical visits or in other settings may increase identification of women who are suffering from PPD. In order for this screening to lead to meaningful changes, women must receive timely and expert evaluations for PPD and treatment that is efficacious and accessible.

Psychiatrists often are called upon to treat women with postpartum illness, and whether the mother is breast-feeding or not may influence treatment decisions. When clinically warranted, antidepressants are an important option in the context of breast-feeding, although some antidepressants have more data available than others regarding use during lactation. If a mother has had a good response to a specific antidepressant in the past, that medication should be considered among the treatment options to avoid unnecessary medication trials and delayed response to treatment. Antidepressants with serotonergic action may be especially helpful if a woman presents with substantial postpartum anxiety. Psychotherapy is an important treatment for PPD; CBT and IPT are among the best-studied, efficacious treatments.

Diagnosis and treatment: 4 pearls

Verify the diagnosis. Many women who present with postpartum depressive symptoms may have previously unrecognized bipolar disorder, and many women presenting with a primary complaint of anxiety have PPD.33,34

Discuss breast-feeding. This topic is important in assessing the risks and benefits of antidepressants in postpartum women, but many women also experience breast-feeding as a topic with emotional valence of its own and may need support with infant feeding.

Meet the patient where she is. Patient preferences strongly influence PPD treatment decisions. Women with similar clinical presentations may have strong preferences for different treatments.

Make treatment accessible. Postpartum women may find it challenging to engage in treatment. Treatment plans need to be feasible for women who are depressed while caring for a newborn. On-site childcare, home visits, Internet communication, and other accommodations that may facilitate treatment should be considered at a systems level.

Related Resources

  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Screening for depression during and after pregnancy. www.acog.org/Resources_And_Publications/Committee_Opinions/Committee_on_Obstetric_Practice/Screening_for_Depression_During_and_After_Pregnancy.
  • Meltzer-Brody S. New insights into perinatal depression: pathogenesis and treatment during pregnancy and postpartum. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2011;13(1):89-100.
  • Dennis CL, Stewart DE. Treatment of postpartum depression, part 1: a critical review of biological interventions. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(9):1242-1251.
  • Dennis CL. Treatment of postpartum depression, part 2: a critical review of nonbiological interventions. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(9):1252-1265.
  • Cohen LS, Wang B, Nonacs R, et al. Treatment of mood disorders during pregnancy and postpartum. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2010;33(2):273-293.
Drug Brand Names

  • Bupropion • Wellbutrin, Zyban
  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Desvenlafaxine • Pristiq
  • Duloxetine • Cymbalta
  • Escitalopram • Lexapro
  • Fluoxetine • Prozac
  • Fluvoxamine • Luvox
  • Mirtazapine • Remeron
  • Nefazodone • Serzone
  • Nortriptyline • Aventyl, Pamelor
  • Paroxetine • Paxil
  • Sertraline • Zoloft
  • Venlafaxine • Effexor
Dr. Freeman has received grant or research support from Eli Lilly and Company, Forest Laboratories, and GlaxoSmithKline, is on the advisory boards of Otsuka and Takeda/Lundbeck, and is a consultant for PamLab LLC.

Dr. Joffe has received grant or research support from Cephalon/Teva, and is a consultant to Noven and Sunovion.

Dr. Cohen has received research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Forest Laboratories, GlaxoSmithKline, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Ortho-McNeil Janssen, and Pfizer and has served on an advisory board for PamLab LLC.

References

1. Cicchetti D, Rogosch FA, Toth SL. Maternal depressive disorder and contextual risk: contributions to the development of attachment insecurity and behavior problems in toddlerhood. Dev Psychopathol. 1998;10(2):283-300.

2. Murray L, Fiori-Cowley A, Hooper R, et al. The impact of postnatal depression and associated adversity on early mother-infant interactions and later infant outcome. Child Dev. 1996;67(5):2512-2526.

3. Sharp D, Hay DF, Pawlby S, et al. The impact of postnatal depression on boys’ intellectual development. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1995;36(8):1315-1336.

4. Altshuler LL, Hendrick V, Cohen LS. Course of mood and anxiety disorders during pregnancy and the postpartum period. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59(suppl 2):29-33.

5. Pariser SF. Women and mood disorders. Menarche to menopause. Ann Clin Psychiatry. 1993;5(4):249-254.

6. Dennis CL, Janssen PA, Singer J. Identifying women at-risk for postpartum depression in the immediate postpartum period. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2004;110(5):338-346.

7. Chaudron LH, Klein MH, Remington P, et al. Predictors, prodromes and incidence of postpartum depression. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;22(2):103-112.

8. Heron J, O’Connor TG, Evans J, et al. ALSPAC Study Team. The course of anxiety and depression through pregnancy and the postpartum in a community sample. J Affect Disord. 2004;80(1):65-73.

9. Wenzel A, Haugen EN, Jackson LC, et al. Anxiety symptoms and disorders at eight weeks postpartum. J Anxiety Disord. 2005;19(3):295-311.

10. Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987;150:782-786.

11. Evins GG, Theofrastous JP, Galvin SL. Postpartum depression: a comparison of screening and routine clinical evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(5):1080-1082.

12. Flynn HA, O’Mahen HA, Massey L, et al. The impact of a brief obstetrics clinic-based intervention on treatment use for perinatal depression. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2006;15(10):1195-1204.

13. Yonkers KA, Smith MV, Lin H, et al. Depression screening of perinatal women: an evaluation of the healthy start depression initiative. Psychiatr Serv. 2009;60(3):322-328.

14. van Schaik DJ, Klijn AF, van Hout HP, et al. Patients’ p in the treatment of depressive disorder in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2004;26(3):184-189.

15. Boath E, Bradley E, Henshaw C. Women’s views of antidepressants in the treatment of postnatal depression. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;25(3-4):221-233.

16. Pearlstein TB, Zlotnick C, Battle CL, et al. Patient choice of treatment for postpartum depression: a pilot study. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2006;9(6):303-308.

17. Zlotnick C, Johnson SL, Miller IW, et al. Postpartum depression in women receiving public assistance: pilot study of an interpersonal-therapy-oriented group intervention. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(4):638-640.

18. Klier CM, Muzik M, Rosenblum KL, et al. Interpersonal psychotherapy adapted for the group setting in the treatment of postpartum depression. J Psychother Pract Res. 2001;10(2):124-131.

19. Stuart S, O’Hara MW, Gorman LL. The prevention and psychotherapeutic treatment of postpartum depression. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2003;6(suppl 2):S57-S69.

20. Appleby L, Warner R, Whitton A, et al. A controlled study of fluoxetine and cognitive-behavioural counselling in the treatment of postnatal depression. BMJ. 1997;314(7085):932-936.

21. Yonkers KA, Lin H, Howell HB, et al. Pharmacologic treatment of postpartum women with new-onset major depressive disorder: a randomized controlled trial with paroxetine. J Clin Psychiatry. 2008;69(4):659-665.

22. Wisner KL, Hanusa BH, Perel JM, et al. Postpartum depression: a randomized trial of sertraline versus nortriptyline. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2006;(4)26:353-360.

23. Misri S, Reebye P, Corral M, et al. The use of paroxetine and cognitive-behavioral therapy in postpartum depression and anxiety: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(9):1236-1241.

24. Stowe ZN, Casarella J, Landry J, et al. Sertraline in the treatment of women with postpartum major depression. Depression. 1995;3(1-2):49-55.

25. Cohen LS, Viguera AC, Bouffard SM, et al. Venlafaxine in the treatment of postpartum depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 2001;62(8):592-596.

26. Suri R, Burt VK, Altshuler LL, et al. Fluvoxamine for postpartum depression. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(10):1739-1740.

27. Nonacs RM, Soares CN, Viguera AC, et al. Bupropion SR for the treatment of postpartum depression: a pilot study. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2005;8(3):445-449.

28. Burt VK, Suri R, Altshuler L, et al. The use of psychotropic medications during breast-feeding. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(7):1001-1009.

29. Weissman AM, Levy BT, Hartz AJ, et al. Pooled analysis of antidepressant levels in lactating mothers, breast milk, and nursing infants. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(6):1066-1078.

30. Newport DJ, Ritchie JC, Knight BT, et al. Venlafaxine in human breast milk and nursing infant plasma: determination of exposure. J Clin Psychiatry. 2009;70(9):1304-1310.

31. Chaudron LH, Schoenecker CJ. Bupropion and breastfeeding: a case of a possible infant seizure. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(6):881-882.

32. Hendrick V, Stowe ZN, Altshuler LL, et al. Fluoxetine and norfluoxetine concentrations in nursing infants and breast milk. Biol Psychiatry. 2001;50(10):775-782.

33. Sharma V, Khan M. Identification of bipolar disorder in women with postpartum depression. Bipolar Disord. 2010;12(3):335-340.

34. Austin MP, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Priest SR, et al. Depressive and anxiety disorders in the postpartum period: how prevalent are they and can we improve their detection? Arch Womens Ment Health. 2010;13(5):395-401.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Marlene P. Freeman, MD
Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Director of Clinical Services, Perinatal and Reproductive Psychiatry Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Hadine Joffe, MD, MSc
Associate Professor, Harvard Medical School, Director of Research, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Lee S. Cohen, MD
Carpenter Chair in Psychiatry and Women’s Mental Health, Harvard Medical School, Director, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
14-21
Legacy Keywords
postpartum depression; depression; treatment; breast-feeding; new mothers
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Marlene P. Freeman, MD
Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Director of Clinical Services, Perinatal and Reproductive Psychiatry Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Hadine Joffe, MD, MSc
Associate Professor, Harvard Medical School, Director of Research, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Lee S. Cohen, MD
Carpenter Chair in Psychiatry and Women’s Mental Health, Harvard Medical School, Director, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Author and Disclosure Information

Marlene P. Freeman, MD
Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Director of Clinical Services, Perinatal and Reproductive Psychiatry Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Hadine Joffe, MD, MSc
Associate Professor, Harvard Medical School, Director of Research, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
Lee S. Cohen, MD
Carpenter Chair in Psychiatry and Women’s Mental Health, Harvard Medical School, Director, Center for Women’s Mental Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

Article PDF
Article PDF

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Postpartum depression (PPD)—emergence of a major depressive episode after childbirth—has broad negative consequences for the mother, baby, and other family members. The time of onset after delivery for a depressive episode to be considered postpartum is debatable, but the DSM-IV-TR specifier states that onset within 4 weeks of childbirth is considered postpartum. PPD can impact many aspects of child development, including mother-infant attachment, cognitive development, and behavior.1-3

An estimated 10% of women who have given birth experience PPD.4,5 The risk of PPD is particularly high among women who have had previous episodes of PPD or major depressive disorder (MDD). Other risk factors include stressful life events, depression and/or anxiety during pregnancy, family history of PPD, and obstetrical complications.6-8 Anxiety disorders are common in postpartum women, and anxiety symptoms often are prominent in PPD.9

Despite the prevalence of PPD and its serious consequences, few studies have addressed antidepressant treatment. In this article we discuss screening and treating PPD and considerations for breast-feeding mothers. Click here for results of an open-label trial of escitalopram for PPD we conducted in which patient recruitment was challenging.

Screening for PPD: A good start

Initiatives by state governments and health care providers have led to programs in which universal screening for PPD has been implemented. Screening provides a mechanism for early detection and intervention. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale10 is a self-rated, 10-item scale developed for the postpartum setting, and its use increases identification of PPD at postpartum obstetrics visits.11 Other screening tools such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 also are commonly used. Despite the success of screening programs in attempting the feasibility of screening, it is unclear if the identification of women who may be experiencing PPD increases their engagement in treatment. Studies have demonstrated that even when depressive symptoms suggesting a PPD episode are identified in the postpartum period, many women still do not receive treatment.12,13 Studies of PPD screening programs have not demonstrated that screening itself improves treatment engagement or improves outcomes.12,13

Multiple factors—including accessibility of treatment options and patient preference for specific types of treatment—determine whether mothers with PPD obtain treatment. Patients diagnosed with depression by a primary care clinician may prefer psychotherapy to antidepressants,14 and a postpartum mother’s willingness to accept antidepressant treatment may be influenced by concerns about possible risks during breast-feeding.15

Psychotherapy: An effective option

Psychotherapy is an important first-line option for PPD, particularly because of considerations of medication exposure during breast-feeding and many women are reluctant to take antidepressants while breast-feeding.16 Interpersonal psychotherapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) have been most studied for PPD, and both appear effective for prevention and acute treatment of PPD.17-20 Although psychotherapy alone may be sufficient for some women, for others, medication may be an important first-line treatment, depending on symptom severity, access to psychotherapy, and personal preference.

Evidence for antidepressants

Table 120-27 describes clinical trials that assessed the efficacy of antidepressants for PPD. Two relatively small, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have evaluated selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for PPD. In a randomized, double-blind study of CBT plus fluoxetine or CBT plus placebo (N = 87), fluoxetine was significantly more effective than placebo.20 In a randomized, controlled trial of paroxetine vs placebo for PPD (N = 70), both groups improved as measured by the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression or Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report; those who received paroxetine did not improve significantly more than those who received placebo.21 It is difficult to interpret a negative, underpowered study because placebo response rates in antidepressant trials of MDD tend to be high. Data from placebo-controlled trials in PPD are limited by the number and power of those trials.

Randomization to placebo is rare in PPD trials. Most trials have used open-label designs because placebo arms pose ethical dilemmas considering the impact of PPD on a mother and her baby. In a randomized study of sertraline or nortriptyline for PPD, both drugs were similarly efficacious.22 In another study comparing paroxetine monotherapy and paroxetine plus CBT for PPD, both groups experienced significant improvement in depression and anxiety symptoms, with no difference between groups at endpoint.23 Open-label trials have suggested antidepressants’ efficacy, although some studies have included small sample sizes (Table 1).20-27

Table 1

Antidepressants for PPD: Summary of the evidence

 

 

StudyDesign and sizeMedicationResults
Appleby et al, 19972012-week, placebo-controlled, N = 87FluoxetinePatients taking fluoxetine showed greater improvement than those taking placebo
Yonkers et al, 2008218-week, placebo-controlled, N = 70ParoxetineBoth groups improved over time, but patients taking paroxetine had greater improvement in overall clinical severity
Wisner et al, 2006228-week, RCT, N = 109Sertraline vs nortriptylineProportion of women who responded or remitted did not differ between those taking sertraline or nortriptyline
Misri et al, 20042312-week, RCT, N = 35Paroxetine monotherapy vs paroxetine + CBTBoth groups showed significant improvement in mood and anxiety symptoms
Stowe et al, 1995248-week, open-label, N = 21Sertraline20 patients experienced >50% reduction in SIGH-D score
Cohen et al, 199725Open-label, N = 15Venlafaxine12 patients achieved remission
Suri et al, 2001268-week, open-label, N = 6Fluvoxamine4 patients became euthymic, with HDRS scores ranging from 2 to 5
Nonacs et al, 2005278-week, open-label, N = 8Bupropion6 patients had ≥50% decrease in HDRS score from baseline; 3 achieved remission
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; HDRS: Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; PPD: postpartum depression; RCT: randomized controlled trial; SIGH-D: Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale

Breast-feeding considerations

From a nutritional standpoint, breast-feeding is optimal for a newborn. However, for some women, breast-feeding is difficult and stressful, and new mothers may experience this difficulty as failure. Some women prefer not to breast-feed, and others may prefer to formula feed if they require pharmacotherapy, particularly if the medication has not been well studied in breast-feeding patients. Some women may decline to take medications if they are breast-feeding out of concern for the baby’s exposure via breast milk and prefer to try nonpharmacologic approaches first. Many mothers with PPD need to be reassured that stopping breast-feeding may be exactly what is needed if the experience is contributing to their PPD or making them uncomfortable accepting pharmacotherapy when indicated. Maternal mental health is more important than breast-feeding to the health and wellness of the mother-baby dyad.

Breast-feeding and antidepressants. Any medication used during lactation should be assumed to pass into breast milk, although rigorous studies quantifying amounts of antidepressants in breast milk and infant serum generally have demonstrated low levels of exposure among the better studied antidepressants.28,29 Studies that inform extent of drug exposure during lactation have included mothers who have provided serial samples of breast milk and allowed their infant’s blood levels to be checked for the drug. See Table 229-31 for details regarding specific antidepressants and breast-feeding.

Table 2

Considerations for antidepressant use during breast-feeding

Drug(s)Comments
FluoxetineBecause of long half-life, may be more likely to be detected in infant serum, especially at higher doses. Reasonable for use during breast-feeding if a woman has had a good previous response to the drug or used it during pregnancy
SertralineReports of low levels of exposure. Relatively large amount of data available
Citalopram, escitalopramLess systematic study of mother-infant pairs compared with sertraline and paroxetine. Low levels of exposure to infant via breast-feeding observed
ParoxetineConsistent reports of low levels of exposure and has been relatively well studied without reported adverse events. Use limited by commonly experienced withdrawal symptoms; may be more sedating than other SSRIs
BupropionPaucity of systematic study in newborns of nursing mothers; a few case reports in older infants demonstrated low levels of exposure via breast-feeding. May help women who smoke to quit or to maintain abstinence from smoking. Reasonable to use if a woman had good previous response. One case report of possible infant seizure; no other reported adverse events
Venlafaxine, desvenlafaxineHigher levels of desvenlafaxine than venlafaxine found in breast milk. No adverse events reported. Patients may experience withdrawal with discontinuation or missed doses
Tricyclic antidepressantsConsidered reasonable for breast-feeding mothers if use is clinically warranted; few adverse effects in babies and generally low levels of exposure reported
Mirtazapine, nefazodone, MAOIs, duloxetineSystematic human data not available for breast-feeding patients. May be reasonable if a woman previously has responded best to 1 of these; advise patients that data are not available to guide decisions
MAOIs: monoamine oxidase inhibitors; SSRIs: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors
Source: References 29-31
Lactation exposure to paroxetine and sertraline has been most studied, and both have been nondetectable or found in low amounts in infant drug assays. Because fluoxetine has a longer half-life than other antidepressants, it may be more likely to be detected in infant blood sampling, with higher doses more likely to be detected than lower doses.32 Decisions to breast-feed while taking medication must take into account unknown long-term effects of antidepressant exposure. There are a few case reports of suspected adverse events associated with antidepressant use during lactation.
 

 

28,29

The psychiatrist’s role

PPD has great public health significance because it affects a large number of women and their families. Screening during obstetrical visits or in other settings may increase identification of women who are suffering from PPD. In order for this screening to lead to meaningful changes, women must receive timely and expert evaluations for PPD and treatment that is efficacious and accessible.

Psychiatrists often are called upon to treat women with postpartum illness, and whether the mother is breast-feeding or not may influence treatment decisions. When clinically warranted, antidepressants are an important option in the context of breast-feeding, although some antidepressants have more data available than others regarding use during lactation. If a mother has had a good response to a specific antidepressant in the past, that medication should be considered among the treatment options to avoid unnecessary medication trials and delayed response to treatment. Antidepressants with serotonergic action may be especially helpful if a woman presents with substantial postpartum anxiety. Psychotherapy is an important treatment for PPD; CBT and IPT are among the best-studied, efficacious treatments.

Diagnosis and treatment: 4 pearls

Verify the diagnosis. Many women who present with postpartum depressive symptoms may have previously unrecognized bipolar disorder, and many women presenting with a primary complaint of anxiety have PPD.33,34

Discuss breast-feeding. This topic is important in assessing the risks and benefits of antidepressants in postpartum women, but many women also experience breast-feeding as a topic with emotional valence of its own and may need support with infant feeding.

Meet the patient where she is. Patient preferences strongly influence PPD treatment decisions. Women with similar clinical presentations may have strong preferences for different treatments.

Make treatment accessible. Postpartum women may find it challenging to engage in treatment. Treatment plans need to be feasible for women who are depressed while caring for a newborn. On-site childcare, home visits, Internet communication, and other accommodations that may facilitate treatment should be considered at a systems level.

Related Resources

  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Screening for depression during and after pregnancy. www.acog.org/Resources_And_Publications/Committee_Opinions/Committee_on_Obstetric_Practice/Screening_for_Depression_During_and_After_Pregnancy.
  • Meltzer-Brody S. New insights into perinatal depression: pathogenesis and treatment during pregnancy and postpartum. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2011;13(1):89-100.
  • Dennis CL, Stewart DE. Treatment of postpartum depression, part 1: a critical review of biological interventions. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(9):1242-1251.
  • Dennis CL. Treatment of postpartum depression, part 2: a critical review of nonbiological interventions. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(9):1252-1265.
  • Cohen LS, Wang B, Nonacs R, et al. Treatment of mood disorders during pregnancy and postpartum. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2010;33(2):273-293.
Drug Brand Names

  • Bupropion • Wellbutrin, Zyban
  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Desvenlafaxine • Pristiq
  • Duloxetine • Cymbalta
  • Escitalopram • Lexapro
  • Fluoxetine • Prozac
  • Fluvoxamine • Luvox
  • Mirtazapine • Remeron
  • Nefazodone • Serzone
  • Nortriptyline • Aventyl, Pamelor
  • Paroxetine • Paxil
  • Sertraline • Zoloft
  • Venlafaxine • Effexor
Dr. Freeman has received grant or research support from Eli Lilly and Company, Forest Laboratories, and GlaxoSmithKline, is on the advisory boards of Otsuka and Takeda/Lundbeck, and is a consultant for PamLab LLC.

Dr. Joffe has received grant or research support from Cephalon/Teva, and is a consultant to Noven and Sunovion.

Dr. Cohen has received research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Forest Laboratories, GlaxoSmithKline, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Ortho-McNeil Janssen, and Pfizer and has served on an advisory board for PamLab LLC.

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Postpartum depression (PPD)—emergence of a major depressive episode after childbirth—has broad negative consequences for the mother, baby, and other family members. The time of onset after delivery for a depressive episode to be considered postpartum is debatable, but the DSM-IV-TR specifier states that onset within 4 weeks of childbirth is considered postpartum. PPD can impact many aspects of child development, including mother-infant attachment, cognitive development, and behavior.1-3

An estimated 10% of women who have given birth experience PPD.4,5 The risk of PPD is particularly high among women who have had previous episodes of PPD or major depressive disorder (MDD). Other risk factors include stressful life events, depression and/or anxiety during pregnancy, family history of PPD, and obstetrical complications.6-8 Anxiety disorders are common in postpartum women, and anxiety symptoms often are prominent in PPD.9

Despite the prevalence of PPD and its serious consequences, few studies have addressed antidepressant treatment. In this article we discuss screening and treating PPD and considerations for breast-feeding mothers. Click here for results of an open-label trial of escitalopram for PPD we conducted in which patient recruitment was challenging.

Screening for PPD: A good start

Initiatives by state governments and health care providers have led to programs in which universal screening for PPD has been implemented. Screening provides a mechanism for early detection and intervention. The Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale10 is a self-rated, 10-item scale developed for the postpartum setting, and its use increases identification of PPD at postpartum obstetrics visits.11 Other screening tools such as the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 also are commonly used. Despite the success of screening programs in attempting the feasibility of screening, it is unclear if the identification of women who may be experiencing PPD increases their engagement in treatment. Studies have demonstrated that even when depressive symptoms suggesting a PPD episode are identified in the postpartum period, many women still do not receive treatment.12,13 Studies of PPD screening programs have not demonstrated that screening itself improves treatment engagement or improves outcomes.12,13

Multiple factors—including accessibility of treatment options and patient preference for specific types of treatment—determine whether mothers with PPD obtain treatment. Patients diagnosed with depression by a primary care clinician may prefer psychotherapy to antidepressants,14 and a postpartum mother’s willingness to accept antidepressant treatment may be influenced by concerns about possible risks during breast-feeding.15

Psychotherapy: An effective option

Psychotherapy is an important first-line option for PPD, particularly because of considerations of medication exposure during breast-feeding and many women are reluctant to take antidepressants while breast-feeding.16 Interpersonal psychotherapy and cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) have been most studied for PPD, and both appear effective for prevention and acute treatment of PPD.17-20 Although psychotherapy alone may be sufficient for some women, for others, medication may be an important first-line treatment, depending on symptom severity, access to psychotherapy, and personal preference.

Evidence for antidepressants

Table 120-27 describes clinical trials that assessed the efficacy of antidepressants for PPD. Two relatively small, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials have evaluated selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for PPD. In a randomized, double-blind study of CBT plus fluoxetine or CBT plus placebo (N = 87), fluoxetine was significantly more effective than placebo.20 In a randomized, controlled trial of paroxetine vs placebo for PPD (N = 70), both groups improved as measured by the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression or Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report; those who received paroxetine did not improve significantly more than those who received placebo.21 It is difficult to interpret a negative, underpowered study because placebo response rates in antidepressant trials of MDD tend to be high. Data from placebo-controlled trials in PPD are limited by the number and power of those trials.

Randomization to placebo is rare in PPD trials. Most trials have used open-label designs because placebo arms pose ethical dilemmas considering the impact of PPD on a mother and her baby. In a randomized study of sertraline or nortriptyline for PPD, both drugs were similarly efficacious.22 In another study comparing paroxetine monotherapy and paroxetine plus CBT for PPD, both groups experienced significant improvement in depression and anxiety symptoms, with no difference between groups at endpoint.23 Open-label trials have suggested antidepressants’ efficacy, although some studies have included small sample sizes (Table 1).20-27

Table 1

Antidepressants for PPD: Summary of the evidence

 

 

StudyDesign and sizeMedicationResults
Appleby et al, 19972012-week, placebo-controlled, N = 87FluoxetinePatients taking fluoxetine showed greater improvement than those taking placebo
Yonkers et al, 2008218-week, placebo-controlled, N = 70ParoxetineBoth groups improved over time, but patients taking paroxetine had greater improvement in overall clinical severity
Wisner et al, 2006228-week, RCT, N = 109Sertraline vs nortriptylineProportion of women who responded or remitted did not differ between those taking sertraline or nortriptyline
Misri et al, 20042312-week, RCT, N = 35Paroxetine monotherapy vs paroxetine + CBTBoth groups showed significant improvement in mood and anxiety symptoms
Stowe et al, 1995248-week, open-label, N = 21Sertraline20 patients experienced >50% reduction in SIGH-D score
Cohen et al, 199725Open-label, N = 15Venlafaxine12 patients achieved remission
Suri et al, 2001268-week, open-label, N = 6Fluvoxamine4 patients became euthymic, with HDRS scores ranging from 2 to 5
Nonacs et al, 2005278-week, open-label, N = 8Bupropion6 patients had ≥50% decrease in HDRS score from baseline; 3 achieved remission
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; HDRS: Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; PPD: postpartum depression; RCT: randomized controlled trial; SIGH-D: Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale

Breast-feeding considerations

From a nutritional standpoint, breast-feeding is optimal for a newborn. However, for some women, breast-feeding is difficult and stressful, and new mothers may experience this difficulty as failure. Some women prefer not to breast-feed, and others may prefer to formula feed if they require pharmacotherapy, particularly if the medication has not been well studied in breast-feeding patients. Some women may decline to take medications if they are breast-feeding out of concern for the baby’s exposure via breast milk and prefer to try nonpharmacologic approaches first. Many mothers with PPD need to be reassured that stopping breast-feeding may be exactly what is needed if the experience is contributing to their PPD or making them uncomfortable accepting pharmacotherapy when indicated. Maternal mental health is more important than breast-feeding to the health and wellness of the mother-baby dyad.

Breast-feeding and antidepressants. Any medication used during lactation should be assumed to pass into breast milk, although rigorous studies quantifying amounts of antidepressants in breast milk and infant serum generally have demonstrated low levels of exposure among the better studied antidepressants.28,29 Studies that inform extent of drug exposure during lactation have included mothers who have provided serial samples of breast milk and allowed their infant’s blood levels to be checked for the drug. See Table 229-31 for details regarding specific antidepressants and breast-feeding.

Table 2

Considerations for antidepressant use during breast-feeding

Drug(s)Comments
FluoxetineBecause of long half-life, may be more likely to be detected in infant serum, especially at higher doses. Reasonable for use during breast-feeding if a woman has had a good previous response to the drug or used it during pregnancy
SertralineReports of low levels of exposure. Relatively large amount of data available
Citalopram, escitalopramLess systematic study of mother-infant pairs compared with sertraline and paroxetine. Low levels of exposure to infant via breast-feeding observed
ParoxetineConsistent reports of low levels of exposure and has been relatively well studied without reported adverse events. Use limited by commonly experienced withdrawal symptoms; may be more sedating than other SSRIs
BupropionPaucity of systematic study in newborns of nursing mothers; a few case reports in older infants demonstrated low levels of exposure via breast-feeding. May help women who smoke to quit or to maintain abstinence from smoking. Reasonable to use if a woman had good previous response. One case report of possible infant seizure; no other reported adverse events
Venlafaxine, desvenlafaxineHigher levels of desvenlafaxine than venlafaxine found in breast milk. No adverse events reported. Patients may experience withdrawal with discontinuation or missed doses
Tricyclic antidepressantsConsidered reasonable for breast-feeding mothers if use is clinically warranted; few adverse effects in babies and generally low levels of exposure reported
Mirtazapine, nefazodone, MAOIs, duloxetineSystematic human data not available for breast-feeding patients. May be reasonable if a woman previously has responded best to 1 of these; advise patients that data are not available to guide decisions
MAOIs: monoamine oxidase inhibitors; SSRIs: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors
Source: References 29-31
Lactation exposure to paroxetine and sertraline has been most studied, and both have been nondetectable or found in low amounts in infant drug assays. Because fluoxetine has a longer half-life than other antidepressants, it may be more likely to be detected in infant blood sampling, with higher doses more likely to be detected than lower doses.32 Decisions to breast-feed while taking medication must take into account unknown long-term effects of antidepressant exposure. There are a few case reports of suspected adverse events associated with antidepressant use during lactation.
 

 

28,29

The psychiatrist’s role

PPD has great public health significance because it affects a large number of women and their families. Screening during obstetrical visits or in other settings may increase identification of women who are suffering from PPD. In order for this screening to lead to meaningful changes, women must receive timely and expert evaluations for PPD and treatment that is efficacious and accessible.

Psychiatrists often are called upon to treat women with postpartum illness, and whether the mother is breast-feeding or not may influence treatment decisions. When clinically warranted, antidepressants are an important option in the context of breast-feeding, although some antidepressants have more data available than others regarding use during lactation. If a mother has had a good response to a specific antidepressant in the past, that medication should be considered among the treatment options to avoid unnecessary medication trials and delayed response to treatment. Antidepressants with serotonergic action may be especially helpful if a woman presents with substantial postpartum anxiety. Psychotherapy is an important treatment for PPD; CBT and IPT are among the best-studied, efficacious treatments.

Diagnosis and treatment: 4 pearls

Verify the diagnosis. Many women who present with postpartum depressive symptoms may have previously unrecognized bipolar disorder, and many women presenting with a primary complaint of anxiety have PPD.33,34

Discuss breast-feeding. This topic is important in assessing the risks and benefits of antidepressants in postpartum women, but many women also experience breast-feeding as a topic with emotional valence of its own and may need support with infant feeding.

Meet the patient where she is. Patient preferences strongly influence PPD treatment decisions. Women with similar clinical presentations may have strong preferences for different treatments.

Make treatment accessible. Postpartum women may find it challenging to engage in treatment. Treatment plans need to be feasible for women who are depressed while caring for a newborn. On-site childcare, home visits, Internet communication, and other accommodations that may facilitate treatment should be considered at a systems level.

Related Resources

  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Screening for depression during and after pregnancy. www.acog.org/Resources_And_Publications/Committee_Opinions/Committee_on_Obstetric_Practice/Screening_for_Depression_During_and_After_Pregnancy.
  • Meltzer-Brody S. New insights into perinatal depression: pathogenesis and treatment during pregnancy and postpartum. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2011;13(1):89-100.
  • Dennis CL, Stewart DE. Treatment of postpartum depression, part 1: a critical review of biological interventions. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(9):1242-1251.
  • Dennis CL. Treatment of postpartum depression, part 2: a critical review of nonbiological interventions. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(9):1252-1265.
  • Cohen LS, Wang B, Nonacs R, et al. Treatment of mood disorders during pregnancy and postpartum. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2010;33(2):273-293.
Drug Brand Names

  • Bupropion • Wellbutrin, Zyban
  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Desvenlafaxine • Pristiq
  • Duloxetine • Cymbalta
  • Escitalopram • Lexapro
  • Fluoxetine • Prozac
  • Fluvoxamine • Luvox
  • Mirtazapine • Remeron
  • Nefazodone • Serzone
  • Nortriptyline • Aventyl, Pamelor
  • Paroxetine • Paxil
  • Sertraline • Zoloft
  • Venlafaxine • Effexor
Dr. Freeman has received grant or research support from Eli Lilly and Company, Forest Laboratories, and GlaxoSmithKline, is on the advisory boards of Otsuka and Takeda/Lundbeck, and is a consultant for PamLab LLC.

Dr. Joffe has received grant or research support from Cephalon/Teva, and is a consultant to Noven and Sunovion.

Dr. Cohen has received research support from AstraZeneca, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Forest Laboratories, GlaxoSmithKline, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Ortho-McNeil Janssen, and Pfizer and has served on an advisory board for PamLab LLC.

References

1. Cicchetti D, Rogosch FA, Toth SL. Maternal depressive disorder and contextual risk: contributions to the development of attachment insecurity and behavior problems in toddlerhood. Dev Psychopathol. 1998;10(2):283-300.

2. Murray L, Fiori-Cowley A, Hooper R, et al. The impact of postnatal depression and associated adversity on early mother-infant interactions and later infant outcome. Child Dev. 1996;67(5):2512-2526.

3. Sharp D, Hay DF, Pawlby S, et al. The impact of postnatal depression on boys’ intellectual development. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1995;36(8):1315-1336.

4. Altshuler LL, Hendrick V, Cohen LS. Course of mood and anxiety disorders during pregnancy and the postpartum period. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59(suppl 2):29-33.

5. Pariser SF. Women and mood disorders. Menarche to menopause. Ann Clin Psychiatry. 1993;5(4):249-254.

6. Dennis CL, Janssen PA, Singer J. Identifying women at-risk for postpartum depression in the immediate postpartum period. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2004;110(5):338-346.

7. Chaudron LH, Klein MH, Remington P, et al. Predictors, prodromes and incidence of postpartum depression. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;22(2):103-112.

8. Heron J, O’Connor TG, Evans J, et al. ALSPAC Study Team. The course of anxiety and depression through pregnancy and the postpartum in a community sample. J Affect Disord. 2004;80(1):65-73.

9. Wenzel A, Haugen EN, Jackson LC, et al. Anxiety symptoms and disorders at eight weeks postpartum. J Anxiety Disord. 2005;19(3):295-311.

10. Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987;150:782-786.

11. Evins GG, Theofrastous JP, Galvin SL. Postpartum depression: a comparison of screening and routine clinical evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(5):1080-1082.

12. Flynn HA, O’Mahen HA, Massey L, et al. The impact of a brief obstetrics clinic-based intervention on treatment use for perinatal depression. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2006;15(10):1195-1204.

13. Yonkers KA, Smith MV, Lin H, et al. Depression screening of perinatal women: an evaluation of the healthy start depression initiative. Psychiatr Serv. 2009;60(3):322-328.

14. van Schaik DJ, Klijn AF, van Hout HP, et al. Patients’ p in the treatment of depressive disorder in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2004;26(3):184-189.

15. Boath E, Bradley E, Henshaw C. Women’s views of antidepressants in the treatment of postnatal depression. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;25(3-4):221-233.

16. Pearlstein TB, Zlotnick C, Battle CL, et al. Patient choice of treatment for postpartum depression: a pilot study. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2006;9(6):303-308.

17. Zlotnick C, Johnson SL, Miller IW, et al. Postpartum depression in women receiving public assistance: pilot study of an interpersonal-therapy-oriented group intervention. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(4):638-640.

18. Klier CM, Muzik M, Rosenblum KL, et al. Interpersonal psychotherapy adapted for the group setting in the treatment of postpartum depression. J Psychother Pract Res. 2001;10(2):124-131.

19. Stuart S, O’Hara MW, Gorman LL. The prevention and psychotherapeutic treatment of postpartum depression. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2003;6(suppl 2):S57-S69.

20. Appleby L, Warner R, Whitton A, et al. A controlled study of fluoxetine and cognitive-behavioural counselling in the treatment of postnatal depression. BMJ. 1997;314(7085):932-936.

21. Yonkers KA, Lin H, Howell HB, et al. Pharmacologic treatment of postpartum women with new-onset major depressive disorder: a randomized controlled trial with paroxetine. J Clin Psychiatry. 2008;69(4):659-665.

22. Wisner KL, Hanusa BH, Perel JM, et al. Postpartum depression: a randomized trial of sertraline versus nortriptyline. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2006;(4)26:353-360.

23. Misri S, Reebye P, Corral M, et al. The use of paroxetine and cognitive-behavioral therapy in postpartum depression and anxiety: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(9):1236-1241.

24. Stowe ZN, Casarella J, Landry J, et al. Sertraline in the treatment of women with postpartum major depression. Depression. 1995;3(1-2):49-55.

25. Cohen LS, Viguera AC, Bouffard SM, et al. Venlafaxine in the treatment of postpartum depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 2001;62(8):592-596.

26. Suri R, Burt VK, Altshuler LL, et al. Fluvoxamine for postpartum depression. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(10):1739-1740.

27. Nonacs RM, Soares CN, Viguera AC, et al. Bupropion SR for the treatment of postpartum depression: a pilot study. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2005;8(3):445-449.

28. Burt VK, Suri R, Altshuler L, et al. The use of psychotropic medications during breast-feeding. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(7):1001-1009.

29. Weissman AM, Levy BT, Hartz AJ, et al. Pooled analysis of antidepressant levels in lactating mothers, breast milk, and nursing infants. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(6):1066-1078.

30. Newport DJ, Ritchie JC, Knight BT, et al. Venlafaxine in human breast milk and nursing infant plasma: determination of exposure. J Clin Psychiatry. 2009;70(9):1304-1310.

31. Chaudron LH, Schoenecker CJ. Bupropion and breastfeeding: a case of a possible infant seizure. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(6):881-882.

32. Hendrick V, Stowe ZN, Altshuler LL, et al. Fluoxetine and norfluoxetine concentrations in nursing infants and breast milk. Biol Psychiatry. 2001;50(10):775-782.

33. Sharma V, Khan M. Identification of bipolar disorder in women with postpartum depression. Bipolar Disord. 2010;12(3):335-340.

34. Austin MP, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Priest SR, et al. Depressive and anxiety disorders in the postpartum period: how prevalent are they and can we improve their detection? Arch Womens Ment Health. 2010;13(5):395-401.

References

1. Cicchetti D, Rogosch FA, Toth SL. Maternal depressive disorder and contextual risk: contributions to the development of attachment insecurity and behavior problems in toddlerhood. Dev Psychopathol. 1998;10(2):283-300.

2. Murray L, Fiori-Cowley A, Hooper R, et al. The impact of postnatal depression and associated adversity on early mother-infant interactions and later infant outcome. Child Dev. 1996;67(5):2512-2526.

3. Sharp D, Hay DF, Pawlby S, et al. The impact of postnatal depression on boys’ intellectual development. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1995;36(8):1315-1336.

4. Altshuler LL, Hendrick V, Cohen LS. Course of mood and anxiety disorders during pregnancy and the postpartum period. J Clin Psychiatry. 1998;59(suppl 2):29-33.

5. Pariser SF. Women and mood disorders. Menarche to menopause. Ann Clin Psychiatry. 1993;5(4):249-254.

6. Dennis CL, Janssen PA, Singer J. Identifying women at-risk for postpartum depression in the immediate postpartum period. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2004;110(5):338-346.

7. Chaudron LH, Klein MH, Remington P, et al. Predictors, prodromes and incidence of postpartum depression. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;22(2):103-112.

8. Heron J, O’Connor TG, Evans J, et al. ALSPAC Study Team. The course of anxiety and depression through pregnancy and the postpartum in a community sample. J Affect Disord. 2004;80(1):65-73.

9. Wenzel A, Haugen EN, Jackson LC, et al. Anxiety symptoms and disorders at eight weeks postpartum. J Anxiety Disord. 2005;19(3):295-311.

10. Cox JL, Holden JM, Sagovsky R. Detection of postnatal depression. Development of the 10-item Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale. Br J Psychiatry. 1987;150:782-786.

11. Evins GG, Theofrastous JP, Galvin SL. Postpartum depression: a comparison of screening and routine clinical evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2000;182(5):1080-1082.

12. Flynn HA, O’Mahen HA, Massey L, et al. The impact of a brief obstetrics clinic-based intervention on treatment use for perinatal depression. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2006;15(10):1195-1204.

13. Yonkers KA, Smith MV, Lin H, et al. Depression screening of perinatal women: an evaluation of the healthy start depression initiative. Psychiatr Serv. 2009;60(3):322-328.

14. van Schaik DJ, Klijn AF, van Hout HP, et al. Patients’ p in the treatment of depressive disorder in primary care. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2004;26(3):184-189.

15. Boath E, Bradley E, Henshaw C. Women’s views of antidepressants in the treatment of postnatal depression. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;25(3-4):221-233.

16. Pearlstein TB, Zlotnick C, Battle CL, et al. Patient choice of treatment for postpartum depression: a pilot study. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2006;9(6):303-308.

17. Zlotnick C, Johnson SL, Miller IW, et al. Postpartum depression in women receiving public assistance: pilot study of an interpersonal-therapy-oriented group intervention. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(4):638-640.

18. Klier CM, Muzik M, Rosenblum KL, et al. Interpersonal psychotherapy adapted for the group setting in the treatment of postpartum depression. J Psychother Pract Res. 2001;10(2):124-131.

19. Stuart S, O’Hara MW, Gorman LL. The prevention and psychotherapeutic treatment of postpartum depression. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2003;6(suppl 2):S57-S69.

20. Appleby L, Warner R, Whitton A, et al. A controlled study of fluoxetine and cognitive-behavioural counselling in the treatment of postnatal depression. BMJ. 1997;314(7085):932-936.

21. Yonkers KA, Lin H, Howell HB, et al. Pharmacologic treatment of postpartum women with new-onset major depressive disorder: a randomized controlled trial with paroxetine. J Clin Psychiatry. 2008;69(4):659-665.

22. Wisner KL, Hanusa BH, Perel JM, et al. Postpartum depression: a randomized trial of sertraline versus nortriptyline. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2006;(4)26:353-360.

23. Misri S, Reebye P, Corral M, et al. The use of paroxetine and cognitive-behavioral therapy in postpartum depression and anxiety: a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(9):1236-1241.

24. Stowe ZN, Casarella J, Landry J, et al. Sertraline in the treatment of women with postpartum major depression. Depression. 1995;3(1-2):49-55.

25. Cohen LS, Viguera AC, Bouffard SM, et al. Venlafaxine in the treatment of postpartum depression. J Clin Psychiatry. 2001;62(8):592-596.

26. Suri R, Burt VK, Altshuler LL, et al. Fluvoxamine for postpartum depression. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(10):1739-1740.

27. Nonacs RM, Soares CN, Viguera AC, et al. Bupropion SR for the treatment of postpartum depression: a pilot study. Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2005;8(3):445-449.

28. Burt VK, Suri R, Altshuler L, et al. The use of psychotropic medications during breast-feeding. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(7):1001-1009.

29. Weissman AM, Levy BT, Hartz AJ, et al. Pooled analysis of antidepressant levels in lactating mothers, breast milk, and nursing infants. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(6):1066-1078.

30. Newport DJ, Ritchie JC, Knight BT, et al. Venlafaxine in human breast milk and nursing infant plasma: determination of exposure. J Clin Psychiatry. 2009;70(9):1304-1310.

31. Chaudron LH, Schoenecker CJ. Bupropion and breastfeeding: a case of a possible infant seizure. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(6):881-882.

32. Hendrick V, Stowe ZN, Altshuler LL, et al. Fluoxetine and norfluoxetine concentrations in nursing infants and breast milk. Biol Psychiatry. 2001;50(10):775-782.

33. Sharma V, Khan M. Identification of bipolar disorder in women with postpartum depression. Bipolar Disord. 2010;12(3):335-340.

34. Austin MP, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Priest SR, et al. Depressive and anxiety disorders in the postpartum period: how prevalent are they and can we improve their detection? Arch Womens Ment Health. 2010;13(5):395-401.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Page Number
14-21
Page Number
14-21
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Postpartum depression: Help patients find the right treatment
Display Headline
Postpartum depression: Help patients find the right treatment
Legacy Keywords
postpartum depression; depression; treatment; breast-feeding; new mothers
Legacy Keywords
postpartum depression; depression; treatment; breast-feeding; new mothers
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Panic disorder: Break the fear circuit

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Panic disorder: Break the fear circuit


Dr. Dunlop: State-of-the-art treatment for panic disorder


Ms. K, a 24-year-old waitress who lives with her boyfriend, was referred by her primary care physician for evaluation of panic attacks that began “out of nowhere” at work approximately 6 months ago. The unpredictable attacks occur multiple times per week, causing her to leave work and cancel shifts.

Ms. K reports that before the panic attacks began, she felt happy in her relationship, enjoyed hobbies, and was hopeful about the future. However, she has become concerned that a potentially catastrophic illness is causing her panic attacks. She researches her symptoms on the Internet, and is preoccupied with the possibility of sudden death due to an undiagnosed heart condition. Multiple visits to the emergency room have not identified any physical abnormalities. Her primary care doctor prescribed alprazolam, 0.5 mg as needed for panic attacks, which she reports is helpful, “but only in the moment of the attacks.” Ms. K avoids alcohol and illicit substances and limits her caffeine intake. She is not willing to accept that her life “feels so limited.” Her dream of earning a nursing degree and eventually starting a family now seems unattainable.

Panic disorder (PD) occurs in 3% to 5% of adults, with women affected at roughly twice the rate of men.1 Causing a broad range of distress and varying degrees of impairment, PD commonly occurs with other psychiatric disorders. For most patients, treatment is effective, but those who do not respond to initial approaches require a thoughtful, stepped approach to care. Key considerations include establishing an accurate diagnosis, clarifying comorbid illnesses, ascertaining patient beliefs and expectations, and providing appropriately dosed and maintained treatments.

Panic attacks vs PD

Panic attacks consist of rapid onset of intense anxiety, with prominent somatic symptoms, that peaks within 10 minutes (Figure).2 Attacks in which <4 of the listed symptoms occur are considered limited-symptom panic attacks.


Figure: Body locations of panic attack symptoms
Diagnosis of a panic attack requires the sudden development of intense fear or discomfort characterized by ≥4 of the 13 symptoms listed above that peaks in intensity within 10 minutes of onset
Source: Reference 2

Panic attacks can occur with various disorders, including other anxiety disorders, mood disorders, and substance intoxication or withdrawal. Because serious medical conditions can present with panic-like symptoms, the initial occurrence of such symptoms warrants consideration of physiological causes. For a Box2 that describes the differential diagnosis of panic attacks, see this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com.

Box

Differential diagnosis of panic attacks

To meet diagnostic criteria for panic disorder, panic attacks must initially occur “out of the blue,” meaning no specific object or situation induced the attack. The differential diagnosis of panic attacks includes assessing for other psychiatric disorders that may involve panic attacks. Evaluation requires considering the context in which the panic attacks occur, including their start date, pattern of attacks, instigating situations, and associated thoughts.

Social phobia. Attacks occur only during or immediately before a social interaction in which the patient fears embarrassing himself or herself.

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Attacks occur when the patient cannot avoid exposure to an obsessional fear or is prevented from performing a ritual that diffuses obsessional anxiety.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Attacks occur when confronted by a trauma-related memory or trigger.

Specific phobia. Attacks occur only when the patient encounters a specifically feared object, place, or situation, unrelated to social phobia, OCD, or PTSD.

Medical conditions. Conditions to consider include—but are not limited to—hyperthyroidism, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, cardiac dysrhythmias, hypoglycemia, asthma, partial complex seizures, and pheochromocytoma.

Source: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed, text rev. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000

A PD diagnosis requires that repeated panic attacks initially must occur from “out of the blue,” meaning no specific object or situation induced the attack. In addition, the diagnosis requires 1 of 3 types of psychological or behavioral changes as a result of the attacks (Table 1).2 Agoraphobia is diagnosed if 1 of the behavioral changes is avoidance of places or situations from which escape might be embarrassing or difficult should an attack occur. A patient can be diagnosed as having PD with agoraphobia, PD without agoraphobia, or agoraphobia without PD (ie, experiences only limited symptom panic attacks, but avoids situations or stimuli associated with them).

Table 1

Definitions of panic disorder and agoraphobia

Panic disorder
  1. Both 1 and 2:
  2. The panic attacks do not arise from the direct physiological effects of substance intoxication (eg, caffeine, cocaine) or withdrawal (eg, cannabis, gamma-hydroxybutyrate) or from a general medical condition
  3. The panic attacks are not better accounted for by another mental disorder
Agoraphobia
Anxiety about, or avoidance of, being in places or situations from which escape might be difficult or embarrassing, or in which help may not be available in the event of having an unexpected or situationally predisposed panic attack or panic-like symptoms. Agoraphobic fears typically involve characteristic clusters of situations that include being outside the home alone, being in a crowd, standing in a line, being on a bridge, or traveling in a bus, train, or automobile
Source: Reference 2
 

 

Comorbidities are common in patients with PD and predict greater difficulty achieving remission (Box).1,3-6

Box

Comorbidities: How they affect panic disorder treatment

The most common psychiatric conditions that co-occur with panic disorder (PD) are other anxiety disorders, mood disorders, personality disorders, and substance use disorders.1 Carefully assess the severity and degree of impairment or distress arising from each condition to prioritize treatment goals. For example, treating panic attacks would be a lower priority in a patient with untreated bipolar disorder.

Assessing comorbid substance abuse is important in selecting PD treatments. Benzodiazepines should almost always be avoided in patients with a history of drug abuse—illicit or prescribed. Although complete abstinence should not be a prerequisite for beginning PD treatment, detoxification and concomitant substance abuse treatment are essential.3

Comorbid mood disorders also affect the course of PD treatment. Antidepressants are effective for treating depression and PD, whereas benzodiazepines are not effective for depression.4 Antidepressants in patients with bipolar disorder are controversial because these medications might induce mixed or elevated mood states or rapid cycling. In these complicated patients, consider antidepressants lower in the treatment algorithm.5

Other conditions to consider before beginning treatment include pregnancy or the possibility of becoming pregnant in the near future and suicidal ideation. PD is associated with increased risk for suicidal ideation and progression to suicide attempts, particularly in patients with a comorbid mood or psychotic disorder.6 In addition, consider the potential impact of medications on comorbid medical conditions.

Treatment begins with education

The goal of treatment is remission of symptoms, ideally including an absence of panic attacks, agoraphobic avoidance, and anticipatory anxiety.1 The Panic Disorder Severity Scale self-report is a validated measure of panic symptoms that may be useful in clinical practice.7

The first step in treatment is educating patients about panic attacks, framing them as an overreactive fear circuit in the brain that produces physical symptoms that are not dangerous. Using a brain model that shows the location of the amygdala, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex—which play crucial roles in generating and controlling anxiety and fear—can make this discussion more concrete.8 Although highly simplified, such models allow clinicians to demonstrate that excessive reactivity of limbic regions can be reduced by both top-down (cortico-limbic connections via cognitive-behavioral therapy [CBT]) and bottom-up (pharmacotherapy directly acting on limbic structures) approaches. Such discussions lead to treatment recommendations for CBT, pharmacotherapy, or their combination.

No single treatment has emerged as the definitive “best” for PD, and no reliable predictors can guide specific treatment for an individual.3 Combining CBT with pharmacotherapy produces higher short-term response rates than either treatment alone, but in the long term, combination treatment does not appear to be superior to CBT alone.9 Base the initial treatment selection for PD on patient preference, treatment availability and cost, and comorbid medical and psychiatric conditions. For an Algorithm to guide treatment decisions, see this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com.


Algorithm: Treatment for panic disorder: A suggested algorithm
aPoor response to an SSRI should lead to a switch to venlafaxine extended-release, and vice versa
bBenzodiazepines are relatively contraindicated in geriatric patients and patients with a history of substance abuse or dependence
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; MAOI: monoamine oxidase inhibitor; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; TCA: tricyclic antidepressant; Ven XR: venlafaxine extended-release

First-line treatments

Psychotherapy. CBT is the most efficacious psychotherapy for PD. Twelve to 15 sessions of CBT has demonstrated efficacy for PD, with additional effects on comorbid anxiety and depressive symptoms.10 No large clinical trials of CBT have used cognitive restructuring alone; all have included at least some component of exposure that requires the patient to confront feared physical sensations. Gains during treatment may be steady and gradual or sudden and uneven, with rapid improvement in some but not all symptoms. CBT and pharmacotherapy have demonstrated similar levels of benefit in short-term trials, but CBT has proven superior in most9 but not all11 trials evaluating long-term outcomes, particularly compared with pharmacotherapy that is discontinued during follow-up. Although less studied, group CBT also may be considered if a patient cannot afford individual CBT.

Pharmacotherapy. Evidence supports selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), venlafaxine extended-release (XR), benzodiazepines, and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) as effective treatments for PD.3 No class of medication has demonstrated superiority over others in short-term treatment.3,12 Because of the medical risks associated with benzodiazepines and TCAs, an SSRI or venlafaxine XR should be the first medication option for most patients. Fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, and venlafaxine XR are FDA-approved for PD. Paroxetine is associated with weight gain and may increase the risk for panic recurrence upon discontinuation more than sertraline, making it a less favorable option for many patients.13 Start doses at half the normal starting dose used for treating major depressive disorder and continue for 4 to 7 days, then increase to the minimal effective dose. For a Table3 that lists dosing recommendations for antidepressants to treat PD, see this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com. If there is no improvement by 4 weeks, increase the dose every 2 to 4 weeks until remission is achieved or side effects prevent further dose increases.

 

 

Table

Recommended doses for antidepressants used to treat panic disorder

MedicationStarting dose (mg/d)Therapeutic range (mg/d)
SSRIs
   Citalopram1020 to 40
   Escitalopram510 to 40
   Fluoxetine5 to 1020 to 80
   Fluvoxamine25100 to 300
   Paroxetine1020 to 80
   Paroxetine CR12.525 to 50
   Sertraline25100 to 200
SNRIs
   Duloxetine20 to 3060 to 120
   Venlafaxine XR37.5150 to 225
TCAs
   Clomipramine10 to 25100 to 300
   Imipramine10100 to 300
MAOI
   Phenelzine1545 to 90
CR: controlled release; MAOI: monoamine oxidase inhibitor; SNRIs: serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors; SSRIs: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; TCAs: tricyclic antidepressants; XR: extended release
Source: American Psychiatric Association. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with panic disorder. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2009

Treatment nonresponse. True non-response needs to be distinguished from poor response caused by inadequate treatment delivery, eg, patients not completing homework assignments in CBT or not adhering to pharmacotherapy. Asking patients about adverse effects or personal and family beliefs about treatment may reveal reasons for nonadherence.

Second-line treatments

Little data are available to guide next-step treatment options in patients who don’t achieve remission from their initial treatment. Patients who benefit from an SSRI, venlafaxine XR, or CBT but still have symptoms should be started on combination treatment. For a patient who experiences complete non-response to the initial treatment, discontinue the first treatment and switch to the other modality. In general, completely ineffective treatments should be discontinued when another treatment is added, but when partial improvement (>30%) occurs, continue the original treatment and augment it with another approach.

For patients pursuing pharmacotherapy, poor response to an adequate SSRI trial usually should lead to a switch to venlafaxine XR, and vice versa. Failure to respond to both of these medication classes should prompt a switch to a benzodiazepine or TCA.

Benzodiazepines are a fast-acting, effective treatment for PD, with efficacy similar to SSRIs in acute and long-term treatment.14 Benzodiazepines may be prescribed with antidepressants at the beginning of treatment to improve response speed.15 Clonazepam and alprazolam are FDA-approved for treating PD. A high-potency, long-acting agent, clonazepam is the preferred initial benzodiazepine, dosed 0.5 to 4 mg/d on a fixed schedule. Although substantial data support using alprazolam for PD, it requires more frequent dosing and has a greater risk of rebound anxiety and abuse potential because of its more rapid onset of action. Compared with immediate-release alprazolam, alprazolam XR has a slower absorption rate and longer steady state in the blood, but this formulation does not have lower abuse potential or greater efficacy. Although not FDA-approved for PD, diazepam and lorazepam also have proven efficacy for PD.3

Benzodiazepines should be considered contraindicated in patients with a history of substance abuse, except in select cases.4 Benzodiazepines generally should be avoided in older patients because of increased risk for falls, cognitive impairment, and motor vehicle accidents. Table 2 lists situations in which benzodiazepines may be used to treat PD.

Table 2

Clinical scenarios in which to consider using benzodiazepines

Coadministration for 2 to 4 weeks when initiating treatment with an SSRI or venlafaxine XR to achieve more rapid relief and mitigate potential antidepressant-induced anxiety
For patients who wish to avoid antidepressants because of concern about sexual dysfunction
For patients who need chronic aspirin or an NSAID, which may increase the risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding when taken in combination with an SSRI
For patients with comorbid bipolar disorder or epilepsy
Next-step monotherapy or augmentation in patients who respond poorly to an SSRI, venlafaxine XR, TCA, or CBT
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; NSAID: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; TCA: tricyclic antidepressant; XR: extended release

TCAs are effective as monotherapy for PD. Most support comes from studies of imipramine or clomipramine.12 Similar to SSRIs and venlafaxine XR, use a low initial dose and gradually increase until the patient remits or side effects prevent further increases. SSRI and TCA combinations rarely are used unless the TCA is a relatively specific norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (eg, desipramine, nortriptyline). Because TCAs are metabolized via the cytochrome P450 2D6 system and some SSRIs—particularly fluoxetine and paroxetine—strongly inhibit 2D6, combinations of TCAs with these agents may lead to dangerously high plasma TCA levels, placing patients at risk for cardiac dysrhythmias and other side effects.16

Monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs)—particularly phenelzine—are underused for PD. They have the strongest efficacy data for any class of medications outside the first- and second-line agents and have a unique mechanism of action. In patients who can comply with the dietary and medication limitations, an MAOI generally should be the next step after nonresponse to other treatments.3

 

 

Alternative treatments

For patients who do not respond to any of the treatments described above, data from uncontrolled studies support mirtazapine, levetiracetam, and the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors duloxetine and milnacipran as monotherapy for PD.17 Pindolol—a beta blocker and 5-HT1A receptor antagonist—proved superior to placebo as an adjunctive agent to SSRIs in treatment-resistant PD in 1 of 2 trials.17 Minimal evidence supports the atypical antipsychotics risperidone and olanzapine in treatment-resistant PD, although a placebo-controlled trial of quetiapine SR coadministered with SSRIs recently was completed (NCT00619892; results pending). Atypical antipsychotics are best reserved for patients with a primary psychotic disorder or bipolar disorder who experience panic attacks.5

Panic-focused psychodynamic psychotherapy, a 12-week (approximately 24 sessions) form of psychotherapy, has demonstrated superiority vs applied relaxation therapy.18 This treatment could be considered for patients who do not respond to standard first-line treatments, but few community therapists are familiar with this method.

For many patients with PD, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) approaches are appealing. See this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com for a Box that discusses CAM for PD.

Box

Complementary and alternative medicine for panic disorder

Although no complementary and alternative medicine treatments have strong evidence of efficacy as monotherapy for panic disorder (PD), several have data that suggest benefit with little evidence of risk. These include bibliotherapy, yoga, aerobic exercise, and the dietary supplements kava and inositol.a Exercise as a treatment poses a challenge because it can induce symptoms that the patient fears, such as tachycardia and shortness of breath. In addition to any direct physiologic benefit from aerobic exercise, there is also an exposure component that can be harnessed by gradually increasing the exertion level.

Another approach undergoing extensive evaluation is Internet-provided cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Using guided CBT modules with or without therapist support, Internet-provided CBT provides an option for motivated patients unable to complete in-person CBT because of logistical factors.b A helpful resource that reviews Internet self-help and psychotherapy guided programs for PD and other psychiatric conditions is http://beacon.anu.edu.au.

References

a. Antonacci DJ, Davis E, Bloch RM, et al. CAM for your anxious patient: what the evidence says. Current Psychiatry. 2010;9(10):42-52.

b. Johnston L, Titov N, Andrews G, et al. A RCT of a transdiagnostic internet-delivered treatment for three anxiety disorders: examination of support roles and disorder-specific outcomes. PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e28079.

Maintenance treatment

Patients who complete a course of CBT for PD often follow up with several “booster sessions” at monthly or longer intervals that focus on relapse prevention techniques. Few controlled trials have evaluated pharmacotherapy discontinuation in PD. Most guidelines recommend continuing treatment for ≥1 year after achieving remission to minimize the risk of relapse.3 Researchers are focusing on whether medication dosage can be reduced during maintenance without loss of efficacy.

Treatment discontinuation

In the absence of urgent medical need, taper medications for PD gradually over several months. PD patients are highly sensitive to unusual physical sensations, which can occur while discontinuing antidepressants or benzodiazepines. If a benzodiazepine is used in conjunction with an antidepressant, the benzodiazepine should be discontinued first, so that the antidepressant can help ease benzodiazepine-associated discontinuation symptoms. A brief course of CBT during pharmacotherapy discontinuation may increase the likelihood of successful tapering.19

CASE CONTINUED: A successful switch

Ms. K has to discontinue sequential trials of fluoxetine, 40 mg/d, and venlafaxine XR, 225 mg/d because of side effects, and she does not reduce the frequency of her alprazolam use. She agrees to switch from alprazolam to clonazepam, 0.5 mg every morning and 1 mg at bedtime, and to start CBT. Clonazepam reduces her anxiety sufficiently so she can address her symptoms in therapy. Through CBT she becomes motivated to monitor her thoughts and treat them as guesses rather than facts, reviewing the evidence for her thoughts and generating rational responses. She participates in exposure exercises, which she practices between sessions, and grows to tolerate uncomfortable sensations until they no longer signal danger. After 12 CBT sessions, she is panic-free. Despite some trepidation, she agrees to a slow taper off clonazepam, reducing the dose by 0.25 mg every 2 weeks. She continues booster sessions with her therapist to manage any re-emerging anxiety. After an additional 12 weeks, she successfully discontinues clonazepam and remains panic-free.

Related Resources

Drug Brand Names

 

 

  • Alprazolam • Xanax
  • Alprazolam XR • Xanax XR
  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Clomipramine • Anafranil
  • Clonazepam • Klonopin
  • Desipramine • Norpramin
  • Diazepam • Valium
  • Duloxetine • Cymbalta
  • Escitalopram • Lexapro
  • Fluoxetine • Prozac
  • Fluvoxamine • Luvox
  • Imipramine • Tofranil
  • Levetiracetam • Keppra
  • Lorazepam • Ativan
  • Milnacipran • Savella
  • Mirtazapine • Remeron
  • Nortriptyline • Aventyl, Pamelor
  • Olanzapine • Zyprexa
  • Paroxetine • Paxil
  • Paroxetine CR • Paxil CR
  • Phenelzine • Nardil
  • Pindolol • Visken
  • Quetiapine SR • Seroquel SR
  • Risperidone • Risperdal
  • Sertraline • Zoloft
  • Venlafaxine XR • Effexor XR

Disclosures

Dr. Dunlop receives research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, and the National Institute of Mental Health. He serves as a consultant to MedAvante and Roche.

Ms. Schneider and Dr. Gerardi report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

References

1. Roy-Byrne PP, Craske MG, Stein MB. Panic disorder. Lancet. 2006;368(9540):1023-1032.

2. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed, text rev. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.

3. American Psychiatric Association. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with panic disorder. 2nd ed. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2009.

4. Dunlop BW, Davis PG. Combination treatment with benzodiazepines and SSRIs for comorbid anxiety and depression: a review. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2008;10(3):222-228.

5. Rakofsky JJ, Dunlop BW. Treating nonspecific anxiety and anxiety disorders in patients with bipolar disorder: a review. J Clin Psychiatry. 2011;72(1):81-90.

6. Sareen J, Cox BJ, Afifi TO, et al. Anxiety disorders and risk for suicidal ideation and suicide attempts: a population-based longitudinal study of adults. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(11):1249-1257.

7. Houck PR, Spiegel DA, Shear MK, et al. Reliability of the self-report version of the panic disorder severity scale. Depress Anxiety. 2002;15(4):183-185.

8. Ninan PT, Dunlop BW. Neurobiology and etiology of panic disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2005;66(suppl 4):3-7.

9. Furukawa TA, Watanabe N, Churchill R. Psychotherapy plus antidepressant for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: systematic review. Br J Psychiatry. 2006;188:305-312.

10. Barlow DH, Gorman JM, Shear MK, et al. Cognitive-behavioral therapy, imipramine, or their combination for panic disorder: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2000;283(19):2529-2536.

11. van Apeldoorn FJ, Timmerman ME, Mersch PP, et al. A randomized trial of cognitive-behavioral therapy or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or both combined for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: treatment results through 1-year follow-up. J Clin Psychiatry. 2010;71(5):574-586.

12. Bakker A, van Balkom AJ, Spinhoven P. SSRIs vs. TCAs in the treatment of panic disorder: a meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2002;106(3):163-167.

13. Bandelow B, Behnke K, Lenoir S, et al. Sertraline versus paroxetine in the treatment of panic disorder: an acute, double-blind noninferiority comparison. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(3):405-413.

14. Nardi AE, Freire RC, Mochcovitch MD, et al. A randomized, naturalistic, parallel-group study for the long-term treatment of panic disorder with clonazepam or paroxetine. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012;32(1):120-126.

15. Goddard AW, Brouette T, Almai A, et al. Early coadministration of clonazepam with sertraline for panic disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001;58(7):681-686.

16. Preskorn SH, Shah R, Neff M, et al. The potential for clinically significant drug-drug interactions involving the CYP 2D6 system: effects with fluoxetine and paroxetine versus sertraline. J Psychiatr Pract. 2007;13(1):5-12.

17. Perna G, Guerriero G, Caldirola D. Emerging drugs for panic disorder. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs. 2011;16(4):631-645.

18. Milrod B, Leon AC, Busch F, et al. A randomized controlled clinical trial of psychoanalytic psychotherapy for panic disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(2):265-272.

19. Otto MW, Pollack MH, Sachs GS, et al. Discontinuation of benzodiazepine treatment: efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy for patients with panic disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1993;150(10):1485-1490.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Boadie W. Dunlop, MD, MSCR
Assistant Professor, Director, Mood and Anxiety Disorders Program, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
Rebecca Schneider, BA
Research Coordinator, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
Maryrose Gerardi, PhD
Assistant Professor, Trauma and Anxiety Recovery Program, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
36-47
Legacy Keywords
panic disorder; fear; cognitive-behavioral therapy; antidepressants; panic attacks
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Boadie W. Dunlop, MD, MSCR
Assistant Professor, Director, Mood and Anxiety Disorders Program, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
Rebecca Schneider, BA
Research Coordinator, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
Maryrose Gerardi, PhD
Assistant Professor, Trauma and Anxiety Recovery Program, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA

Author and Disclosure Information

Boadie W. Dunlop, MD, MSCR
Assistant Professor, Director, Mood and Anxiety Disorders Program, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
Rebecca Schneider, BA
Research Coordinator, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
Maryrose Gerardi, PhD
Assistant Professor, Trauma and Anxiety Recovery Program, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA

Article PDF
Article PDF


Dr. Dunlop: State-of-the-art treatment for panic disorder


Ms. K, a 24-year-old waitress who lives with her boyfriend, was referred by her primary care physician for evaluation of panic attacks that began “out of nowhere” at work approximately 6 months ago. The unpredictable attacks occur multiple times per week, causing her to leave work and cancel shifts.

Ms. K reports that before the panic attacks began, she felt happy in her relationship, enjoyed hobbies, and was hopeful about the future. However, she has become concerned that a potentially catastrophic illness is causing her panic attacks. She researches her symptoms on the Internet, and is preoccupied with the possibility of sudden death due to an undiagnosed heart condition. Multiple visits to the emergency room have not identified any physical abnormalities. Her primary care doctor prescribed alprazolam, 0.5 mg as needed for panic attacks, which she reports is helpful, “but only in the moment of the attacks.” Ms. K avoids alcohol and illicit substances and limits her caffeine intake. She is not willing to accept that her life “feels so limited.” Her dream of earning a nursing degree and eventually starting a family now seems unattainable.

Panic disorder (PD) occurs in 3% to 5% of adults, with women affected at roughly twice the rate of men.1 Causing a broad range of distress and varying degrees of impairment, PD commonly occurs with other psychiatric disorders. For most patients, treatment is effective, but those who do not respond to initial approaches require a thoughtful, stepped approach to care. Key considerations include establishing an accurate diagnosis, clarifying comorbid illnesses, ascertaining patient beliefs and expectations, and providing appropriately dosed and maintained treatments.

Panic attacks vs PD

Panic attacks consist of rapid onset of intense anxiety, with prominent somatic symptoms, that peaks within 10 minutes (Figure).2 Attacks in which <4 of the listed symptoms occur are considered limited-symptom panic attacks.


Figure: Body locations of panic attack symptoms
Diagnosis of a panic attack requires the sudden development of intense fear or discomfort characterized by ≥4 of the 13 symptoms listed above that peaks in intensity within 10 minutes of onset
Source: Reference 2

Panic attacks can occur with various disorders, including other anxiety disorders, mood disorders, and substance intoxication or withdrawal. Because serious medical conditions can present with panic-like symptoms, the initial occurrence of such symptoms warrants consideration of physiological causes. For a Box2 that describes the differential diagnosis of panic attacks, see this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com.

Box

Differential diagnosis of panic attacks

To meet diagnostic criteria for panic disorder, panic attacks must initially occur “out of the blue,” meaning no specific object or situation induced the attack. The differential diagnosis of panic attacks includes assessing for other psychiatric disorders that may involve panic attacks. Evaluation requires considering the context in which the panic attacks occur, including their start date, pattern of attacks, instigating situations, and associated thoughts.

Social phobia. Attacks occur only during or immediately before a social interaction in which the patient fears embarrassing himself or herself.

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Attacks occur when the patient cannot avoid exposure to an obsessional fear or is prevented from performing a ritual that diffuses obsessional anxiety.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Attacks occur when confronted by a trauma-related memory or trigger.

Specific phobia. Attacks occur only when the patient encounters a specifically feared object, place, or situation, unrelated to social phobia, OCD, or PTSD.

Medical conditions. Conditions to consider include—but are not limited to—hyperthyroidism, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, cardiac dysrhythmias, hypoglycemia, asthma, partial complex seizures, and pheochromocytoma.

Source: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed, text rev. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000

A PD diagnosis requires that repeated panic attacks initially must occur from “out of the blue,” meaning no specific object or situation induced the attack. In addition, the diagnosis requires 1 of 3 types of psychological or behavioral changes as a result of the attacks (Table 1).2 Agoraphobia is diagnosed if 1 of the behavioral changes is avoidance of places or situations from which escape might be embarrassing or difficult should an attack occur. A patient can be diagnosed as having PD with agoraphobia, PD without agoraphobia, or agoraphobia without PD (ie, experiences only limited symptom panic attacks, but avoids situations or stimuli associated with them).

Table 1

Definitions of panic disorder and agoraphobia

Panic disorder
  1. Both 1 and 2:
  2. The panic attacks do not arise from the direct physiological effects of substance intoxication (eg, caffeine, cocaine) or withdrawal (eg, cannabis, gamma-hydroxybutyrate) or from a general medical condition
  3. The panic attacks are not better accounted for by another mental disorder
Agoraphobia
Anxiety about, or avoidance of, being in places or situations from which escape might be difficult or embarrassing, or in which help may not be available in the event of having an unexpected or situationally predisposed panic attack or panic-like symptoms. Agoraphobic fears typically involve characteristic clusters of situations that include being outside the home alone, being in a crowd, standing in a line, being on a bridge, or traveling in a bus, train, or automobile
Source: Reference 2
 

 

Comorbidities are common in patients with PD and predict greater difficulty achieving remission (Box).1,3-6

Box

Comorbidities: How they affect panic disorder treatment

The most common psychiatric conditions that co-occur with panic disorder (PD) are other anxiety disorders, mood disorders, personality disorders, and substance use disorders.1 Carefully assess the severity and degree of impairment or distress arising from each condition to prioritize treatment goals. For example, treating panic attacks would be a lower priority in a patient with untreated bipolar disorder.

Assessing comorbid substance abuse is important in selecting PD treatments. Benzodiazepines should almost always be avoided in patients with a history of drug abuse—illicit or prescribed. Although complete abstinence should not be a prerequisite for beginning PD treatment, detoxification and concomitant substance abuse treatment are essential.3

Comorbid mood disorders also affect the course of PD treatment. Antidepressants are effective for treating depression and PD, whereas benzodiazepines are not effective for depression.4 Antidepressants in patients with bipolar disorder are controversial because these medications might induce mixed or elevated mood states or rapid cycling. In these complicated patients, consider antidepressants lower in the treatment algorithm.5

Other conditions to consider before beginning treatment include pregnancy or the possibility of becoming pregnant in the near future and suicidal ideation. PD is associated with increased risk for suicidal ideation and progression to suicide attempts, particularly in patients with a comorbid mood or psychotic disorder.6 In addition, consider the potential impact of medications on comorbid medical conditions.

Treatment begins with education

The goal of treatment is remission of symptoms, ideally including an absence of panic attacks, agoraphobic avoidance, and anticipatory anxiety.1 The Panic Disorder Severity Scale self-report is a validated measure of panic symptoms that may be useful in clinical practice.7

The first step in treatment is educating patients about panic attacks, framing them as an overreactive fear circuit in the brain that produces physical symptoms that are not dangerous. Using a brain model that shows the location of the amygdala, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex—which play crucial roles in generating and controlling anxiety and fear—can make this discussion more concrete.8 Although highly simplified, such models allow clinicians to demonstrate that excessive reactivity of limbic regions can be reduced by both top-down (cortico-limbic connections via cognitive-behavioral therapy [CBT]) and bottom-up (pharmacotherapy directly acting on limbic structures) approaches. Such discussions lead to treatment recommendations for CBT, pharmacotherapy, or their combination.

No single treatment has emerged as the definitive “best” for PD, and no reliable predictors can guide specific treatment for an individual.3 Combining CBT with pharmacotherapy produces higher short-term response rates than either treatment alone, but in the long term, combination treatment does not appear to be superior to CBT alone.9 Base the initial treatment selection for PD on patient preference, treatment availability and cost, and comorbid medical and psychiatric conditions. For an Algorithm to guide treatment decisions, see this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com.


Algorithm: Treatment for panic disorder: A suggested algorithm
aPoor response to an SSRI should lead to a switch to venlafaxine extended-release, and vice versa
bBenzodiazepines are relatively contraindicated in geriatric patients and patients with a history of substance abuse or dependence
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; MAOI: monoamine oxidase inhibitor; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; TCA: tricyclic antidepressant; Ven XR: venlafaxine extended-release

First-line treatments

Psychotherapy. CBT is the most efficacious psychotherapy for PD. Twelve to 15 sessions of CBT has demonstrated efficacy for PD, with additional effects on comorbid anxiety and depressive symptoms.10 No large clinical trials of CBT have used cognitive restructuring alone; all have included at least some component of exposure that requires the patient to confront feared physical sensations. Gains during treatment may be steady and gradual or sudden and uneven, with rapid improvement in some but not all symptoms. CBT and pharmacotherapy have demonstrated similar levels of benefit in short-term trials, but CBT has proven superior in most9 but not all11 trials evaluating long-term outcomes, particularly compared with pharmacotherapy that is discontinued during follow-up. Although less studied, group CBT also may be considered if a patient cannot afford individual CBT.

Pharmacotherapy. Evidence supports selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), venlafaxine extended-release (XR), benzodiazepines, and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) as effective treatments for PD.3 No class of medication has demonstrated superiority over others in short-term treatment.3,12 Because of the medical risks associated with benzodiazepines and TCAs, an SSRI or venlafaxine XR should be the first medication option for most patients. Fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, and venlafaxine XR are FDA-approved for PD. Paroxetine is associated with weight gain and may increase the risk for panic recurrence upon discontinuation more than sertraline, making it a less favorable option for many patients.13 Start doses at half the normal starting dose used for treating major depressive disorder and continue for 4 to 7 days, then increase to the minimal effective dose. For a Table3 that lists dosing recommendations for antidepressants to treat PD, see this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com. If there is no improvement by 4 weeks, increase the dose every 2 to 4 weeks until remission is achieved or side effects prevent further dose increases.

 

 

Table

Recommended doses for antidepressants used to treat panic disorder

MedicationStarting dose (mg/d)Therapeutic range (mg/d)
SSRIs
   Citalopram1020 to 40
   Escitalopram510 to 40
   Fluoxetine5 to 1020 to 80
   Fluvoxamine25100 to 300
   Paroxetine1020 to 80
   Paroxetine CR12.525 to 50
   Sertraline25100 to 200
SNRIs
   Duloxetine20 to 3060 to 120
   Venlafaxine XR37.5150 to 225
TCAs
   Clomipramine10 to 25100 to 300
   Imipramine10100 to 300
MAOI
   Phenelzine1545 to 90
CR: controlled release; MAOI: monoamine oxidase inhibitor; SNRIs: serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors; SSRIs: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; TCAs: tricyclic antidepressants; XR: extended release
Source: American Psychiatric Association. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with panic disorder. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2009

Treatment nonresponse. True non-response needs to be distinguished from poor response caused by inadequate treatment delivery, eg, patients not completing homework assignments in CBT or not adhering to pharmacotherapy. Asking patients about adverse effects or personal and family beliefs about treatment may reveal reasons for nonadherence.

Second-line treatments

Little data are available to guide next-step treatment options in patients who don’t achieve remission from their initial treatment. Patients who benefit from an SSRI, venlafaxine XR, or CBT but still have symptoms should be started on combination treatment. For a patient who experiences complete non-response to the initial treatment, discontinue the first treatment and switch to the other modality. In general, completely ineffective treatments should be discontinued when another treatment is added, but when partial improvement (>30%) occurs, continue the original treatment and augment it with another approach.

For patients pursuing pharmacotherapy, poor response to an adequate SSRI trial usually should lead to a switch to venlafaxine XR, and vice versa. Failure to respond to both of these medication classes should prompt a switch to a benzodiazepine or TCA.

Benzodiazepines are a fast-acting, effective treatment for PD, with efficacy similar to SSRIs in acute and long-term treatment.14 Benzodiazepines may be prescribed with antidepressants at the beginning of treatment to improve response speed.15 Clonazepam and alprazolam are FDA-approved for treating PD. A high-potency, long-acting agent, clonazepam is the preferred initial benzodiazepine, dosed 0.5 to 4 mg/d on a fixed schedule. Although substantial data support using alprazolam for PD, it requires more frequent dosing and has a greater risk of rebound anxiety and abuse potential because of its more rapid onset of action. Compared with immediate-release alprazolam, alprazolam XR has a slower absorption rate and longer steady state in the blood, but this formulation does not have lower abuse potential or greater efficacy. Although not FDA-approved for PD, diazepam and lorazepam also have proven efficacy for PD.3

Benzodiazepines should be considered contraindicated in patients with a history of substance abuse, except in select cases.4 Benzodiazepines generally should be avoided in older patients because of increased risk for falls, cognitive impairment, and motor vehicle accidents. Table 2 lists situations in which benzodiazepines may be used to treat PD.

Table 2

Clinical scenarios in which to consider using benzodiazepines

Coadministration for 2 to 4 weeks when initiating treatment with an SSRI or venlafaxine XR to achieve more rapid relief and mitigate potential antidepressant-induced anxiety
For patients who wish to avoid antidepressants because of concern about sexual dysfunction
For patients who need chronic aspirin or an NSAID, which may increase the risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding when taken in combination with an SSRI
For patients with comorbid bipolar disorder or epilepsy
Next-step monotherapy or augmentation in patients who respond poorly to an SSRI, venlafaxine XR, TCA, or CBT
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; NSAID: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; TCA: tricyclic antidepressant; XR: extended release

TCAs are effective as monotherapy for PD. Most support comes from studies of imipramine or clomipramine.12 Similar to SSRIs and venlafaxine XR, use a low initial dose and gradually increase until the patient remits or side effects prevent further increases. SSRI and TCA combinations rarely are used unless the TCA is a relatively specific norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (eg, desipramine, nortriptyline). Because TCAs are metabolized via the cytochrome P450 2D6 system and some SSRIs—particularly fluoxetine and paroxetine—strongly inhibit 2D6, combinations of TCAs with these agents may lead to dangerously high plasma TCA levels, placing patients at risk for cardiac dysrhythmias and other side effects.16

Monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs)—particularly phenelzine—are underused for PD. They have the strongest efficacy data for any class of medications outside the first- and second-line agents and have a unique mechanism of action. In patients who can comply with the dietary and medication limitations, an MAOI generally should be the next step after nonresponse to other treatments.3

 

 

Alternative treatments

For patients who do not respond to any of the treatments described above, data from uncontrolled studies support mirtazapine, levetiracetam, and the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors duloxetine and milnacipran as monotherapy for PD.17 Pindolol—a beta blocker and 5-HT1A receptor antagonist—proved superior to placebo as an adjunctive agent to SSRIs in treatment-resistant PD in 1 of 2 trials.17 Minimal evidence supports the atypical antipsychotics risperidone and olanzapine in treatment-resistant PD, although a placebo-controlled trial of quetiapine SR coadministered with SSRIs recently was completed (NCT00619892; results pending). Atypical antipsychotics are best reserved for patients with a primary psychotic disorder or bipolar disorder who experience panic attacks.5

Panic-focused psychodynamic psychotherapy, a 12-week (approximately 24 sessions) form of psychotherapy, has demonstrated superiority vs applied relaxation therapy.18 This treatment could be considered for patients who do not respond to standard first-line treatments, but few community therapists are familiar with this method.

For many patients with PD, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) approaches are appealing. See this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com for a Box that discusses CAM for PD.

Box

Complementary and alternative medicine for panic disorder

Although no complementary and alternative medicine treatments have strong evidence of efficacy as monotherapy for panic disorder (PD), several have data that suggest benefit with little evidence of risk. These include bibliotherapy, yoga, aerobic exercise, and the dietary supplements kava and inositol.a Exercise as a treatment poses a challenge because it can induce symptoms that the patient fears, such as tachycardia and shortness of breath. In addition to any direct physiologic benefit from aerobic exercise, there is also an exposure component that can be harnessed by gradually increasing the exertion level.

Another approach undergoing extensive evaluation is Internet-provided cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Using guided CBT modules with or without therapist support, Internet-provided CBT provides an option for motivated patients unable to complete in-person CBT because of logistical factors.b A helpful resource that reviews Internet self-help and psychotherapy guided programs for PD and other psychiatric conditions is http://beacon.anu.edu.au.

References

a. Antonacci DJ, Davis E, Bloch RM, et al. CAM for your anxious patient: what the evidence says. Current Psychiatry. 2010;9(10):42-52.

b. Johnston L, Titov N, Andrews G, et al. A RCT of a transdiagnostic internet-delivered treatment for three anxiety disorders: examination of support roles and disorder-specific outcomes. PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e28079.

Maintenance treatment

Patients who complete a course of CBT for PD often follow up with several “booster sessions” at monthly or longer intervals that focus on relapse prevention techniques. Few controlled trials have evaluated pharmacotherapy discontinuation in PD. Most guidelines recommend continuing treatment for ≥1 year after achieving remission to minimize the risk of relapse.3 Researchers are focusing on whether medication dosage can be reduced during maintenance without loss of efficacy.

Treatment discontinuation

In the absence of urgent medical need, taper medications for PD gradually over several months. PD patients are highly sensitive to unusual physical sensations, which can occur while discontinuing antidepressants or benzodiazepines. If a benzodiazepine is used in conjunction with an antidepressant, the benzodiazepine should be discontinued first, so that the antidepressant can help ease benzodiazepine-associated discontinuation symptoms. A brief course of CBT during pharmacotherapy discontinuation may increase the likelihood of successful tapering.19

CASE CONTINUED: A successful switch

Ms. K has to discontinue sequential trials of fluoxetine, 40 mg/d, and venlafaxine XR, 225 mg/d because of side effects, and she does not reduce the frequency of her alprazolam use. She agrees to switch from alprazolam to clonazepam, 0.5 mg every morning and 1 mg at bedtime, and to start CBT. Clonazepam reduces her anxiety sufficiently so she can address her symptoms in therapy. Through CBT she becomes motivated to monitor her thoughts and treat them as guesses rather than facts, reviewing the evidence for her thoughts and generating rational responses. She participates in exposure exercises, which she practices between sessions, and grows to tolerate uncomfortable sensations until they no longer signal danger. After 12 CBT sessions, she is panic-free. Despite some trepidation, she agrees to a slow taper off clonazepam, reducing the dose by 0.25 mg every 2 weeks. She continues booster sessions with her therapist to manage any re-emerging anxiety. After an additional 12 weeks, she successfully discontinues clonazepam and remains panic-free.

Related Resources

Drug Brand Names

 

 

  • Alprazolam • Xanax
  • Alprazolam XR • Xanax XR
  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Clomipramine • Anafranil
  • Clonazepam • Klonopin
  • Desipramine • Norpramin
  • Diazepam • Valium
  • Duloxetine • Cymbalta
  • Escitalopram • Lexapro
  • Fluoxetine • Prozac
  • Fluvoxamine • Luvox
  • Imipramine • Tofranil
  • Levetiracetam • Keppra
  • Lorazepam • Ativan
  • Milnacipran • Savella
  • Mirtazapine • Remeron
  • Nortriptyline • Aventyl, Pamelor
  • Olanzapine • Zyprexa
  • Paroxetine • Paxil
  • Paroxetine CR • Paxil CR
  • Phenelzine • Nardil
  • Pindolol • Visken
  • Quetiapine SR • Seroquel SR
  • Risperidone • Risperdal
  • Sertraline • Zoloft
  • Venlafaxine XR • Effexor XR

Disclosures

Dr. Dunlop receives research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, and the National Institute of Mental Health. He serves as a consultant to MedAvante and Roche.

Ms. Schneider and Dr. Gerardi report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.


Dr. Dunlop: State-of-the-art treatment for panic disorder


Ms. K, a 24-year-old waitress who lives with her boyfriend, was referred by her primary care physician for evaluation of panic attacks that began “out of nowhere” at work approximately 6 months ago. The unpredictable attacks occur multiple times per week, causing her to leave work and cancel shifts.

Ms. K reports that before the panic attacks began, she felt happy in her relationship, enjoyed hobbies, and was hopeful about the future. However, she has become concerned that a potentially catastrophic illness is causing her panic attacks. She researches her symptoms on the Internet, and is preoccupied with the possibility of sudden death due to an undiagnosed heart condition. Multiple visits to the emergency room have not identified any physical abnormalities. Her primary care doctor prescribed alprazolam, 0.5 mg as needed for panic attacks, which she reports is helpful, “but only in the moment of the attacks.” Ms. K avoids alcohol and illicit substances and limits her caffeine intake. She is not willing to accept that her life “feels so limited.” Her dream of earning a nursing degree and eventually starting a family now seems unattainable.

Panic disorder (PD) occurs in 3% to 5% of adults, with women affected at roughly twice the rate of men.1 Causing a broad range of distress and varying degrees of impairment, PD commonly occurs with other psychiatric disorders. For most patients, treatment is effective, but those who do not respond to initial approaches require a thoughtful, stepped approach to care. Key considerations include establishing an accurate diagnosis, clarifying comorbid illnesses, ascertaining patient beliefs and expectations, and providing appropriately dosed and maintained treatments.

Panic attacks vs PD

Panic attacks consist of rapid onset of intense anxiety, with prominent somatic symptoms, that peaks within 10 minutes (Figure).2 Attacks in which <4 of the listed symptoms occur are considered limited-symptom panic attacks.


Figure: Body locations of panic attack symptoms
Diagnosis of a panic attack requires the sudden development of intense fear or discomfort characterized by ≥4 of the 13 symptoms listed above that peaks in intensity within 10 minutes of onset
Source: Reference 2

Panic attacks can occur with various disorders, including other anxiety disorders, mood disorders, and substance intoxication or withdrawal. Because serious medical conditions can present with panic-like symptoms, the initial occurrence of such symptoms warrants consideration of physiological causes. For a Box2 that describes the differential diagnosis of panic attacks, see this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com.

Box

Differential diagnosis of panic attacks

To meet diagnostic criteria for panic disorder, panic attacks must initially occur “out of the blue,” meaning no specific object or situation induced the attack. The differential diagnosis of panic attacks includes assessing for other psychiatric disorders that may involve panic attacks. Evaluation requires considering the context in which the panic attacks occur, including their start date, pattern of attacks, instigating situations, and associated thoughts.

Social phobia. Attacks occur only during or immediately before a social interaction in which the patient fears embarrassing himself or herself.

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Attacks occur when the patient cannot avoid exposure to an obsessional fear or is prevented from performing a ritual that diffuses obsessional anxiety.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Attacks occur when confronted by a trauma-related memory or trigger.

Specific phobia. Attacks occur only when the patient encounters a specifically feared object, place, or situation, unrelated to social phobia, OCD, or PTSD.

Medical conditions. Conditions to consider include—but are not limited to—hyperthyroidism, pulmonary embolism, myocardial infarction, cardiac dysrhythmias, hypoglycemia, asthma, partial complex seizures, and pheochromocytoma.

Source: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed, text rev. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000

A PD diagnosis requires that repeated panic attacks initially must occur from “out of the blue,” meaning no specific object or situation induced the attack. In addition, the diagnosis requires 1 of 3 types of psychological or behavioral changes as a result of the attacks (Table 1).2 Agoraphobia is diagnosed if 1 of the behavioral changes is avoidance of places or situations from which escape might be embarrassing or difficult should an attack occur. A patient can be diagnosed as having PD with agoraphobia, PD without agoraphobia, or agoraphobia without PD (ie, experiences only limited symptom panic attacks, but avoids situations or stimuli associated with them).

Table 1

Definitions of panic disorder and agoraphobia

Panic disorder
  1. Both 1 and 2:
  2. The panic attacks do not arise from the direct physiological effects of substance intoxication (eg, caffeine, cocaine) or withdrawal (eg, cannabis, gamma-hydroxybutyrate) or from a general medical condition
  3. The panic attacks are not better accounted for by another mental disorder
Agoraphobia
Anxiety about, or avoidance of, being in places or situations from which escape might be difficult or embarrassing, or in which help may not be available in the event of having an unexpected or situationally predisposed panic attack or panic-like symptoms. Agoraphobic fears typically involve characteristic clusters of situations that include being outside the home alone, being in a crowd, standing in a line, being on a bridge, or traveling in a bus, train, or automobile
Source: Reference 2
 

 

Comorbidities are common in patients with PD and predict greater difficulty achieving remission (Box).1,3-6

Box

Comorbidities: How they affect panic disorder treatment

The most common psychiatric conditions that co-occur with panic disorder (PD) are other anxiety disorders, mood disorders, personality disorders, and substance use disorders.1 Carefully assess the severity and degree of impairment or distress arising from each condition to prioritize treatment goals. For example, treating panic attacks would be a lower priority in a patient with untreated bipolar disorder.

Assessing comorbid substance abuse is important in selecting PD treatments. Benzodiazepines should almost always be avoided in patients with a history of drug abuse—illicit or prescribed. Although complete abstinence should not be a prerequisite for beginning PD treatment, detoxification and concomitant substance abuse treatment are essential.3

Comorbid mood disorders also affect the course of PD treatment. Antidepressants are effective for treating depression and PD, whereas benzodiazepines are not effective for depression.4 Antidepressants in patients with bipolar disorder are controversial because these medications might induce mixed or elevated mood states or rapid cycling. In these complicated patients, consider antidepressants lower in the treatment algorithm.5

Other conditions to consider before beginning treatment include pregnancy or the possibility of becoming pregnant in the near future and suicidal ideation. PD is associated with increased risk for suicidal ideation and progression to suicide attempts, particularly in patients with a comorbid mood or psychotic disorder.6 In addition, consider the potential impact of medications on comorbid medical conditions.

Treatment begins with education

The goal of treatment is remission of symptoms, ideally including an absence of panic attacks, agoraphobic avoidance, and anticipatory anxiety.1 The Panic Disorder Severity Scale self-report is a validated measure of panic symptoms that may be useful in clinical practice.7

The first step in treatment is educating patients about panic attacks, framing them as an overreactive fear circuit in the brain that produces physical symptoms that are not dangerous. Using a brain model that shows the location of the amygdala, hippocampus, and prefrontal cortex—which play crucial roles in generating and controlling anxiety and fear—can make this discussion more concrete.8 Although highly simplified, such models allow clinicians to demonstrate that excessive reactivity of limbic regions can be reduced by both top-down (cortico-limbic connections via cognitive-behavioral therapy [CBT]) and bottom-up (pharmacotherapy directly acting on limbic structures) approaches. Such discussions lead to treatment recommendations for CBT, pharmacotherapy, or their combination.

No single treatment has emerged as the definitive “best” for PD, and no reliable predictors can guide specific treatment for an individual.3 Combining CBT with pharmacotherapy produces higher short-term response rates than either treatment alone, but in the long term, combination treatment does not appear to be superior to CBT alone.9 Base the initial treatment selection for PD on patient preference, treatment availability and cost, and comorbid medical and psychiatric conditions. For an Algorithm to guide treatment decisions, see this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com.


Algorithm: Treatment for panic disorder: A suggested algorithm
aPoor response to an SSRI should lead to a switch to venlafaxine extended-release, and vice versa
bBenzodiazepines are relatively contraindicated in geriatric patients and patients with a history of substance abuse or dependence
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; MAOI: monoamine oxidase inhibitor; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; TCA: tricyclic antidepressant; Ven XR: venlafaxine extended-release

First-line treatments

Psychotherapy. CBT is the most efficacious psychotherapy for PD. Twelve to 15 sessions of CBT has demonstrated efficacy for PD, with additional effects on comorbid anxiety and depressive symptoms.10 No large clinical trials of CBT have used cognitive restructuring alone; all have included at least some component of exposure that requires the patient to confront feared physical sensations. Gains during treatment may be steady and gradual or sudden and uneven, with rapid improvement in some but not all symptoms. CBT and pharmacotherapy have demonstrated similar levels of benefit in short-term trials, but CBT has proven superior in most9 but not all11 trials evaluating long-term outcomes, particularly compared with pharmacotherapy that is discontinued during follow-up. Although less studied, group CBT also may be considered if a patient cannot afford individual CBT.

Pharmacotherapy. Evidence supports selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), venlafaxine extended-release (XR), benzodiazepines, and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) as effective treatments for PD.3 No class of medication has demonstrated superiority over others in short-term treatment.3,12 Because of the medical risks associated with benzodiazepines and TCAs, an SSRI or venlafaxine XR should be the first medication option for most patients. Fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, and venlafaxine XR are FDA-approved for PD. Paroxetine is associated with weight gain and may increase the risk for panic recurrence upon discontinuation more than sertraline, making it a less favorable option for many patients.13 Start doses at half the normal starting dose used for treating major depressive disorder and continue for 4 to 7 days, then increase to the minimal effective dose. For a Table3 that lists dosing recommendations for antidepressants to treat PD, see this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com. If there is no improvement by 4 weeks, increase the dose every 2 to 4 weeks until remission is achieved or side effects prevent further dose increases.

 

 

Table

Recommended doses for antidepressants used to treat panic disorder

MedicationStarting dose (mg/d)Therapeutic range (mg/d)
SSRIs
   Citalopram1020 to 40
   Escitalopram510 to 40
   Fluoxetine5 to 1020 to 80
   Fluvoxamine25100 to 300
   Paroxetine1020 to 80
   Paroxetine CR12.525 to 50
   Sertraline25100 to 200
SNRIs
   Duloxetine20 to 3060 to 120
   Venlafaxine XR37.5150 to 225
TCAs
   Clomipramine10 to 25100 to 300
   Imipramine10100 to 300
MAOI
   Phenelzine1545 to 90
CR: controlled release; MAOI: monoamine oxidase inhibitor; SNRIs: serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors; SSRIs: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; TCAs: tricyclic antidepressants; XR: extended release
Source: American Psychiatric Association. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with panic disorder. 2nd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2009

Treatment nonresponse. True non-response needs to be distinguished from poor response caused by inadequate treatment delivery, eg, patients not completing homework assignments in CBT or not adhering to pharmacotherapy. Asking patients about adverse effects or personal and family beliefs about treatment may reveal reasons for nonadherence.

Second-line treatments

Little data are available to guide next-step treatment options in patients who don’t achieve remission from their initial treatment. Patients who benefit from an SSRI, venlafaxine XR, or CBT but still have symptoms should be started on combination treatment. For a patient who experiences complete non-response to the initial treatment, discontinue the first treatment and switch to the other modality. In general, completely ineffective treatments should be discontinued when another treatment is added, but when partial improvement (>30%) occurs, continue the original treatment and augment it with another approach.

For patients pursuing pharmacotherapy, poor response to an adequate SSRI trial usually should lead to a switch to venlafaxine XR, and vice versa. Failure to respond to both of these medication classes should prompt a switch to a benzodiazepine or TCA.

Benzodiazepines are a fast-acting, effective treatment for PD, with efficacy similar to SSRIs in acute and long-term treatment.14 Benzodiazepines may be prescribed with antidepressants at the beginning of treatment to improve response speed.15 Clonazepam and alprazolam are FDA-approved for treating PD. A high-potency, long-acting agent, clonazepam is the preferred initial benzodiazepine, dosed 0.5 to 4 mg/d on a fixed schedule. Although substantial data support using alprazolam for PD, it requires more frequent dosing and has a greater risk of rebound anxiety and abuse potential because of its more rapid onset of action. Compared with immediate-release alprazolam, alprazolam XR has a slower absorption rate and longer steady state in the blood, but this formulation does not have lower abuse potential or greater efficacy. Although not FDA-approved for PD, diazepam and lorazepam also have proven efficacy for PD.3

Benzodiazepines should be considered contraindicated in patients with a history of substance abuse, except in select cases.4 Benzodiazepines generally should be avoided in older patients because of increased risk for falls, cognitive impairment, and motor vehicle accidents. Table 2 lists situations in which benzodiazepines may be used to treat PD.

Table 2

Clinical scenarios in which to consider using benzodiazepines

Coadministration for 2 to 4 weeks when initiating treatment with an SSRI or venlafaxine XR to achieve more rapid relief and mitigate potential antidepressant-induced anxiety
For patients who wish to avoid antidepressants because of concern about sexual dysfunction
For patients who need chronic aspirin or an NSAID, which may increase the risk for upper gastrointestinal bleeding when taken in combination with an SSRI
For patients with comorbid bipolar disorder or epilepsy
Next-step monotherapy or augmentation in patients who respond poorly to an SSRI, venlafaxine XR, TCA, or CBT
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; NSAID: nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor; TCA: tricyclic antidepressant; XR: extended release

TCAs are effective as monotherapy for PD. Most support comes from studies of imipramine or clomipramine.12 Similar to SSRIs and venlafaxine XR, use a low initial dose and gradually increase until the patient remits or side effects prevent further increases. SSRI and TCA combinations rarely are used unless the TCA is a relatively specific norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (eg, desipramine, nortriptyline). Because TCAs are metabolized via the cytochrome P450 2D6 system and some SSRIs—particularly fluoxetine and paroxetine—strongly inhibit 2D6, combinations of TCAs with these agents may lead to dangerously high plasma TCA levels, placing patients at risk for cardiac dysrhythmias and other side effects.16

Monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs)—particularly phenelzine—are underused for PD. They have the strongest efficacy data for any class of medications outside the first- and second-line agents and have a unique mechanism of action. In patients who can comply with the dietary and medication limitations, an MAOI generally should be the next step after nonresponse to other treatments.3

 

 

Alternative treatments

For patients who do not respond to any of the treatments described above, data from uncontrolled studies support mirtazapine, levetiracetam, and the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors duloxetine and milnacipran as monotherapy for PD.17 Pindolol—a beta blocker and 5-HT1A receptor antagonist—proved superior to placebo as an adjunctive agent to SSRIs in treatment-resistant PD in 1 of 2 trials.17 Minimal evidence supports the atypical antipsychotics risperidone and olanzapine in treatment-resistant PD, although a placebo-controlled trial of quetiapine SR coadministered with SSRIs recently was completed (NCT00619892; results pending). Atypical antipsychotics are best reserved for patients with a primary psychotic disorder or bipolar disorder who experience panic attacks.5

Panic-focused psychodynamic psychotherapy, a 12-week (approximately 24 sessions) form of psychotherapy, has demonstrated superiority vs applied relaxation therapy.18 This treatment could be considered for patients who do not respond to standard first-line treatments, but few community therapists are familiar with this method.

For many patients with PD, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) approaches are appealing. See this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com for a Box that discusses CAM for PD.

Box

Complementary and alternative medicine for panic disorder

Although no complementary and alternative medicine treatments have strong evidence of efficacy as monotherapy for panic disorder (PD), several have data that suggest benefit with little evidence of risk. These include bibliotherapy, yoga, aerobic exercise, and the dietary supplements kava and inositol.a Exercise as a treatment poses a challenge because it can induce symptoms that the patient fears, such as tachycardia and shortness of breath. In addition to any direct physiologic benefit from aerobic exercise, there is also an exposure component that can be harnessed by gradually increasing the exertion level.

Another approach undergoing extensive evaluation is Internet-provided cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT). Using guided CBT modules with or without therapist support, Internet-provided CBT provides an option for motivated patients unable to complete in-person CBT because of logistical factors.b A helpful resource that reviews Internet self-help and psychotherapy guided programs for PD and other psychiatric conditions is http://beacon.anu.edu.au.

References

a. Antonacci DJ, Davis E, Bloch RM, et al. CAM for your anxious patient: what the evidence says. Current Psychiatry. 2010;9(10):42-52.

b. Johnston L, Titov N, Andrews G, et al. A RCT of a transdiagnostic internet-delivered treatment for three anxiety disorders: examination of support roles and disorder-specific outcomes. PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e28079.

Maintenance treatment

Patients who complete a course of CBT for PD often follow up with several “booster sessions” at monthly or longer intervals that focus on relapse prevention techniques. Few controlled trials have evaluated pharmacotherapy discontinuation in PD. Most guidelines recommend continuing treatment for ≥1 year after achieving remission to minimize the risk of relapse.3 Researchers are focusing on whether medication dosage can be reduced during maintenance without loss of efficacy.

Treatment discontinuation

In the absence of urgent medical need, taper medications for PD gradually over several months. PD patients are highly sensitive to unusual physical sensations, which can occur while discontinuing antidepressants or benzodiazepines. If a benzodiazepine is used in conjunction with an antidepressant, the benzodiazepine should be discontinued first, so that the antidepressant can help ease benzodiazepine-associated discontinuation symptoms. A brief course of CBT during pharmacotherapy discontinuation may increase the likelihood of successful tapering.19

CASE CONTINUED: A successful switch

Ms. K has to discontinue sequential trials of fluoxetine, 40 mg/d, and venlafaxine XR, 225 mg/d because of side effects, and she does not reduce the frequency of her alprazolam use. She agrees to switch from alprazolam to clonazepam, 0.5 mg every morning and 1 mg at bedtime, and to start CBT. Clonazepam reduces her anxiety sufficiently so she can address her symptoms in therapy. Through CBT she becomes motivated to monitor her thoughts and treat them as guesses rather than facts, reviewing the evidence for her thoughts and generating rational responses. She participates in exposure exercises, which she practices between sessions, and grows to tolerate uncomfortable sensations until they no longer signal danger. After 12 CBT sessions, she is panic-free. Despite some trepidation, she agrees to a slow taper off clonazepam, reducing the dose by 0.25 mg every 2 weeks. She continues booster sessions with her therapist to manage any re-emerging anxiety. After an additional 12 weeks, she successfully discontinues clonazepam and remains panic-free.

Related Resources

Drug Brand Names

 

 

  • Alprazolam • Xanax
  • Alprazolam XR • Xanax XR
  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Clomipramine • Anafranil
  • Clonazepam • Klonopin
  • Desipramine • Norpramin
  • Diazepam • Valium
  • Duloxetine • Cymbalta
  • Escitalopram • Lexapro
  • Fluoxetine • Prozac
  • Fluvoxamine • Luvox
  • Imipramine • Tofranil
  • Levetiracetam • Keppra
  • Lorazepam • Ativan
  • Milnacipran • Savella
  • Mirtazapine • Remeron
  • Nortriptyline • Aventyl, Pamelor
  • Olanzapine • Zyprexa
  • Paroxetine • Paxil
  • Paroxetine CR • Paxil CR
  • Phenelzine • Nardil
  • Pindolol • Visken
  • Quetiapine SR • Seroquel SR
  • Risperidone • Risperdal
  • Sertraline • Zoloft
  • Venlafaxine XR • Effexor XR

Disclosures

Dr. Dunlop receives research support from Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, and the National Institute of Mental Health. He serves as a consultant to MedAvante and Roche.

Ms. Schneider and Dr. Gerardi report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

References

1. Roy-Byrne PP, Craske MG, Stein MB. Panic disorder. Lancet. 2006;368(9540):1023-1032.

2. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed, text rev. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.

3. American Psychiatric Association. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with panic disorder. 2nd ed. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2009.

4. Dunlop BW, Davis PG. Combination treatment with benzodiazepines and SSRIs for comorbid anxiety and depression: a review. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2008;10(3):222-228.

5. Rakofsky JJ, Dunlop BW. Treating nonspecific anxiety and anxiety disorders in patients with bipolar disorder: a review. J Clin Psychiatry. 2011;72(1):81-90.

6. Sareen J, Cox BJ, Afifi TO, et al. Anxiety disorders and risk for suicidal ideation and suicide attempts: a population-based longitudinal study of adults. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(11):1249-1257.

7. Houck PR, Spiegel DA, Shear MK, et al. Reliability of the self-report version of the panic disorder severity scale. Depress Anxiety. 2002;15(4):183-185.

8. Ninan PT, Dunlop BW. Neurobiology and etiology of panic disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2005;66(suppl 4):3-7.

9. Furukawa TA, Watanabe N, Churchill R. Psychotherapy plus antidepressant for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: systematic review. Br J Psychiatry. 2006;188:305-312.

10. Barlow DH, Gorman JM, Shear MK, et al. Cognitive-behavioral therapy, imipramine, or their combination for panic disorder: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2000;283(19):2529-2536.

11. van Apeldoorn FJ, Timmerman ME, Mersch PP, et al. A randomized trial of cognitive-behavioral therapy or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or both combined for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: treatment results through 1-year follow-up. J Clin Psychiatry. 2010;71(5):574-586.

12. Bakker A, van Balkom AJ, Spinhoven P. SSRIs vs. TCAs in the treatment of panic disorder: a meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2002;106(3):163-167.

13. Bandelow B, Behnke K, Lenoir S, et al. Sertraline versus paroxetine in the treatment of panic disorder: an acute, double-blind noninferiority comparison. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(3):405-413.

14. Nardi AE, Freire RC, Mochcovitch MD, et al. A randomized, naturalistic, parallel-group study for the long-term treatment of panic disorder with clonazepam or paroxetine. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012;32(1):120-126.

15. Goddard AW, Brouette T, Almai A, et al. Early coadministration of clonazepam with sertraline for panic disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001;58(7):681-686.

16. Preskorn SH, Shah R, Neff M, et al. The potential for clinically significant drug-drug interactions involving the CYP 2D6 system: effects with fluoxetine and paroxetine versus sertraline. J Psychiatr Pract. 2007;13(1):5-12.

17. Perna G, Guerriero G, Caldirola D. Emerging drugs for panic disorder. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs. 2011;16(4):631-645.

18. Milrod B, Leon AC, Busch F, et al. A randomized controlled clinical trial of psychoanalytic psychotherapy for panic disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(2):265-272.

19. Otto MW, Pollack MH, Sachs GS, et al. Discontinuation of benzodiazepine treatment: efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy for patients with panic disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1993;150(10):1485-1490.

References

1. Roy-Byrne PP, Craske MG, Stein MB. Panic disorder. Lancet. 2006;368(9540):1023-1032.

2. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed, text rev. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.

3. American Psychiatric Association. Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with panic disorder. 2nd ed. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2009.

4. Dunlop BW, Davis PG. Combination treatment with benzodiazepines and SSRIs for comorbid anxiety and depression: a review. Prim Care Companion J Clin Psychiatry. 2008;10(3):222-228.

5. Rakofsky JJ, Dunlop BW. Treating nonspecific anxiety and anxiety disorders in patients with bipolar disorder: a review. J Clin Psychiatry. 2011;72(1):81-90.

6. Sareen J, Cox BJ, Afifi TO, et al. Anxiety disorders and risk for suicidal ideation and suicide attempts: a population-based longitudinal study of adults. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(11):1249-1257.

7. Houck PR, Spiegel DA, Shear MK, et al. Reliability of the self-report version of the panic disorder severity scale. Depress Anxiety. 2002;15(4):183-185.

8. Ninan PT, Dunlop BW. Neurobiology and etiology of panic disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 2005;66(suppl 4):3-7.

9. Furukawa TA, Watanabe N, Churchill R. Psychotherapy plus antidepressant for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: systematic review. Br J Psychiatry. 2006;188:305-312.

10. Barlow DH, Gorman JM, Shear MK, et al. Cognitive-behavioral therapy, imipramine, or their combination for panic disorder: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2000;283(19):2529-2536.

11. van Apeldoorn FJ, Timmerman ME, Mersch PP, et al. A randomized trial of cognitive-behavioral therapy or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor or both combined for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: treatment results through 1-year follow-up. J Clin Psychiatry. 2010;71(5):574-586.

12. Bakker A, van Balkom AJ, Spinhoven P. SSRIs vs. TCAs in the treatment of panic disorder: a meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2002;106(3):163-167.

13. Bandelow B, Behnke K, Lenoir S, et al. Sertraline versus paroxetine in the treatment of panic disorder: an acute, double-blind noninferiority comparison. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(3):405-413.

14. Nardi AE, Freire RC, Mochcovitch MD, et al. A randomized, naturalistic, parallel-group study for the long-term treatment of panic disorder with clonazepam or paroxetine. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2012;32(1):120-126.

15. Goddard AW, Brouette T, Almai A, et al. Early coadministration of clonazepam with sertraline for panic disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2001;58(7):681-686.

16. Preskorn SH, Shah R, Neff M, et al. The potential for clinically significant drug-drug interactions involving the CYP 2D6 system: effects with fluoxetine and paroxetine versus sertraline. J Psychiatr Pract. 2007;13(1):5-12.

17. Perna G, Guerriero G, Caldirola D. Emerging drugs for panic disorder. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs. 2011;16(4):631-645.

18. Milrod B, Leon AC, Busch F, et al. A randomized controlled clinical trial of psychoanalytic psychotherapy for panic disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(2):265-272.

19. Otto MW, Pollack MH, Sachs GS, et al. Discontinuation of benzodiazepine treatment: efficacy of cognitive-behavioral therapy for patients with panic disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 1993;150(10):1485-1490.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Page Number
36-47
Page Number
36-47
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Panic disorder: Break the fear circuit
Display Headline
Panic disorder: Break the fear circuit
Legacy Keywords
panic disorder; fear; cognitive-behavioral therapy; antidepressants; panic attacks
Legacy Keywords
panic disorder; fear; cognitive-behavioral therapy; antidepressants; panic attacks
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

How to collaborate effectively with psychiatric nurse practitioners

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
How to collaborate effectively with psychiatric nurse practitioners

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Psychiatrists who are accustomed to working with “med/surg” or psychiatric nurses may be less familiar with how to collaborate with more specialized psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners (PMHNPs). These clinicians play an important role in delivering mental health services, which is likely to continue because of the physician shortage in the United States1 and increasing mental health care needs from passage of the Affordable Health Care Act and the Mental Health Parity Act.2 These specialty trained, master’s level nurses work with psychiatrists in outpatient clinics, hospital consultation and liaison services, psychiatric emergency services, inpatient units, and geropsychiatric consultation.3-5 PMHNPs can fill gaps of coverage in underserved areas, supplement and complement busy and overburdened psychiatrists, and add an important dimension of holistic care.

This article reviews issues related to a successful psychiatrist-PMHNP collaboration, including:

  • PMHNP’s training and scope of practice
  • their skill and competency development in inpatient and outpatient settings
  • the principles and dynamics of collaboration, hindrances to cooperation, and keys to relationship-building for PMHNPs and psychiatrists.

Rigorous requirements

PMHNPs enroll in an accredited graduate nursing program that takes 16 to 24 months to complete and builds on the competencies of their undergraduate nursing education and clinical experience. All programs meet standards set by national nursing accrediting agencies. The typical graduate-level curriculum for a PMHNP includes core bio-behavioral theory, research courses, advanced physiology and pathophysiology, advanced physical and psychiatric health assessment, pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions, and managing health care delivery systems. For graduation and certification, PMHNPs must complete 500 supervised clinical hours focused on psychiatric and mental health care.

Each certified PMHNP must pass a national certification examination and obtain a license to practice as an advanced practice nurse (APN). To maintain certification, every 5 years PMHNPs must complete 75 to 150 continuing education credits and accrue 1,000 practice hours. The Psychiatric Mental Health Nursing Scope and Practice Standards developed by the American Nurses Association in conjunction with the American Psychiatric Nurses Association and the International Society of Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurses includes the following competencies:6

  • comprehensive psychiatric evaluation
  • formulation of a differential diagnosis
  • ordering and interpreting diagnostic tests
  • prescribing pharmacologic agents
  • conducting individual, couple, group, or family psychotherapy using evidence-based approaches.
In May 2012, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services finalized rules that affirmed an equal role for physicians and nurse practitioners in hospital medical staff affairs, and allowed nurse practitioners to work to the full extent of their educational preparation.7

PMHNPs also are responsible for recognizing the limits of their knowledge and experience, planning for situations beyond their expertise, and providing appropriate referral to other health care providers when indicated.8

Successful collaborative practice requires a clear definition and understanding of roles.9 This is particularly important for collaborating psychiatrists and PMHNPs because there has been confusion among physicians and the general public related to the nurse practitioner’s role. Psychiatrists who work with PMHNPs need to be familiar with state regulations that govern levels of physician supervision and prescriptive authority for nurse practitioners. Eleven states and the District of Columbia allow nurse practitioners to prescribe independently, including controlled substances. Most states require physician collaboration for prescribing medications, but the language can be ambiguous, with restrictions on certain formularies or drug schedules—eg, Michigan nurse practitioners may prescribe schedule II through V controlled substances, but schedule II medications are limited to nurse practitioners who work in hospitals, surgical outpatient settings, or hospices.10

Competencies and development

New PMHNPs see patients and prescribe medication, but their work needs close supervision. Postgraduate clinical experience combined with supervision gradually allows the PMHNP greater independence. A PMHNP who provides care in a busy outpatient clinic, inpatient unit, or psychiatric emergency department is likely to master the treatment philosophy and ancillary competencies related to that particular clinical site—including favored pharmacologic approaches, electronic documentation and ordering functions, and admission and discharge facilitation—at a level exceeding that of psychiatric residents, who rotate on and off a service as part of their training.

It’s helpful for new PMHNPs to have a time frame for their development over several years. The Table11 outlines general graded competency areas PMHNPs may focus on in their development. See this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com for Tables that provide examples of detailed competencies for third-year PMHNPs in inpatient and outpatient settings.

Table

PMHNP development: General graded competency areas

Psychiatric evaluation and diagnosis
Psychiatric treatments, including medications and psychotherapies
Maintenance of the therapeutic alliance, including monitoring the PMHNP’s emotional responses to patients
Participation in an interdisciplinary team
Understanding comorbid medical conditions, integrating laboratory and other tests into the treatment plan, and recognizing the need for consultation with the medical team
Documentation, such as initial evaluations, progress notes, and discharge summaries
Assessment for suicide and violence potential
Teaching
Patient and family psychoeducation
Use of feedback and supervision
PMHNP: psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner
Source: Reference 11
 

 

Table 1

Competencies for third-year PMHNPs in an outpatient clinic

Recognize clinical presentations of complex psychiatric disorders, variants, and comorbidities
Firm knowledge of diagnostic criteria, and skills for independent comprehensive assessment and diagnosis
Firm knowledge of evidence-based outpatient treatments for disorders, with mastery of ≥1 nonpharmacologic modality in addition to prescribing and managing medications
Use and provide feedback in comprehensive case formulations and treatment plans
Assist in clinical education of trainees in psychiatric nursing, social work, psychiatric residency, and psychology
Participate and collaborate in educational events and initiatives
Knowledge of internal and external health system and resources, and facilitating patient access to these networks
Incorporate mental health and behavioral and psychiatric nursing research into patient care
PMHNP: psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner
Table 2

Competencies for third-year PMHNPs on an inpatient psychiatric unit

Refinement of assessment section in evaluations, progress notes, and discharge summaries
Understanding indications for neuropsychological testing, and integrating findings into the treatment plan
Assessment of readiness for discharge in patients with a history of suicidality or violence
Developing a sophisticated and detailed discharge or follow-up plan
Understanding treatment resistance in mood and psychotic disorders, and implementing treatment
More detailed knowledge of types of illness treated on an inpatient unit
Ability to orient and train PMHNPs and other inpatient unit trainees
Ability to gather and use articles and other literature pertaining to inpatient care
Increasing competence in short-term, crisis-based therapeutic techniques, including familiarity with DBT, CBT, and IPT
Understanding family systems and impact on patient care
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; DBT: dialectical behavior therapy; IPT: interpersonal therapy; PMHNP: psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner

Principles of practice

Studies have demonstrated the importance of understanding how to effectively implement collaborative care across medical disciplines.12 See the Box12 for a discussion of 3 key determinants for successful clinical collaborations.

Box

Successful clinical collaborations: 3 determinants

San Martín-Rodríguez et al12 recognized 3 key factors that may help develop successful collaborative clinical relationships.

Interactional factors include a mutual willingness to collaborate, a commitment to collaborate, a belief in the benefits of collaborating, and sharing common objectives. Trust in the partnering clinician’s competency contributes to a successful collaboration. Strong communication skills—including the ability to convey what each clinician can contribute to achieving goals—also strengthens collaboration. Learning and understanding skills in conflict management and dialogue are key. Mutual respect also is essential.

Organizational factors include a shift from a traditional hierarchical structure to a more horizontal structure, and a work climate that supports openness, risk taking—ie, a willingness to disagree with a colleague if it is in a patient’s best interest or to develop a new and innovative method of providing care—integrity, and trust. Administrative structures and supports that convey the importance of collaboration also are key components of a strong collaborative environment. Teamwork and shared decision-making are important elements; teamwork should include time to discuss patient issues and develop strong interpersonal relationships. A commitment to professional development is another key factor.

Systemic factors include a social system that supports collegial relationships and professionalism that respects and accepts other professions. This includes decreased focus on protecting professional territory and increased recognition of overlaps among professions.

Enhancing collaboration

Psychiatrists who work with PMHNPs develop trust based on observing each PMHNP’s work, including their relationship with patients, ability to conceptualize a case and develop a treatment plan, and the skill with which they function within a team. The psychiatrist’s comfort level also is related to his or her awareness of the comprehensiveness of the PMHNP’s training and the competencies gained from clinical experience. Respect for the PMHNP’s educational and professional background is the foundation for what is often—at least in the collaborative relationship’s initial stages—a combined cooperative and supervisory relationship with the PMHNP. As such, the PMHNP gradually will absorb certain “intangibles” to supplement the training and work experiences that preceded his or her position. This may include assimilating the psychiatrist’s or clinic’s philosophy and treatment practice, including expertise in dealing with specialized psychiatric populations (eg, developmental disabilities, acute psychosis, or treatment-resistant depression).

As with any relationship, the individuals’ specific traits and ability to communicate and negotiate differences13 contribute to working well together. Ideally, in a psychiatrist-PMHNP relationship, both parties recognize “the need for independence and the desire for professional autonomy as well as…each other’s expertise and strength in the delivery of health care.”13 At the practical level, this may mean that the psychiatrist may note—and benefit from—factors such as a PMHNP’s particular ease with patients with borderline personality disorder, skill in managing patients with anorexia nervosa, or facility in educating families.
 

 

The patient’s comfort level

Collaborating PMHNPs and psychiatrists need to be prepared for a patient who expresses disappointment with being treated by a PMHNP or a preference to see “a doctor.” Psychiatrists who have not worked through their own ambivalence about the collaboration or who lack confidence in the PMHNP’s abilities may find themselves consciously or unconsciously aligning with the patient’s stance. They may neglect to explore the basis and meaning of the patient’s preference, which may be related to the patient’s lack of knowledge about the PMHNP’s role and training. The PMHNP who encounters such a patient has a more challenging task—namely, how to calmly address the patient’s concern while the patient is challenging the PMHNP’s competence. Both the PMHNP and psychiatrist need to be alert to the possibility of “splitting” in the treatment of axis II-disordered patients.

Studies of patient satisfaction have found that patients generally have favorable views of treatment received from nurse practitioners.14,15 These findings have been confirmed for PMHNPs.16,17

Barriers to collaboration

From the PMHNP perspective, barriers to a collaborative relationship include referring to PMHNPs by a less preferred term or title, instead of a nurse practitioner or APN, which can hinder the relationship. Although physician assistants and NPs have been grouped together under the term “mid-level providers,” the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners notes that this term suggests a lower level of care or service is being provided.18 “Physician extender” is another term that fails to recognize the PMHNP’s separate and unique role and the PMHNP’s view of their role as complementary to medicine, rather than an extension of a physician’s practice.

Another barrier is the psychiatrist’s lack of understanding regarding the PMHNP’s role. Because hospitals employ PMHNPs without providing psychiatrists formal direction explaining their role, background, or educational requirements, psychiatrists may ignore the PMHNP’s full potential. Sometimes, a psychiatrist may categorize an experienced PMHNP as a trainee rather than a highly skilled, trained professional. Although PMHNPs may gain knowledge and supervisory help from an attending psychiatrist, they have—unlike psychiatric residents—completed their formal training.

Territorial issues can impede collaborative relationships. Psychiatrists who resist collaborating will be less effective than those who welcome a PMHNP and readily delegate specific tasks and portions of the workload, whereas psychiatrists who value the help will be more likely to build a collaborative partnership, leading to better patient care.

Autonomy is a critical determinant of professional satisfaction for PMHNPs. A PMHNP’s autonomy can be impeded by organizational constraints and physician perceptions.19 PMHNPs require autonomy to self-direct patient diagnosis and treatment within the scope of their practice, and many find this relative independence essential to delivering high quality patient care. Lack of autonomy can lead to breaks in workflow in the outpatient setting and increased length of stay for hospitalized patients. In addition, an autonomously functioning, experienced PMHNP can increase efficiency in hospital settings where psychiatrists can be in short supply, preoccupied with administrative matters, or require help on weekends.

Related Resources

Disclosures

Dr. Casher is a speaker for Sunovion Pharmaceuticals and receives royalties from Cambridge University Press.

Ms. Kuebler, Ms. Bastida, and Ms. Chipps report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

References

1. Sataline S, Wang SS. Medical schools can’t keep up. Wall Street Journal. April 12 2010. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304506904575180331528424238.html. Accessed August 21, 2012.

2. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The health care law & you. http://www.healthcare.gov/law/index.html. Accessed August 21, 2012.

3. Wand T, Fisher J. The mental health nurse practitioner in the emergency department: an Australian experience. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2006;15(3):201-208.

4. Eisch JS, Brozovic B, Colling K, et al. Nurse practitioner geropsychiatric consultation service to nursing homes. Geriatr Nurs. 2000;21(3):150-155.

5. Baker N. Exploring the mental health nurse practitioner scope of practice in youth early psychosis: an anecdotal account. Contemp Nurse. 2010;34(2):211-220.

6. International Society of Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurses. Psychiatric mental health nursing scope & standards. http://www.ispn-psych.org/docs/standards/scope-standards-draft.pdf. Updated 2006. Accessed August 21, 2012.

7. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. HHS finalizes new rules to cut regulations for hospitals and health care providers saving more than $5 billion. http://www.cms.gov/apps/media/press/release.asp?Counter=4362. Published May 9, 2012. Accessed August 21, 2012.

8. APRN Consensus Work Group, National Council of State Boards of Nursing APRN Advisory Committee. Consensus model for regulation: licensure accreditation, certification & education. https://www.ncsbn.org/Consensus_Model_for_APRN_Regulation_July_2008.pdf. Published July 7, 2008. Accessed August 21, 2012.

9. Legault F, Humbert J, Amos S, et al. Difficulties encountered in collaborative care: logistics trumps desire. J Am Board Fam Med. 2012;25(2):168-176.

10. Michigan Council of Nurse Practitioners. Michigan’s rules and regulations for prescriptive authority. http://micnp.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=109. Accessed August 21, 2012.

11. Wheeler K, Haber J. Development of psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner competencies: opportunities for the 21st century. J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc. 2004;10(3):129-138.

12. San Martín-Rodríguez L, Beaulieu MD, D’Amour D, et al. The determinants of successful collaboration: a review of theoretical and empirical studies. J Interprof Care. 2005;19(suppl 1):132-147.

13. Suter E, Arndt J, Arthur N, et al. Role understanding and effective communication as core competencies for collaborative practice. J Interprof Care. 2009;23(1):41-51.

14. Horrocks S, Anderson E, Salisbury C. Systematic review of whether nurse practitioners working in primary care can provide equivalent care to doctors. BMJ. 2002;324(7341):819-823.

15. Byrne G, Richardson M, Brunsdon J, et al. Patient satisfaction with emergency nurse practitioners in A & E. J Clin Nurs. 2000;9(1):83-92.

16. McCann TV, Clark E. Attitudes of patients towards mental health nurse prescribing of antipsychotic agents. Int J Nurs Pract. 2008;14(2):115-121.

17. Wortans J, Happell B, Johnstone H. The role of the nurse practitioner in psychiatric/mental health nursing: exploring consumer satisfaction. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2006;13(1):78-84.

18. Frellick M. The nurse practitioner will see you now. Advanced practice providers fill the physician gap. Hosp Health Netw. 2011;85(7):44-46, 48–49.

19. Maylone MM, Ranieri L, Quinn Griffin MT, et al. Collaboration and autonomy: perceptions among nurse practitioners. J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2011;23(1):51-57.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Michael I. Casher, MD
Clinical Assistant Professor, Attending Psychiatrist, Adult Inpatient Program and Consultation Liaison Service, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Julie Kuebler, MS, APRN, BC
Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Maria Bastida, MS, APRN, BC
Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Suzanne Chipps, MS, APRN, BC
Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
49-54
Legacy Keywords
collaboration; psychiatric nurse practitioners; nurses; psychiatrists; how to work together
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Michael I. Casher, MD
Clinical Assistant Professor, Attending Psychiatrist, Adult Inpatient Program and Consultation Liaison Service, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Julie Kuebler, MS, APRN, BC
Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Maria Bastida, MS, APRN, BC
Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Suzanne Chipps, MS, APRN, BC
Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI

Author and Disclosure Information

Michael I. Casher, MD
Clinical Assistant Professor, Attending Psychiatrist, Adult Inpatient Program and Consultation Liaison Service, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Julie Kuebler, MS, APRN, BC
Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Maria Bastida, MS, APRN, BC
Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
Suzanne Chipps, MS, APRN, BC
Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI

Article PDF
Article PDF

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Psychiatrists who are accustomed to working with “med/surg” or psychiatric nurses may be less familiar with how to collaborate with more specialized psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners (PMHNPs). These clinicians play an important role in delivering mental health services, which is likely to continue because of the physician shortage in the United States1 and increasing mental health care needs from passage of the Affordable Health Care Act and the Mental Health Parity Act.2 These specialty trained, master’s level nurses work with psychiatrists in outpatient clinics, hospital consultation and liaison services, psychiatric emergency services, inpatient units, and geropsychiatric consultation.3-5 PMHNPs can fill gaps of coverage in underserved areas, supplement and complement busy and overburdened psychiatrists, and add an important dimension of holistic care.

This article reviews issues related to a successful psychiatrist-PMHNP collaboration, including:

  • PMHNP’s training and scope of practice
  • their skill and competency development in inpatient and outpatient settings
  • the principles and dynamics of collaboration, hindrances to cooperation, and keys to relationship-building for PMHNPs and psychiatrists.

Rigorous requirements

PMHNPs enroll in an accredited graduate nursing program that takes 16 to 24 months to complete and builds on the competencies of their undergraduate nursing education and clinical experience. All programs meet standards set by national nursing accrediting agencies. The typical graduate-level curriculum for a PMHNP includes core bio-behavioral theory, research courses, advanced physiology and pathophysiology, advanced physical and psychiatric health assessment, pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions, and managing health care delivery systems. For graduation and certification, PMHNPs must complete 500 supervised clinical hours focused on psychiatric and mental health care.

Each certified PMHNP must pass a national certification examination and obtain a license to practice as an advanced practice nurse (APN). To maintain certification, every 5 years PMHNPs must complete 75 to 150 continuing education credits and accrue 1,000 practice hours. The Psychiatric Mental Health Nursing Scope and Practice Standards developed by the American Nurses Association in conjunction with the American Psychiatric Nurses Association and the International Society of Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurses includes the following competencies:6

  • comprehensive psychiatric evaluation
  • formulation of a differential diagnosis
  • ordering and interpreting diagnostic tests
  • prescribing pharmacologic agents
  • conducting individual, couple, group, or family psychotherapy using evidence-based approaches.
In May 2012, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services finalized rules that affirmed an equal role for physicians and nurse practitioners in hospital medical staff affairs, and allowed nurse practitioners to work to the full extent of their educational preparation.7

PMHNPs also are responsible for recognizing the limits of their knowledge and experience, planning for situations beyond their expertise, and providing appropriate referral to other health care providers when indicated.8

Successful collaborative practice requires a clear definition and understanding of roles.9 This is particularly important for collaborating psychiatrists and PMHNPs because there has been confusion among physicians and the general public related to the nurse practitioner’s role. Psychiatrists who work with PMHNPs need to be familiar with state regulations that govern levels of physician supervision and prescriptive authority for nurse practitioners. Eleven states and the District of Columbia allow nurse practitioners to prescribe independently, including controlled substances. Most states require physician collaboration for prescribing medications, but the language can be ambiguous, with restrictions on certain formularies or drug schedules—eg, Michigan nurse practitioners may prescribe schedule II through V controlled substances, but schedule II medications are limited to nurse practitioners who work in hospitals, surgical outpatient settings, or hospices.10

Competencies and development

New PMHNPs see patients and prescribe medication, but their work needs close supervision. Postgraduate clinical experience combined with supervision gradually allows the PMHNP greater independence. A PMHNP who provides care in a busy outpatient clinic, inpatient unit, or psychiatric emergency department is likely to master the treatment philosophy and ancillary competencies related to that particular clinical site—including favored pharmacologic approaches, electronic documentation and ordering functions, and admission and discharge facilitation—at a level exceeding that of psychiatric residents, who rotate on and off a service as part of their training.

It’s helpful for new PMHNPs to have a time frame for their development over several years. The Table11 outlines general graded competency areas PMHNPs may focus on in their development. See this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com for Tables that provide examples of detailed competencies for third-year PMHNPs in inpatient and outpatient settings.

Table

PMHNP development: General graded competency areas

Psychiatric evaluation and diagnosis
Psychiatric treatments, including medications and psychotherapies
Maintenance of the therapeutic alliance, including monitoring the PMHNP’s emotional responses to patients
Participation in an interdisciplinary team
Understanding comorbid medical conditions, integrating laboratory and other tests into the treatment plan, and recognizing the need for consultation with the medical team
Documentation, such as initial evaluations, progress notes, and discharge summaries
Assessment for suicide and violence potential
Teaching
Patient and family psychoeducation
Use of feedback and supervision
PMHNP: psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner
Source: Reference 11
 

 

Table 1

Competencies for third-year PMHNPs in an outpatient clinic

Recognize clinical presentations of complex psychiatric disorders, variants, and comorbidities
Firm knowledge of diagnostic criteria, and skills for independent comprehensive assessment and diagnosis
Firm knowledge of evidence-based outpatient treatments for disorders, with mastery of ≥1 nonpharmacologic modality in addition to prescribing and managing medications
Use and provide feedback in comprehensive case formulations and treatment plans
Assist in clinical education of trainees in psychiatric nursing, social work, psychiatric residency, and psychology
Participate and collaborate in educational events and initiatives
Knowledge of internal and external health system and resources, and facilitating patient access to these networks
Incorporate mental health and behavioral and psychiatric nursing research into patient care
PMHNP: psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner
Table 2

Competencies for third-year PMHNPs on an inpatient psychiatric unit

Refinement of assessment section in evaluations, progress notes, and discharge summaries
Understanding indications for neuropsychological testing, and integrating findings into the treatment plan
Assessment of readiness for discharge in patients with a history of suicidality or violence
Developing a sophisticated and detailed discharge or follow-up plan
Understanding treatment resistance in mood and psychotic disorders, and implementing treatment
More detailed knowledge of types of illness treated on an inpatient unit
Ability to orient and train PMHNPs and other inpatient unit trainees
Ability to gather and use articles and other literature pertaining to inpatient care
Increasing competence in short-term, crisis-based therapeutic techniques, including familiarity with DBT, CBT, and IPT
Understanding family systems and impact on patient care
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; DBT: dialectical behavior therapy; IPT: interpersonal therapy; PMHNP: psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner

Principles of practice

Studies have demonstrated the importance of understanding how to effectively implement collaborative care across medical disciplines.12 See the Box12 for a discussion of 3 key determinants for successful clinical collaborations.

Box

Successful clinical collaborations: 3 determinants

San Martín-Rodríguez et al12 recognized 3 key factors that may help develop successful collaborative clinical relationships.

Interactional factors include a mutual willingness to collaborate, a commitment to collaborate, a belief in the benefits of collaborating, and sharing common objectives. Trust in the partnering clinician’s competency contributes to a successful collaboration. Strong communication skills—including the ability to convey what each clinician can contribute to achieving goals—also strengthens collaboration. Learning and understanding skills in conflict management and dialogue are key. Mutual respect also is essential.

Organizational factors include a shift from a traditional hierarchical structure to a more horizontal structure, and a work climate that supports openness, risk taking—ie, a willingness to disagree with a colleague if it is in a patient’s best interest or to develop a new and innovative method of providing care—integrity, and trust. Administrative structures and supports that convey the importance of collaboration also are key components of a strong collaborative environment. Teamwork and shared decision-making are important elements; teamwork should include time to discuss patient issues and develop strong interpersonal relationships. A commitment to professional development is another key factor.

Systemic factors include a social system that supports collegial relationships and professionalism that respects and accepts other professions. This includes decreased focus on protecting professional territory and increased recognition of overlaps among professions.

Enhancing collaboration

Psychiatrists who work with PMHNPs develop trust based on observing each PMHNP’s work, including their relationship with patients, ability to conceptualize a case and develop a treatment plan, and the skill with which they function within a team. The psychiatrist’s comfort level also is related to his or her awareness of the comprehensiveness of the PMHNP’s training and the competencies gained from clinical experience. Respect for the PMHNP’s educational and professional background is the foundation for what is often—at least in the collaborative relationship’s initial stages—a combined cooperative and supervisory relationship with the PMHNP. As such, the PMHNP gradually will absorb certain “intangibles” to supplement the training and work experiences that preceded his or her position. This may include assimilating the psychiatrist’s or clinic’s philosophy and treatment practice, including expertise in dealing with specialized psychiatric populations (eg, developmental disabilities, acute psychosis, or treatment-resistant depression).

As with any relationship, the individuals’ specific traits and ability to communicate and negotiate differences13 contribute to working well together. Ideally, in a psychiatrist-PMHNP relationship, both parties recognize “the need for independence and the desire for professional autonomy as well as…each other’s expertise and strength in the delivery of health care.”13 At the practical level, this may mean that the psychiatrist may note—and benefit from—factors such as a PMHNP’s particular ease with patients with borderline personality disorder, skill in managing patients with anorexia nervosa, or facility in educating families.
 

 

The patient’s comfort level

Collaborating PMHNPs and psychiatrists need to be prepared for a patient who expresses disappointment with being treated by a PMHNP or a preference to see “a doctor.” Psychiatrists who have not worked through their own ambivalence about the collaboration or who lack confidence in the PMHNP’s abilities may find themselves consciously or unconsciously aligning with the patient’s stance. They may neglect to explore the basis and meaning of the patient’s preference, which may be related to the patient’s lack of knowledge about the PMHNP’s role and training. The PMHNP who encounters such a patient has a more challenging task—namely, how to calmly address the patient’s concern while the patient is challenging the PMHNP’s competence. Both the PMHNP and psychiatrist need to be alert to the possibility of “splitting” in the treatment of axis II-disordered patients.

Studies of patient satisfaction have found that patients generally have favorable views of treatment received from nurse practitioners.14,15 These findings have been confirmed for PMHNPs.16,17

Barriers to collaboration

From the PMHNP perspective, barriers to a collaborative relationship include referring to PMHNPs by a less preferred term or title, instead of a nurse practitioner or APN, which can hinder the relationship. Although physician assistants and NPs have been grouped together under the term “mid-level providers,” the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners notes that this term suggests a lower level of care or service is being provided.18 “Physician extender” is another term that fails to recognize the PMHNP’s separate and unique role and the PMHNP’s view of their role as complementary to medicine, rather than an extension of a physician’s practice.

Another barrier is the psychiatrist’s lack of understanding regarding the PMHNP’s role. Because hospitals employ PMHNPs without providing psychiatrists formal direction explaining their role, background, or educational requirements, psychiatrists may ignore the PMHNP’s full potential. Sometimes, a psychiatrist may categorize an experienced PMHNP as a trainee rather than a highly skilled, trained professional. Although PMHNPs may gain knowledge and supervisory help from an attending psychiatrist, they have—unlike psychiatric residents—completed their formal training.

Territorial issues can impede collaborative relationships. Psychiatrists who resist collaborating will be less effective than those who welcome a PMHNP and readily delegate specific tasks and portions of the workload, whereas psychiatrists who value the help will be more likely to build a collaborative partnership, leading to better patient care.

Autonomy is a critical determinant of professional satisfaction for PMHNPs. A PMHNP’s autonomy can be impeded by organizational constraints and physician perceptions.19 PMHNPs require autonomy to self-direct patient diagnosis and treatment within the scope of their practice, and many find this relative independence essential to delivering high quality patient care. Lack of autonomy can lead to breaks in workflow in the outpatient setting and increased length of stay for hospitalized patients. In addition, an autonomously functioning, experienced PMHNP can increase efficiency in hospital settings where psychiatrists can be in short supply, preoccupied with administrative matters, or require help on weekends.

Related Resources

Disclosures

Dr. Casher is a speaker for Sunovion Pharmaceuticals and receives royalties from Cambridge University Press.

Ms. Kuebler, Ms. Bastida, and Ms. Chipps report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Psychiatrists who are accustomed to working with “med/surg” or psychiatric nurses may be less familiar with how to collaborate with more specialized psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioners (PMHNPs). These clinicians play an important role in delivering mental health services, which is likely to continue because of the physician shortage in the United States1 and increasing mental health care needs from passage of the Affordable Health Care Act and the Mental Health Parity Act.2 These specialty trained, master’s level nurses work with psychiatrists in outpatient clinics, hospital consultation and liaison services, psychiatric emergency services, inpatient units, and geropsychiatric consultation.3-5 PMHNPs can fill gaps of coverage in underserved areas, supplement and complement busy and overburdened psychiatrists, and add an important dimension of holistic care.

This article reviews issues related to a successful psychiatrist-PMHNP collaboration, including:

  • PMHNP’s training and scope of practice
  • their skill and competency development in inpatient and outpatient settings
  • the principles and dynamics of collaboration, hindrances to cooperation, and keys to relationship-building for PMHNPs and psychiatrists.

Rigorous requirements

PMHNPs enroll in an accredited graduate nursing program that takes 16 to 24 months to complete and builds on the competencies of their undergraduate nursing education and clinical experience. All programs meet standards set by national nursing accrediting agencies. The typical graduate-level curriculum for a PMHNP includes core bio-behavioral theory, research courses, advanced physiology and pathophysiology, advanced physical and psychiatric health assessment, pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions, and managing health care delivery systems. For graduation and certification, PMHNPs must complete 500 supervised clinical hours focused on psychiatric and mental health care.

Each certified PMHNP must pass a national certification examination and obtain a license to practice as an advanced practice nurse (APN). To maintain certification, every 5 years PMHNPs must complete 75 to 150 continuing education credits and accrue 1,000 practice hours. The Psychiatric Mental Health Nursing Scope and Practice Standards developed by the American Nurses Association in conjunction with the American Psychiatric Nurses Association and the International Society of Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurses includes the following competencies:6

  • comprehensive psychiatric evaluation
  • formulation of a differential diagnosis
  • ordering and interpreting diagnostic tests
  • prescribing pharmacologic agents
  • conducting individual, couple, group, or family psychotherapy using evidence-based approaches.
In May 2012, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services finalized rules that affirmed an equal role for physicians and nurse practitioners in hospital medical staff affairs, and allowed nurse practitioners to work to the full extent of their educational preparation.7

PMHNPs also are responsible for recognizing the limits of their knowledge and experience, planning for situations beyond their expertise, and providing appropriate referral to other health care providers when indicated.8

Successful collaborative practice requires a clear definition and understanding of roles.9 This is particularly important for collaborating psychiatrists and PMHNPs because there has been confusion among physicians and the general public related to the nurse practitioner’s role. Psychiatrists who work with PMHNPs need to be familiar with state regulations that govern levels of physician supervision and prescriptive authority for nurse practitioners. Eleven states and the District of Columbia allow nurse practitioners to prescribe independently, including controlled substances. Most states require physician collaboration for prescribing medications, but the language can be ambiguous, with restrictions on certain formularies or drug schedules—eg, Michigan nurse practitioners may prescribe schedule II through V controlled substances, but schedule II medications are limited to nurse practitioners who work in hospitals, surgical outpatient settings, or hospices.10

Competencies and development

New PMHNPs see patients and prescribe medication, but their work needs close supervision. Postgraduate clinical experience combined with supervision gradually allows the PMHNP greater independence. A PMHNP who provides care in a busy outpatient clinic, inpatient unit, or psychiatric emergency department is likely to master the treatment philosophy and ancillary competencies related to that particular clinical site—including favored pharmacologic approaches, electronic documentation and ordering functions, and admission and discharge facilitation—at a level exceeding that of psychiatric residents, who rotate on and off a service as part of their training.

It’s helpful for new PMHNPs to have a time frame for their development over several years. The Table11 outlines general graded competency areas PMHNPs may focus on in their development. See this article at CurrentPsychiatry.com for Tables that provide examples of detailed competencies for third-year PMHNPs in inpatient and outpatient settings.

Table

PMHNP development: General graded competency areas

Psychiatric evaluation and diagnosis
Psychiatric treatments, including medications and psychotherapies
Maintenance of the therapeutic alliance, including monitoring the PMHNP’s emotional responses to patients
Participation in an interdisciplinary team
Understanding comorbid medical conditions, integrating laboratory and other tests into the treatment plan, and recognizing the need for consultation with the medical team
Documentation, such as initial evaluations, progress notes, and discharge summaries
Assessment for suicide and violence potential
Teaching
Patient and family psychoeducation
Use of feedback and supervision
PMHNP: psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner
Source: Reference 11
 

 

Table 1

Competencies for third-year PMHNPs in an outpatient clinic

Recognize clinical presentations of complex psychiatric disorders, variants, and comorbidities
Firm knowledge of diagnostic criteria, and skills for independent comprehensive assessment and diagnosis
Firm knowledge of evidence-based outpatient treatments for disorders, with mastery of ≥1 nonpharmacologic modality in addition to prescribing and managing medications
Use and provide feedback in comprehensive case formulations and treatment plans
Assist in clinical education of trainees in psychiatric nursing, social work, psychiatric residency, and psychology
Participate and collaborate in educational events and initiatives
Knowledge of internal and external health system and resources, and facilitating patient access to these networks
Incorporate mental health and behavioral and psychiatric nursing research into patient care
PMHNP: psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner
Table 2

Competencies for third-year PMHNPs on an inpatient psychiatric unit

Refinement of assessment section in evaluations, progress notes, and discharge summaries
Understanding indications for neuropsychological testing, and integrating findings into the treatment plan
Assessment of readiness for discharge in patients with a history of suicidality or violence
Developing a sophisticated and detailed discharge or follow-up plan
Understanding treatment resistance in mood and psychotic disorders, and implementing treatment
More detailed knowledge of types of illness treated on an inpatient unit
Ability to orient and train PMHNPs and other inpatient unit trainees
Ability to gather and use articles and other literature pertaining to inpatient care
Increasing competence in short-term, crisis-based therapeutic techniques, including familiarity with DBT, CBT, and IPT
Understanding family systems and impact on patient care
CBT: cognitive-behavioral therapy; DBT: dialectical behavior therapy; IPT: interpersonal therapy; PMHNP: psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner

Principles of practice

Studies have demonstrated the importance of understanding how to effectively implement collaborative care across medical disciplines.12 See the Box12 for a discussion of 3 key determinants for successful clinical collaborations.

Box

Successful clinical collaborations: 3 determinants

San Martín-Rodríguez et al12 recognized 3 key factors that may help develop successful collaborative clinical relationships.

Interactional factors include a mutual willingness to collaborate, a commitment to collaborate, a belief in the benefits of collaborating, and sharing common objectives. Trust in the partnering clinician’s competency contributes to a successful collaboration. Strong communication skills—including the ability to convey what each clinician can contribute to achieving goals—also strengthens collaboration. Learning and understanding skills in conflict management and dialogue are key. Mutual respect also is essential.

Organizational factors include a shift from a traditional hierarchical structure to a more horizontal structure, and a work climate that supports openness, risk taking—ie, a willingness to disagree with a colleague if it is in a patient’s best interest or to develop a new and innovative method of providing care—integrity, and trust. Administrative structures and supports that convey the importance of collaboration also are key components of a strong collaborative environment. Teamwork and shared decision-making are important elements; teamwork should include time to discuss patient issues and develop strong interpersonal relationships. A commitment to professional development is another key factor.

Systemic factors include a social system that supports collegial relationships and professionalism that respects and accepts other professions. This includes decreased focus on protecting professional territory and increased recognition of overlaps among professions.

Enhancing collaboration

Psychiatrists who work with PMHNPs develop trust based on observing each PMHNP’s work, including their relationship with patients, ability to conceptualize a case and develop a treatment plan, and the skill with which they function within a team. The psychiatrist’s comfort level also is related to his or her awareness of the comprehensiveness of the PMHNP’s training and the competencies gained from clinical experience. Respect for the PMHNP’s educational and professional background is the foundation for what is often—at least in the collaborative relationship’s initial stages—a combined cooperative and supervisory relationship with the PMHNP. As such, the PMHNP gradually will absorb certain “intangibles” to supplement the training and work experiences that preceded his or her position. This may include assimilating the psychiatrist’s or clinic’s philosophy and treatment practice, including expertise in dealing with specialized psychiatric populations (eg, developmental disabilities, acute psychosis, or treatment-resistant depression).

As with any relationship, the individuals’ specific traits and ability to communicate and negotiate differences13 contribute to working well together. Ideally, in a psychiatrist-PMHNP relationship, both parties recognize “the need for independence and the desire for professional autonomy as well as…each other’s expertise and strength in the delivery of health care.”13 At the practical level, this may mean that the psychiatrist may note—and benefit from—factors such as a PMHNP’s particular ease with patients with borderline personality disorder, skill in managing patients with anorexia nervosa, or facility in educating families.
 

 

The patient’s comfort level

Collaborating PMHNPs and psychiatrists need to be prepared for a patient who expresses disappointment with being treated by a PMHNP or a preference to see “a doctor.” Psychiatrists who have not worked through their own ambivalence about the collaboration or who lack confidence in the PMHNP’s abilities may find themselves consciously or unconsciously aligning with the patient’s stance. They may neglect to explore the basis and meaning of the patient’s preference, which may be related to the patient’s lack of knowledge about the PMHNP’s role and training. The PMHNP who encounters such a patient has a more challenging task—namely, how to calmly address the patient’s concern while the patient is challenging the PMHNP’s competence. Both the PMHNP and psychiatrist need to be alert to the possibility of “splitting” in the treatment of axis II-disordered patients.

Studies of patient satisfaction have found that patients generally have favorable views of treatment received from nurse practitioners.14,15 These findings have been confirmed for PMHNPs.16,17

Barriers to collaboration

From the PMHNP perspective, barriers to a collaborative relationship include referring to PMHNPs by a less preferred term or title, instead of a nurse practitioner or APN, which can hinder the relationship. Although physician assistants and NPs have been grouped together under the term “mid-level providers,” the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners notes that this term suggests a lower level of care or service is being provided.18 “Physician extender” is another term that fails to recognize the PMHNP’s separate and unique role and the PMHNP’s view of their role as complementary to medicine, rather than an extension of a physician’s practice.

Another barrier is the psychiatrist’s lack of understanding regarding the PMHNP’s role. Because hospitals employ PMHNPs without providing psychiatrists formal direction explaining their role, background, or educational requirements, psychiatrists may ignore the PMHNP’s full potential. Sometimes, a psychiatrist may categorize an experienced PMHNP as a trainee rather than a highly skilled, trained professional. Although PMHNPs may gain knowledge and supervisory help from an attending psychiatrist, they have—unlike psychiatric residents—completed their formal training.

Territorial issues can impede collaborative relationships. Psychiatrists who resist collaborating will be less effective than those who welcome a PMHNP and readily delegate specific tasks and portions of the workload, whereas psychiatrists who value the help will be more likely to build a collaborative partnership, leading to better patient care.

Autonomy is a critical determinant of professional satisfaction for PMHNPs. A PMHNP’s autonomy can be impeded by organizational constraints and physician perceptions.19 PMHNPs require autonomy to self-direct patient diagnosis and treatment within the scope of their practice, and many find this relative independence essential to delivering high quality patient care. Lack of autonomy can lead to breaks in workflow in the outpatient setting and increased length of stay for hospitalized patients. In addition, an autonomously functioning, experienced PMHNP can increase efficiency in hospital settings where psychiatrists can be in short supply, preoccupied with administrative matters, or require help on weekends.

Related Resources

Disclosures

Dr. Casher is a speaker for Sunovion Pharmaceuticals and receives royalties from Cambridge University Press.

Ms. Kuebler, Ms. Bastida, and Ms. Chipps report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

References

1. Sataline S, Wang SS. Medical schools can’t keep up. Wall Street Journal. April 12 2010. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304506904575180331528424238.html. Accessed August 21, 2012.

2. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The health care law & you. http://www.healthcare.gov/law/index.html. Accessed August 21, 2012.

3. Wand T, Fisher J. The mental health nurse practitioner in the emergency department: an Australian experience. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2006;15(3):201-208.

4. Eisch JS, Brozovic B, Colling K, et al. Nurse practitioner geropsychiatric consultation service to nursing homes. Geriatr Nurs. 2000;21(3):150-155.

5. Baker N. Exploring the mental health nurse practitioner scope of practice in youth early psychosis: an anecdotal account. Contemp Nurse. 2010;34(2):211-220.

6. International Society of Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurses. Psychiatric mental health nursing scope & standards. http://www.ispn-psych.org/docs/standards/scope-standards-draft.pdf. Updated 2006. Accessed August 21, 2012.

7. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. HHS finalizes new rules to cut regulations for hospitals and health care providers saving more than $5 billion. http://www.cms.gov/apps/media/press/release.asp?Counter=4362. Published May 9, 2012. Accessed August 21, 2012.

8. APRN Consensus Work Group, National Council of State Boards of Nursing APRN Advisory Committee. Consensus model for regulation: licensure accreditation, certification & education. https://www.ncsbn.org/Consensus_Model_for_APRN_Regulation_July_2008.pdf. Published July 7, 2008. Accessed August 21, 2012.

9. Legault F, Humbert J, Amos S, et al. Difficulties encountered in collaborative care: logistics trumps desire. J Am Board Fam Med. 2012;25(2):168-176.

10. Michigan Council of Nurse Practitioners. Michigan’s rules and regulations for prescriptive authority. http://micnp.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=109. Accessed August 21, 2012.

11. Wheeler K, Haber J. Development of psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner competencies: opportunities for the 21st century. J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc. 2004;10(3):129-138.

12. San Martín-Rodríguez L, Beaulieu MD, D’Amour D, et al. The determinants of successful collaboration: a review of theoretical and empirical studies. J Interprof Care. 2005;19(suppl 1):132-147.

13. Suter E, Arndt J, Arthur N, et al. Role understanding and effective communication as core competencies for collaborative practice. J Interprof Care. 2009;23(1):41-51.

14. Horrocks S, Anderson E, Salisbury C. Systematic review of whether nurse practitioners working in primary care can provide equivalent care to doctors. BMJ. 2002;324(7341):819-823.

15. Byrne G, Richardson M, Brunsdon J, et al. Patient satisfaction with emergency nurse practitioners in A & E. J Clin Nurs. 2000;9(1):83-92.

16. McCann TV, Clark E. Attitudes of patients towards mental health nurse prescribing of antipsychotic agents. Int J Nurs Pract. 2008;14(2):115-121.

17. Wortans J, Happell B, Johnstone H. The role of the nurse practitioner in psychiatric/mental health nursing: exploring consumer satisfaction. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2006;13(1):78-84.

18. Frellick M. The nurse practitioner will see you now. Advanced practice providers fill the physician gap. Hosp Health Netw. 2011;85(7):44-46, 48–49.

19. Maylone MM, Ranieri L, Quinn Griffin MT, et al. Collaboration and autonomy: perceptions among nurse practitioners. J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2011;23(1):51-57.

References

1. Sataline S, Wang SS. Medical schools can’t keep up. Wall Street Journal. April 12 2010. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304506904575180331528424238.html. Accessed August 21, 2012.

2. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The health care law & you. http://www.healthcare.gov/law/index.html. Accessed August 21, 2012.

3. Wand T, Fisher J. The mental health nurse practitioner in the emergency department: an Australian experience. Int J Ment Health Nurs. 2006;15(3):201-208.

4. Eisch JS, Brozovic B, Colling K, et al. Nurse practitioner geropsychiatric consultation service to nursing homes. Geriatr Nurs. 2000;21(3):150-155.

5. Baker N. Exploring the mental health nurse practitioner scope of practice in youth early psychosis: an anecdotal account. Contemp Nurse. 2010;34(2):211-220.

6. International Society of Psychiatric-Mental Health Nurses. Psychiatric mental health nursing scope & standards. http://www.ispn-psych.org/docs/standards/scope-standards-draft.pdf. Updated 2006. Accessed August 21, 2012.

7. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. HHS finalizes new rules to cut regulations for hospitals and health care providers saving more than $5 billion. http://www.cms.gov/apps/media/press/release.asp?Counter=4362. Published May 9, 2012. Accessed August 21, 2012.

8. APRN Consensus Work Group, National Council of State Boards of Nursing APRN Advisory Committee. Consensus model for regulation: licensure accreditation, certification & education. https://www.ncsbn.org/Consensus_Model_for_APRN_Regulation_July_2008.pdf. Published July 7, 2008. Accessed August 21, 2012.

9. Legault F, Humbert J, Amos S, et al. Difficulties encountered in collaborative care: logistics trumps desire. J Am Board Fam Med. 2012;25(2):168-176.

10. Michigan Council of Nurse Practitioners. Michigan’s rules and regulations for prescriptive authority. http://micnp.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=1&subarticlenbr=109. Accessed August 21, 2012.

11. Wheeler K, Haber J. Development of psychiatric-mental health nurse practitioner competencies: opportunities for the 21st century. J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc. 2004;10(3):129-138.

12. San Martín-Rodríguez L, Beaulieu MD, D’Amour D, et al. The determinants of successful collaboration: a review of theoretical and empirical studies. J Interprof Care. 2005;19(suppl 1):132-147.

13. Suter E, Arndt J, Arthur N, et al. Role understanding and effective communication as core competencies for collaborative practice. J Interprof Care. 2009;23(1):41-51.

14. Horrocks S, Anderson E, Salisbury C. Systematic review of whether nurse practitioners working in primary care can provide equivalent care to doctors. BMJ. 2002;324(7341):819-823.

15. Byrne G, Richardson M, Brunsdon J, et al. Patient satisfaction with emergency nurse practitioners in A & E. J Clin Nurs. 2000;9(1):83-92.

16. McCann TV, Clark E. Attitudes of patients towards mental health nurse prescribing of antipsychotic agents. Int J Nurs Pract. 2008;14(2):115-121.

17. Wortans J, Happell B, Johnstone H. The role of the nurse practitioner in psychiatric/mental health nursing: exploring consumer satisfaction. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2006;13(1):78-84.

18. Frellick M. The nurse practitioner will see you now. Advanced practice providers fill the physician gap. Hosp Health Netw. 2011;85(7):44-46, 48–49.

19. Maylone MM, Ranieri L, Quinn Griffin MT, et al. Collaboration and autonomy: perceptions among nurse practitioners. J Am Acad Nurse Pract. 2011;23(1):51-57.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Page Number
49-54
Page Number
49-54
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
How to collaborate effectively with psychiatric nurse practitioners
Display Headline
How to collaborate effectively with psychiatric nurse practitioners
Legacy Keywords
collaboration; psychiatric nurse practitioners; nurses; psychiatrists; how to work together
Legacy Keywords
collaboration; psychiatric nurse practitioners; nurses; psychiatrists; how to work together
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Differentiating Alzheimer’s disease from dementia with Lewy bodies

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Differentiating Alzheimer’s disease from dementia with Lewy bodies

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) are the first and second most common causes of neurodegenerative dementia, respectively.“New Alzheimer’s disease guidelines: Implications for clinicians,” Current Psychiatry, March 2012, p. 15-20; http://bit.ly/UNYikk.

The 2005 report of the DLB Consortium5 recognizes central, core, suggestive, and supportive features of DLB (Table 1).5,10 These features are considered in the context of other confounding clinical conditions and the timing of cognitive and motor symptoms. The revised DLB criteria5 require a central feature of progressive cognitive decline. “Probable DLB” is when a patient presents with 2 core features or 1 core feature and ≥1 suggestive features. A diagnosis of “possible DLB” requires 1 core feature or 1 suggestive feature in the presence of progressive cognitive decline.

Table 1

Diagnostic criteria for AD and DLB

NIA-AA criteria for AD (2011)10
Possible AD: Clinical and cognitive criteria (DSM-IV-TR) for AD are met and there is an absence of biomarkers to support the diagnosis or there is evidence of a secondary disorder that can cause dementia
Probable AD: Clinical and cognitive criteria for AD are met and there is documented progressive cognitive decline or abnormal biomarker(s) suggestive of AD or evidence of proven AD autosomal dominant genetic mutation (presenilin-1, presenilin-2, amyloid-β precursor protein)
Definite AD: Clinical criteria for probable AD are met and there is histopathologic evidence of the disorder
Revised clinical diagnostic criteria for DLB (2005)5
Core features: Fluctuating cognition, recurrent visual hallucinations, soft motor features of parkinsonism
Suggestive features: REM sleep behavior disorder, severe antipsychotic sensitivity, decreased tracer uptake in striatum on SPECT dopamine transporter imaging or on myocardial scintigraphy with MIBG
Supportive features (common but lacking diagnostic specificity): repeated falls and syncope; transient, unexplained loss of consciousness; systematized delusions; hallucinations other than visual; relative preservation of medial temporal lobe on CT or MRI scan; decreased tracer uptake on SPECT or PET imaging in occipital regions; prominent slow waves on EEG with temporal lobe transient sharp waves
AD: Alzheimer’s disease; DLB: dementia with Lewy bodies; MIBG: metaiodobenzylguanidine; NIA-AA: National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer’s Association; PET: positron emission tomography; REM: rapid eye movement; SPECT: single photon emission computed tomography

Biomarkers for AD, but not DLB

The 2011 diagnostic criteria for AD incorporate biomarkers that can be measured in vivo and reflect speci?c features of disease-related pathophysiologic processes. Biomarkers for AD are divided into 2 categories:11

  • amyloid-beta (Aβ) accumulation: abnormal tracer retention on amyloid positron emission topography (PET) imaging and low cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ42
  • neuronal degeneration or injury: elevated CSF tau (total and phosphorylated tau), decreased ?uorodeoxyglucose uptake on PET in temporo-parietal cortices, and atrophy on structural MRI in the hippocampal and temporo-parietal regions.

No clinically applicable genotypic or CSF markers exist to support a DLB diagnosis, but there are many promising candidates, including elevated levels of CSF p-tau 181, CSF levels of alpha- and beta-synuclein,12 and CSF beta-glucocerebrosidase levels.13 PET mapping of brain acetylcholinesterase activity,14 123I-2β-carbomethoxy-3β- (4-iodophenyl)-N-(3-fluoropropyl)nortropane single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) dopamine transporter (DaT) imaging15 and metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scintigraphy also are promising methods. DaT scan SPECT is FDA-approved for detecting loss of functional dopaminergic neuron terminals in the striatum and can differentiate between AD and DLB with a sensitivity and specificity of 78% to 88% and 94% to 100%, respectively.16 This test is covered by Medicare for differentiating AD and DLB.

Differences in presentation

Cognitive impairment. Contrary to the early memory impairment that characterizes AD, memory deficits in DLB usually appear later in the disease course.5 Patients with DLB manifest greater attentional, visuospatial, and executive impairments than those with AD, whereas AD causes more profound episodic (declarative) memory impairment than DLB. DLB patients show more preserved consolidation and storage of verbal information than AD patients because of less neuroanatomical and cholinergic compromise in the medial temporal lobe. There is no evidence of significant differences in remote memory, semantic memory, and language (naming and fluency).

Compromised attention in DLB may be the basis for fluctuating cognition, a characteristic of the disease. The greater attentional impairment and reaction time variability in DLB compared with AD is evident during complex tasks for attention and may be a function of the executive and visuospatial demands of the tasks.17

Executive functions critical to adaptive, goal-directed behavior are more impaired in DLB than AD. DLB patients are more susceptible to distraction and have difficulty engaging in a task and shifting from 1 task to another. This, together with a tendency for confabulation and perseveration, are signs of executive dysfunction.

 

 

Neuropsychiatric features. DLB patients are more likely than AD patients to exhibit psychiatric symptoms and have more functional impairment.18 In an analysis of autopsy-confirmed cases, hallucinations and delusions were more frequent with Lewy body pathology (75%) than AD (21%) at initial clinical evaluation.18 By the end stages of both illnesses, the degree of psychotic symptoms is comparable.19 Depression is common in DLB; whether base rates of depressed mood and major depression differ between DLB and AD is uncertain.20

Psychosis in AD can be induced by medication or delirium, or triggered by poor sensory perceptions. Psychotic symptoms occur more frequently during the moderate and advanced stages of AD, when patients present with visual hallucinations, delusions, or delusional misidentifications. As many as 10% to 20% of patients with AD experience hallucinations, typically visual. Delusions occur in 30% to 50% of AD patients, usually in the later stages of the disease. The most common delusional themes are infidelity, theft, and paranoia. Female sex is a risk factor for psychosis in AD. Delusions co-occur with aggression, anxiety, and aberrant motor behavior.

Visual hallucinations—mostly vivid, well-formed, false perceptions of insects, animals, or people—are the defining feature of DLB.21 Many patients recognize that they are experiencing visual hallucinations and can ignore them. DLB patients also may experience visual illusions, such as misperceiving household objects as living beings. Delusions—typically paranoid—are common among DLB patients, as are depression and anxiety.1 Agitation or aggressive behavior tends to occur late in the illness, if at all.

The causes of psychotic symptoms in DLB are not fully understood, but dopamine dysfunction likely is involved in hallucinations, delusions, and agitation, and serotonin dysfunction may be associated with depression and anxiety. Rapid eye movement (REM) sleep/wakefulness dysregulation, in which the dream imagery of REM sleep may occur during wakefulness, also has been proposed as a mechanism for visual hallucinations in DLB.22 In DLB, psychotic symptoms occur early and are a hallmark of this illness, whereas in AD they usually occur in the middle to late stages of the disease.

Motor symptoms. In AD, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) are common later in the disease, are strongly correlated with disease severity, and are a strong, independent predictor of depression severity.23 EPS are more common in DLB than in AD24 and DLB patients are at higher risk of developing EPS even with low doses of typical antipsychotics, compared with AD patients.25

Other symptoms. REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD) is characterized by enacting dreams—often violent—during REM sleep. RBD is common in DLB and many patients also have excessive daytime somnolence. Other sleep disorders in DLB include insomnia, obstructive sleep apnea, central sleep apnea, restless legs syndrome, and periodic limb movements during sleep.

In AD patients, common sleep behaviors include confusion in the early evening (“sundowning”) and frequent nighttime awakenings, often accompanied by wandering.26 Orthostatic hypotension, impotence, urinary incontinence, and constipation are common in DLB. Lack of insight concerning personal cognitive, mood, and behavioral state is highly prevalent in AD patients and more common than in DLB.

Diagnostic evaluation

Because there are no definitive clinical markers for DLB, diagnosis is based on a detailed clinical and family history from the patient and a reliable informant, as well as a physical, neurologic, and mental status examination that looks for associated noncognitive symptoms, and neuropsychological evaluation. Reasons DLB may be misdiagnosed include:

  • Some “core” clinical features of DLB may not appear or may overlap with AD.
  • Presence and severity of concurrent AD pathology in DLB may modify the clinical presentation, with decreased rates of hallucinations and parkinsonism and increased neurofibrillary tangles.
  • Failure to reliably identify fluctuations—variations in cognition and arousal, such as periods of unresponsiveness while awake (“zoning out”), excessive daytime somnolence, and disorganized speech.27

Detecting and characterizing cognitive deficits in dementia patients using neuropsychological testing is important in establishing a clinical diagnosis, determining baseline levels of impairment, forming a prognosis, and initiating disease-specific treatments. Differences in neuropsychological findings in AD and DLB are outlined in Table 2.16,28-33 Several studies have suggested using these measures to differentiate patients with DLB from those with AD.20

Table 2

Diagnostic testing for Alzheimer’s disease and dementia with Lewy bodies

Alzheimer’s diseaseDementia with Lewy bodies
Neuropsychological testing findings
Relatively more impairment on verbal memory tasks, delayed recall, delayed recognition, and encoding and storing information.28 Dysfunction of episodic memory functionRelatively more impairment on attention or concentration, verbal fluency, visuoperceptual, visuoconstructive, visual memory tests, and frontal executive functions.28 Relatively preserved confrontation naming and verbal memory
MRI findings
Diffuse cortical atrophy, relatively greater volume loss in hippocampus and medial temporal lobe structures (strong correlation with severity)29Mild generalized cerebral cortical atrophy with minimal hippocampal atrophy and relative preservation of medial temporal lobe structures30
[18F]FDG PET
Widespread metabolic deficits in neocortical association areas, with sparing of the basal ganglia, thalamus, cerebellum, primary sensory motor cortex, and visual cortexWidespread cortical hypometabolism, more marked in primary visual and occipital association areas, and less severe in parietal, frontal, and anterior cingulate cortices.31 Severe cholinergic deafferentation of the neocortex, particularly in posterior cortical regions32
Single photon emission computed tomography
Parietotemporal hypoperfusionOccipital hypoperfusion
123I-FP-CIT SPECT (DaT scan)
No significant loss of DaTLow nigrostriatal terminal density of DaT caused by severe nigrostriatal degeneration16
Myocardial scintigraphy with MIBG
No significant change in MIBG uptakeDecreased MIBG uptake33
123I-FP-CIT: 123I-2β-carbomethoxy-3β-(4-iodophenyl)-N-(3-fluoropropyl)nortropane; DaT: dopamine transporter; FDG PET: [18F]-fluoro-d-glucose positron emission tomography; MIBG: metaiodobenzylguanidine; SPECT: single photon emission computed tomography
 

 

Evidence is insufficient to support using electroencephalographic and polysomnographic studies when initially evaluating patients with dementia. Brain CT or MRI are recommended as part of the initial evaluation of dementia patients to exclude treatable causes of dementia and help clarify the differential diagnosis. Occipital hypometabolism and hypoperfusion demonstrated on PET and SPECT imaging have high sensitivity and specificity for differentiating AD from DLB.

To diagnose DLB more consistently, look for core features of the disease, RBD, antipsychotic hypersensitivity, and decreased striatal binding at presynaptic DaT sites.15 Abnormal (low binding) DaT activity is the most reliable diagnostic marker for DLB.34 Myocardial scintigraphy with MIBG is sensitive to pathologic changes of DLB before clinical expression and could overcome the difficulties of using clinical criteria alone to identify patients with DLB.35 MIBG scintigraphy may be preferred to DaT scan because it is less expensive and its sensitivity and specificity to DLB are independent of the presence of parkinsonism.35

For an overview of pharmacotherapy options for patients with AD or DLB, see Box 2.

Box 2

Treatments for Alzheimer’s disease and dementia with Lewy bodies

Pharmacotherapy options for patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) or dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) include cholinesterase inhibitors, memantine, antipsychotics, and other agents.

Cholinesterase inhibitors. Donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine are FDA-approved for treating AD. Their efficacy appears to be similar, so the choice of agent is based largely on cost, patient tolerability, and physician experience.

No medications are FDA-approved for treating DLB. Neocortical cholinergic activity assessed by choline acetyltransferase levels is more severely depleted in DLB than in AD, and this deficit is correlated with the presence of visual hallucinations and global severity of cognitive impairment.a Therefore, drugs that enhance central cholinergic function offer a therapeutic approach for DLB; cognitive and hallucinatory symptoms are the anticipated targets. Multiple anecdotal reports, open-label studies,b,c and 1 randomized, placebo-controlled triald suggest that cholinesterase inhibitors are efficacious in DLB, with reported benefits in cognition, fluctuations, psychotic symptoms, and parkinsonian symptoms. A 20-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter studyd of patients with DLB found rivastigmine, 6 to 12 mg/d, was superior to placebo. Patients receiving rivastigmine exhibited significantly reduced anxiety, delusions, and hallucinations and significantly better performance on a computerized battery of neuropsychological tests, especially tasks that required sustained attention. Differences between rivastigmine and placebo disappeared after drug discontinuation.

Memantine is a noncompetitive antagonist of N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors that is effective in AD.e The possible involvement of glutamate in DLB has provided a rationale for treating DLB with memantine. Two randomized controlled trials in DLB found that patients treated with memantine for 24 weeks performed better on Clinical Global Impression of Change, but not on most other secondary outcome measures.f,g In both studies, memantine was well tolerated. However, other studies have noted worsening of delusions and hallucinations with memantine in DLB patients.h

Antipsychotics. Agitation is common in moderate and advanced AD. Atypical antipsychotics have been used with variable efficacy to treat agitation, but their use is associated with excess mortality. DLB patients pose a considerable therapeutic challenge because antipsychotics—the mainstay of treatment of psychosis and behavioral problems in most other disorders—can provoke severe, irreversible, and often fatal sensitivity reactions in this type of dementia.i A 2- to 3-fold increased mortality risk associated with antipsychotic sensitivity reactions in DLB is partly mediated via acute blockade of postsynaptic dopamine D2 receptors in the striatum. For severe and disabling psychosis, a trial of a cholinesterase inhibitor and/or lowering the dose of antiparkinsonian medication should be considered first. In urgent situations, small doses of an atypical antipsychotic that is least associated with parkinsonism side effects—such as quetiapine or aripiprazole—should be used.

Other treatments. Treatment of parkinsonian symptoms in DLB patients is similar to that for Parkinson’s disease, but the risk of psychotic symptoms in DLB warrants a conservative approach. Levodopa seems to be more effective than dopamine agonists and produces fewer side effects.j Rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder often responds to low doses of clonazepam (0.25 to 1.5 mg). Depression and anxiety disorders are common in AD at all stages and their treatment is not fundamentally different than in geriatric patients without dementia. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and electroconvulsive therapy have been used successfully in depressed patients with AD or DLB.k,l

Disease-modifying treatments. Researchers are evaluating an array of antiamyloid and neuroprotective therapeutic approaches for AD based on the hypothesis that amyloid-beta protein plays a pivotal role in disease onset and progression. Interventions that reduce amyloid production, limit aggregation, or increase clearance may block the cascade of events comprising AD pathogenesis. Reducing tau hyperphosphorylation, limiting oxidation and excitotoxicity, and controlling inflammation also may be beneficial strategies. Potentially neuroprotective and restorative treatments such as neurotrophins, neurotrophic factor enhancers, and stem cell-related approaches also are being investigated.

There are no large-scale studies of disease-modifying treatments for DLB. Potential areas of research include the relationship between proteasome function and a-synuclein pathology, the role of beta-synuclein, and the impact of alterations to alpha-synuclein on its propensity to aggregate.

References

a. Ballard C, Ziabreva I, Perry R, et al. Differences in neuropathologic characteristics across the Lewy body dementia spectrum. Neurology. 2006;67(11):1931-1934.

b. Beversdorf DQ, Warner JL, Davis RA, et al. Donepezil in the treatment of dementia with lewy bodies. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2004;12(5):542-544.

c. Edwards K, Royall D, Hershey L, et al. Efficacy and safety of galantamine in patients with dementia with Lewy bodies: a 24-week open-label study. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2007;23(6):401-405.

d. McKeith I, Del Ser T, Spano P, et al. Efficacy of rivastigmine in dementia with Lewy bodies: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled international study. Lancet. 2000;356(9247):2031-2036.

e. Tariot PN, Farlow MR, Grossberg GT, et al. Memantine treatment in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer disease already receiving donepezil: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;291(3):317-324.

f. Aarsland D, Ballard C, Walker Z, et al. Memantine in patients with Parkinson’s disease dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8(7):613-618.

g. Emre M, Tsolaki M, Bonuccelli U, et al. Memantine for patients with Parkinson’s disease dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(10):969-977.

h. Ridha BH, Josephs KA, Rossor MN. Delusions and hallucinations in dementia with Lewy bodies: worsening with memantine. Neurology. 2005;65(3):481-482.

i. McKeith I, Fairbairn A, Perry R, et al. Neuroleptic sensitivity in patients with senile dementia of Lewy body type. BMJ. 1992;305(6855):673-678.

j. Fernandez HH, Wu CK, Ott BR. Pharmacotherapy of dementia with Lewy bodies. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2003;4(11):2027-2037.

k. Swartz M, Barak Y, Mirecki I, et al. Treating depression in Alzheimer’s disease: integration of differing guidelines. Int Psychogeriatr. 2000;12(3):353-358.

l. Takahashi S, Mizukami K, Yasuno F, et al. Depression associated with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and the effect of somatotherapy. Psychogeriatrics. 2009;9(2):56-61.

 

 

Related Resources

  • Hanyu H, Sato T, Hirao K, et al. Differences in clinical course between dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer’s disease. Eur J Neurol. 2009;16(2):212-217.
  • Walker Z, McKeith I, Rodda J, et al. Comparison of cognitive decline between dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer’s disease: a cohort study. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e000380.

Drug Brand Names

  • Aripiprazole • Abilify
  • Clonazepam • Klonopin
  • Donepezil • Aricept
  • Galantamine • Razadyne, Reminyl
  • Levodopa • Dopar, Larodopa
  • Memantine • Namenda
  • Quetiapine • Seroquel
  • Rivastigmine • Exelon

Disclosure

Drs. Bishnoi and Manepalli report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

Dr. Grossberg serves as a consultant to Forest, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer. His department receives research funding from Novartis, Janssen, and Pfizer.

References

1. McKeith IG, Galasko D, Kosaka K, et al. Consensus guidelines for the clinical and pathologic diagnosis of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB): report of the consortium on DLB international workshop. Neurology. 1996;47(5):1113-1124.

2. Buracchio T, Arvanitakis Z, Gorbien M. Dementia with Lewy bodies: current concepts. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2005;20(5):306-320.

3. Fujishiro H, Iseki E, Higashi S, et al. Distribution of cerebral amyloid deposition and its relevance to clinical phenotype in Lewy body dementia. Neurosci Lett. 2010;486(1):19-23.

4. Kosaka K. Diffuse Lewy body disease. Neuropathology. 2000;20(suppl):S73-S78.

5. McKeith IG, Dickson DW, Lowe J, et al. Consortium on DLB. Diagnosis and management of dementia with Lewy bodies: third report of the DLB Consortium. Neurology. 2005;65(12):1863-1872.

6. Cummings JL, Cole G. Alzheimer disease. JAMA. 2002;287(18):2335-2338.

7. Zaccai J, McCracken C, Brayne C. A systematic review of prevalence and incidence studies of dementia with Lewy bodies. Age Ageing. 2005;34(6):561-566.

8. Bradshaw J, Saling M, Hopwood M, et al. Fluctuating cognition in dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer’s disease is qualitatively distinct. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004;75(3):382-387.

9. Singleton AB, Wharton A, O’Brien KK, et al. Clinical and neuropathological correlates of apolipoprotein E genotype in dementia with Lewy bodies. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2002;14(4):167-175.

10. McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H, et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):263-269.

11. Jack CR, Jr, Albert MS, Knopman DS, et al. Introduction to the recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):257-262.

12. Mollenhauer B, Cullen V, Kahn I, et al. Direct quantification of CSF alpha-synuclein by ELISA and first cross-sectional study in patients with neurodegeneration. Exp Neurol. 2008;213(2):315-325.

13. Parnetti L, Balducci C, Pierguidi L, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid beta-glucocerebrosidase activity is reduced in dementia with Lewy bodies. Neurobiol Dis. 2009;34(3):484-486.

14. Shimada H, Hirano S, Shinotoh H, et al. Mapping of brain acetylcholinesterase alterations in Lewy body disease by PET. Neurology. 2009;73(4):273-278.

15. McKeith I, O’Brien J, Walker Z, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of dopamine transporter imaging with 123I-FP-CIT SPECT in dementia with Lewy bodies: a phase III, multicentre study. Lancet Neurol. 2007;6(4):305-313.

16. Walker Z, Jaros E, Walker RW, et al. Dementia with Lewy bodies: a comparison of clinical diagnosis, FP-CIT single photon emission computed tomography imaging and autopsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007;78(11):1176-1181.

17. Bradshaw JM, Saling M, Anderson V, et al. Higher cortical deficits influence attentional processing in dementia with Lewy bodies, relative to patients with dementia of the Alzheimer’s type and controls. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2006;77(10):1129-1135.

18. Weiner MF, Hynan LS, Parikh B, et al. Can Alzheimer’s disease and dementias with Lewy bodies be distinguished clinically? J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2003;16(4):245-250.

19. Stavitsky K, Brickman AM, Scarmeas N, et al. The progression of cognition, psychiatric symptoms, and functional abilities in dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol. 2006;63(10):1450-1456.

20. Ferman TJ, Smith GE, Boeve BF, et al. Neuropsychological differentiation of dementia with Lewy bodies from normal aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Clin Neuropsychol. 2006;20(4):623-636.

21. McKeith IG, Perry EK, Perry RH. Report of the second dementia with Lewy body international workshop: diagnosis and treatment. Consortium on Dementia with Lewy Bodies. Neurology. 1999;53(5):902-905.

22. Boeve BF, Silber MH, Ferman TJ, et al. Association of REM sleep behavior disorder and neurodegenerative disease may reflect an underlying synucleinopathy. Mov Disord. 2001;16(4):622-630.

23. Portet F, Scarmeas N, Cosentino S, et al. Extrapyramidal signs before and after diagnosis of incident Alzheimer disease in a prospective population study. Arch Neurol. 2009;66(9):1120-1126.

24. McKeith I, Fairbairn A, Perry R, et al. Neuroleptic sensitivity in patients with senile dementia of Lewy body type. BMJ. 1992;305(6855):673-678.

25. Tarawneh R, Galvin JE. Distinguishing Lewy body dementias from Alzheimer’s disease. Expert Rev Neurother. 2007;7(11):1499-1516.

26. Ancoli-Israel S, Klauber MR, Gillin JC, et al. Sleep in non-institutionalized Alzheimer’s disease patients. Aging (Milano). 1994;6(6):451-458.

27. Ferman TJ, Smith GE, Boeve BF, et al. DLB fluctuations: specific features that reliably differentiate DLB from AD and normal aging. Neurology. 2004;62(2):181-187.

28. Salmon DP, Galasko D, Hansen LA, et al. Neuropsychological deficits associated with diffuse Lewy body disease. Brain Cogn. 1996;31(2):148-165.

29. Jack CR, Jr, Petersen RC, Xu Y, et al. Rates of hippocampal atrophy correlate with change in clinical status in aging and AD. Neurology. 2000;55(4):484-489.

30. Burton EJ, Barber R, Mukaetova-Ladinska EB, et al. Medial temporal lobe atrophy on MRI differentiates Alzheimer’s disease from dementia with Lewy bodies and vascular cognitive impairment: a prospective study with pathological verification of diagnosis. Brain. 2009;132(pt 1):195-203.

31. Ishii K, Soma T, Kono AK, et al. Comparison of regional brain volume and glucose metabolism between patients with mild dementia with lewy bodies and those with mild Alzheimer’s disease. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(5):704-711.

32. Klein JC, Eggers C, Kalbe E, et al. Neurotransmitter changes in dementia with Lewy bodies and Parkinson disease dementia in vivo. Neurology. 2010;74(11):885-892.

33. Fujishiro H, Nakamura S, Kitazawa M, et al. Early detection of dementia with Lewy bodies in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment using 123I-MIBG cardiac scintigraphy. J Neurol Sci. 2012;315(1-2):115-119.

34. O’Brien JT, McKeith IG, Walker Z, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 123I-FP-CIT SPECT in possible dementia with Lewy bodies. Br J Psychiatry. 2009;194:34-39.

35. Yoshita M, Taki J, Yokoyama K, et al. Value of 123I-MIBG radioactivity in the differential diagnosis of DLB from AD. Neurology. 2006;66(12):1850-1854.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Ram J. Bishnoi, MD
Fellow, Geriatric Psychiatry, Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
George T. Grossberg, MD
Samuel W. Fordyce Professor, Director of Geriatric Psychiatry, Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
Jothika Manepalli, MD
Professor, Division of Geriatric Psychiatry, Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
22-30
Legacy Keywords
Alzheimer's disease; dementia; dementia with Lewy bodies; Lewy bodies
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Ram J. Bishnoi, MD
Fellow, Geriatric Psychiatry, Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
George T. Grossberg, MD
Samuel W. Fordyce Professor, Director of Geriatric Psychiatry, Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
Jothika Manepalli, MD
Professor, Division of Geriatric Psychiatry, Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO

Author and Disclosure Information

Ram J. Bishnoi, MD
Fellow, Geriatric Psychiatry, Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
George T. Grossberg, MD
Samuel W. Fordyce Professor, Director of Geriatric Psychiatry, Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO
Jothika Manepalli, MD
Professor, Division of Geriatric Psychiatry, Department of Neurology and Psychiatry, St. Louis University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO

Article PDF
Article PDF

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) are the first and second most common causes of neurodegenerative dementia, respectively.“New Alzheimer’s disease guidelines: Implications for clinicians,” Current Psychiatry, March 2012, p. 15-20; http://bit.ly/UNYikk.

The 2005 report of the DLB Consortium5 recognizes central, core, suggestive, and supportive features of DLB (Table 1).5,10 These features are considered in the context of other confounding clinical conditions and the timing of cognitive and motor symptoms. The revised DLB criteria5 require a central feature of progressive cognitive decline. “Probable DLB” is when a patient presents with 2 core features or 1 core feature and ≥1 suggestive features. A diagnosis of “possible DLB” requires 1 core feature or 1 suggestive feature in the presence of progressive cognitive decline.

Table 1

Diagnostic criteria for AD and DLB

NIA-AA criteria for AD (2011)10
Possible AD: Clinical and cognitive criteria (DSM-IV-TR) for AD are met and there is an absence of biomarkers to support the diagnosis or there is evidence of a secondary disorder that can cause dementia
Probable AD: Clinical and cognitive criteria for AD are met and there is documented progressive cognitive decline or abnormal biomarker(s) suggestive of AD or evidence of proven AD autosomal dominant genetic mutation (presenilin-1, presenilin-2, amyloid-β precursor protein)
Definite AD: Clinical criteria for probable AD are met and there is histopathologic evidence of the disorder
Revised clinical diagnostic criteria for DLB (2005)5
Core features: Fluctuating cognition, recurrent visual hallucinations, soft motor features of parkinsonism
Suggestive features: REM sleep behavior disorder, severe antipsychotic sensitivity, decreased tracer uptake in striatum on SPECT dopamine transporter imaging or on myocardial scintigraphy with MIBG
Supportive features (common but lacking diagnostic specificity): repeated falls and syncope; transient, unexplained loss of consciousness; systematized delusions; hallucinations other than visual; relative preservation of medial temporal lobe on CT or MRI scan; decreased tracer uptake on SPECT or PET imaging in occipital regions; prominent slow waves on EEG with temporal lobe transient sharp waves
AD: Alzheimer’s disease; DLB: dementia with Lewy bodies; MIBG: metaiodobenzylguanidine; NIA-AA: National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer’s Association; PET: positron emission tomography; REM: rapid eye movement; SPECT: single photon emission computed tomography

Biomarkers for AD, but not DLB

The 2011 diagnostic criteria for AD incorporate biomarkers that can be measured in vivo and reflect speci?c features of disease-related pathophysiologic processes. Biomarkers for AD are divided into 2 categories:11

  • amyloid-beta (Aβ) accumulation: abnormal tracer retention on amyloid positron emission topography (PET) imaging and low cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ42
  • neuronal degeneration or injury: elevated CSF tau (total and phosphorylated tau), decreased ?uorodeoxyglucose uptake on PET in temporo-parietal cortices, and atrophy on structural MRI in the hippocampal and temporo-parietal regions.

No clinically applicable genotypic or CSF markers exist to support a DLB diagnosis, but there are many promising candidates, including elevated levels of CSF p-tau 181, CSF levels of alpha- and beta-synuclein,12 and CSF beta-glucocerebrosidase levels.13 PET mapping of brain acetylcholinesterase activity,14 123I-2β-carbomethoxy-3β- (4-iodophenyl)-N-(3-fluoropropyl)nortropane single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) dopamine transporter (DaT) imaging15 and metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scintigraphy also are promising methods. DaT scan SPECT is FDA-approved for detecting loss of functional dopaminergic neuron terminals in the striatum and can differentiate between AD and DLB with a sensitivity and specificity of 78% to 88% and 94% to 100%, respectively.16 This test is covered by Medicare for differentiating AD and DLB.

Differences in presentation

Cognitive impairment. Contrary to the early memory impairment that characterizes AD, memory deficits in DLB usually appear later in the disease course.5 Patients with DLB manifest greater attentional, visuospatial, and executive impairments than those with AD, whereas AD causes more profound episodic (declarative) memory impairment than DLB. DLB patients show more preserved consolidation and storage of verbal information than AD patients because of less neuroanatomical and cholinergic compromise in the medial temporal lobe. There is no evidence of significant differences in remote memory, semantic memory, and language (naming and fluency).

Compromised attention in DLB may be the basis for fluctuating cognition, a characteristic of the disease. The greater attentional impairment and reaction time variability in DLB compared with AD is evident during complex tasks for attention and may be a function of the executive and visuospatial demands of the tasks.17

Executive functions critical to adaptive, goal-directed behavior are more impaired in DLB than AD. DLB patients are more susceptible to distraction and have difficulty engaging in a task and shifting from 1 task to another. This, together with a tendency for confabulation and perseveration, are signs of executive dysfunction.

 

 

Neuropsychiatric features. DLB patients are more likely than AD patients to exhibit psychiatric symptoms and have more functional impairment.18 In an analysis of autopsy-confirmed cases, hallucinations and delusions were more frequent with Lewy body pathology (75%) than AD (21%) at initial clinical evaluation.18 By the end stages of both illnesses, the degree of psychotic symptoms is comparable.19 Depression is common in DLB; whether base rates of depressed mood and major depression differ between DLB and AD is uncertain.20

Psychosis in AD can be induced by medication or delirium, or triggered by poor sensory perceptions. Psychotic symptoms occur more frequently during the moderate and advanced stages of AD, when patients present with visual hallucinations, delusions, or delusional misidentifications. As many as 10% to 20% of patients with AD experience hallucinations, typically visual. Delusions occur in 30% to 50% of AD patients, usually in the later stages of the disease. The most common delusional themes are infidelity, theft, and paranoia. Female sex is a risk factor for psychosis in AD. Delusions co-occur with aggression, anxiety, and aberrant motor behavior.

Visual hallucinations—mostly vivid, well-formed, false perceptions of insects, animals, or people—are the defining feature of DLB.21 Many patients recognize that they are experiencing visual hallucinations and can ignore them. DLB patients also may experience visual illusions, such as misperceiving household objects as living beings. Delusions—typically paranoid—are common among DLB patients, as are depression and anxiety.1 Agitation or aggressive behavior tends to occur late in the illness, if at all.

The causes of psychotic symptoms in DLB are not fully understood, but dopamine dysfunction likely is involved in hallucinations, delusions, and agitation, and serotonin dysfunction may be associated with depression and anxiety. Rapid eye movement (REM) sleep/wakefulness dysregulation, in which the dream imagery of REM sleep may occur during wakefulness, also has been proposed as a mechanism for visual hallucinations in DLB.22 In DLB, psychotic symptoms occur early and are a hallmark of this illness, whereas in AD they usually occur in the middle to late stages of the disease.

Motor symptoms. In AD, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) are common later in the disease, are strongly correlated with disease severity, and are a strong, independent predictor of depression severity.23 EPS are more common in DLB than in AD24 and DLB patients are at higher risk of developing EPS even with low doses of typical antipsychotics, compared with AD patients.25

Other symptoms. REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD) is characterized by enacting dreams—often violent—during REM sleep. RBD is common in DLB and many patients also have excessive daytime somnolence. Other sleep disorders in DLB include insomnia, obstructive sleep apnea, central sleep apnea, restless legs syndrome, and periodic limb movements during sleep.

In AD patients, common sleep behaviors include confusion in the early evening (“sundowning”) and frequent nighttime awakenings, often accompanied by wandering.26 Orthostatic hypotension, impotence, urinary incontinence, and constipation are common in DLB. Lack of insight concerning personal cognitive, mood, and behavioral state is highly prevalent in AD patients and more common than in DLB.

Diagnostic evaluation

Because there are no definitive clinical markers for DLB, diagnosis is based on a detailed clinical and family history from the patient and a reliable informant, as well as a physical, neurologic, and mental status examination that looks for associated noncognitive symptoms, and neuropsychological evaluation. Reasons DLB may be misdiagnosed include:

  • Some “core” clinical features of DLB may not appear or may overlap with AD.
  • Presence and severity of concurrent AD pathology in DLB may modify the clinical presentation, with decreased rates of hallucinations and parkinsonism and increased neurofibrillary tangles.
  • Failure to reliably identify fluctuations—variations in cognition and arousal, such as periods of unresponsiveness while awake (“zoning out”), excessive daytime somnolence, and disorganized speech.27

Detecting and characterizing cognitive deficits in dementia patients using neuropsychological testing is important in establishing a clinical diagnosis, determining baseline levels of impairment, forming a prognosis, and initiating disease-specific treatments. Differences in neuropsychological findings in AD and DLB are outlined in Table 2.16,28-33 Several studies have suggested using these measures to differentiate patients with DLB from those with AD.20

Table 2

Diagnostic testing for Alzheimer’s disease and dementia with Lewy bodies

Alzheimer’s diseaseDementia with Lewy bodies
Neuropsychological testing findings
Relatively more impairment on verbal memory tasks, delayed recall, delayed recognition, and encoding and storing information.28 Dysfunction of episodic memory functionRelatively more impairment on attention or concentration, verbal fluency, visuoperceptual, visuoconstructive, visual memory tests, and frontal executive functions.28 Relatively preserved confrontation naming and verbal memory
MRI findings
Diffuse cortical atrophy, relatively greater volume loss in hippocampus and medial temporal lobe structures (strong correlation with severity)29Mild generalized cerebral cortical atrophy with minimal hippocampal atrophy and relative preservation of medial temporal lobe structures30
[18F]FDG PET
Widespread metabolic deficits in neocortical association areas, with sparing of the basal ganglia, thalamus, cerebellum, primary sensory motor cortex, and visual cortexWidespread cortical hypometabolism, more marked in primary visual and occipital association areas, and less severe in parietal, frontal, and anterior cingulate cortices.31 Severe cholinergic deafferentation of the neocortex, particularly in posterior cortical regions32
Single photon emission computed tomography
Parietotemporal hypoperfusionOccipital hypoperfusion
123I-FP-CIT SPECT (DaT scan)
No significant loss of DaTLow nigrostriatal terminal density of DaT caused by severe nigrostriatal degeneration16
Myocardial scintigraphy with MIBG
No significant change in MIBG uptakeDecreased MIBG uptake33
123I-FP-CIT: 123I-2β-carbomethoxy-3β-(4-iodophenyl)-N-(3-fluoropropyl)nortropane; DaT: dopamine transporter; FDG PET: [18F]-fluoro-d-glucose positron emission tomography; MIBG: metaiodobenzylguanidine; SPECT: single photon emission computed tomography
 

 

Evidence is insufficient to support using electroencephalographic and polysomnographic studies when initially evaluating patients with dementia. Brain CT or MRI are recommended as part of the initial evaluation of dementia patients to exclude treatable causes of dementia and help clarify the differential diagnosis. Occipital hypometabolism and hypoperfusion demonstrated on PET and SPECT imaging have high sensitivity and specificity for differentiating AD from DLB.

To diagnose DLB more consistently, look for core features of the disease, RBD, antipsychotic hypersensitivity, and decreased striatal binding at presynaptic DaT sites.15 Abnormal (low binding) DaT activity is the most reliable diagnostic marker for DLB.34 Myocardial scintigraphy with MIBG is sensitive to pathologic changes of DLB before clinical expression and could overcome the difficulties of using clinical criteria alone to identify patients with DLB.35 MIBG scintigraphy may be preferred to DaT scan because it is less expensive and its sensitivity and specificity to DLB are independent of the presence of parkinsonism.35

For an overview of pharmacotherapy options for patients with AD or DLB, see Box 2.

Box 2

Treatments for Alzheimer’s disease and dementia with Lewy bodies

Pharmacotherapy options for patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) or dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) include cholinesterase inhibitors, memantine, antipsychotics, and other agents.

Cholinesterase inhibitors. Donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine are FDA-approved for treating AD. Their efficacy appears to be similar, so the choice of agent is based largely on cost, patient tolerability, and physician experience.

No medications are FDA-approved for treating DLB. Neocortical cholinergic activity assessed by choline acetyltransferase levels is more severely depleted in DLB than in AD, and this deficit is correlated with the presence of visual hallucinations and global severity of cognitive impairment.a Therefore, drugs that enhance central cholinergic function offer a therapeutic approach for DLB; cognitive and hallucinatory symptoms are the anticipated targets. Multiple anecdotal reports, open-label studies,b,c and 1 randomized, placebo-controlled triald suggest that cholinesterase inhibitors are efficacious in DLB, with reported benefits in cognition, fluctuations, psychotic symptoms, and parkinsonian symptoms. A 20-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter studyd of patients with DLB found rivastigmine, 6 to 12 mg/d, was superior to placebo. Patients receiving rivastigmine exhibited significantly reduced anxiety, delusions, and hallucinations and significantly better performance on a computerized battery of neuropsychological tests, especially tasks that required sustained attention. Differences between rivastigmine and placebo disappeared after drug discontinuation.

Memantine is a noncompetitive antagonist of N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors that is effective in AD.e The possible involvement of glutamate in DLB has provided a rationale for treating DLB with memantine. Two randomized controlled trials in DLB found that patients treated with memantine for 24 weeks performed better on Clinical Global Impression of Change, but not on most other secondary outcome measures.f,g In both studies, memantine was well tolerated. However, other studies have noted worsening of delusions and hallucinations with memantine in DLB patients.h

Antipsychotics. Agitation is common in moderate and advanced AD. Atypical antipsychotics have been used with variable efficacy to treat agitation, but their use is associated with excess mortality. DLB patients pose a considerable therapeutic challenge because antipsychotics—the mainstay of treatment of psychosis and behavioral problems in most other disorders—can provoke severe, irreversible, and often fatal sensitivity reactions in this type of dementia.i A 2- to 3-fold increased mortality risk associated with antipsychotic sensitivity reactions in DLB is partly mediated via acute blockade of postsynaptic dopamine D2 receptors in the striatum. For severe and disabling psychosis, a trial of a cholinesterase inhibitor and/or lowering the dose of antiparkinsonian medication should be considered first. In urgent situations, small doses of an atypical antipsychotic that is least associated with parkinsonism side effects—such as quetiapine or aripiprazole—should be used.

Other treatments. Treatment of parkinsonian symptoms in DLB patients is similar to that for Parkinson’s disease, but the risk of psychotic symptoms in DLB warrants a conservative approach. Levodopa seems to be more effective than dopamine agonists and produces fewer side effects.j Rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder often responds to low doses of clonazepam (0.25 to 1.5 mg). Depression and anxiety disorders are common in AD at all stages and their treatment is not fundamentally different than in geriatric patients without dementia. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and electroconvulsive therapy have been used successfully in depressed patients with AD or DLB.k,l

Disease-modifying treatments. Researchers are evaluating an array of antiamyloid and neuroprotective therapeutic approaches for AD based on the hypothesis that amyloid-beta protein plays a pivotal role in disease onset and progression. Interventions that reduce amyloid production, limit aggregation, or increase clearance may block the cascade of events comprising AD pathogenesis. Reducing tau hyperphosphorylation, limiting oxidation and excitotoxicity, and controlling inflammation also may be beneficial strategies. Potentially neuroprotective and restorative treatments such as neurotrophins, neurotrophic factor enhancers, and stem cell-related approaches also are being investigated.

There are no large-scale studies of disease-modifying treatments for DLB. Potential areas of research include the relationship between proteasome function and a-synuclein pathology, the role of beta-synuclein, and the impact of alterations to alpha-synuclein on its propensity to aggregate.

References

a. Ballard C, Ziabreva I, Perry R, et al. Differences in neuropathologic characteristics across the Lewy body dementia spectrum. Neurology. 2006;67(11):1931-1934.

b. Beversdorf DQ, Warner JL, Davis RA, et al. Donepezil in the treatment of dementia with lewy bodies. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2004;12(5):542-544.

c. Edwards K, Royall D, Hershey L, et al. Efficacy and safety of galantamine in patients with dementia with Lewy bodies: a 24-week open-label study. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2007;23(6):401-405.

d. McKeith I, Del Ser T, Spano P, et al. Efficacy of rivastigmine in dementia with Lewy bodies: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled international study. Lancet. 2000;356(9247):2031-2036.

e. Tariot PN, Farlow MR, Grossberg GT, et al. Memantine treatment in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer disease already receiving donepezil: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;291(3):317-324.

f. Aarsland D, Ballard C, Walker Z, et al. Memantine in patients with Parkinson’s disease dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8(7):613-618.

g. Emre M, Tsolaki M, Bonuccelli U, et al. Memantine for patients with Parkinson’s disease dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(10):969-977.

h. Ridha BH, Josephs KA, Rossor MN. Delusions and hallucinations in dementia with Lewy bodies: worsening with memantine. Neurology. 2005;65(3):481-482.

i. McKeith I, Fairbairn A, Perry R, et al. Neuroleptic sensitivity in patients with senile dementia of Lewy body type. BMJ. 1992;305(6855):673-678.

j. Fernandez HH, Wu CK, Ott BR. Pharmacotherapy of dementia with Lewy bodies. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2003;4(11):2027-2037.

k. Swartz M, Barak Y, Mirecki I, et al. Treating depression in Alzheimer’s disease: integration of differing guidelines. Int Psychogeriatr. 2000;12(3):353-358.

l. Takahashi S, Mizukami K, Yasuno F, et al. Depression associated with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and the effect of somatotherapy. Psychogeriatrics. 2009;9(2):56-61.

 

 

Related Resources

  • Hanyu H, Sato T, Hirao K, et al. Differences in clinical course between dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer’s disease. Eur J Neurol. 2009;16(2):212-217.
  • Walker Z, McKeith I, Rodda J, et al. Comparison of cognitive decline between dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer’s disease: a cohort study. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e000380.

Drug Brand Names

  • Aripiprazole • Abilify
  • Clonazepam • Klonopin
  • Donepezil • Aricept
  • Galantamine • Razadyne, Reminyl
  • Levodopa • Dopar, Larodopa
  • Memantine • Namenda
  • Quetiapine • Seroquel
  • Rivastigmine • Exelon

Disclosure

Drs. Bishnoi and Manepalli report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

Dr. Grossberg serves as a consultant to Forest, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer. His department receives research funding from Novartis, Janssen, and Pfizer.

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) are the first and second most common causes of neurodegenerative dementia, respectively.“New Alzheimer’s disease guidelines: Implications for clinicians,” Current Psychiatry, March 2012, p. 15-20; http://bit.ly/UNYikk.

The 2005 report of the DLB Consortium5 recognizes central, core, suggestive, and supportive features of DLB (Table 1).5,10 These features are considered in the context of other confounding clinical conditions and the timing of cognitive and motor symptoms. The revised DLB criteria5 require a central feature of progressive cognitive decline. “Probable DLB” is when a patient presents with 2 core features or 1 core feature and ≥1 suggestive features. A diagnosis of “possible DLB” requires 1 core feature or 1 suggestive feature in the presence of progressive cognitive decline.

Table 1

Diagnostic criteria for AD and DLB

NIA-AA criteria for AD (2011)10
Possible AD: Clinical and cognitive criteria (DSM-IV-TR) for AD are met and there is an absence of biomarkers to support the diagnosis or there is evidence of a secondary disorder that can cause dementia
Probable AD: Clinical and cognitive criteria for AD are met and there is documented progressive cognitive decline or abnormal biomarker(s) suggestive of AD or evidence of proven AD autosomal dominant genetic mutation (presenilin-1, presenilin-2, amyloid-β precursor protein)
Definite AD: Clinical criteria for probable AD are met and there is histopathologic evidence of the disorder
Revised clinical diagnostic criteria for DLB (2005)5
Core features: Fluctuating cognition, recurrent visual hallucinations, soft motor features of parkinsonism
Suggestive features: REM sleep behavior disorder, severe antipsychotic sensitivity, decreased tracer uptake in striatum on SPECT dopamine transporter imaging or on myocardial scintigraphy with MIBG
Supportive features (common but lacking diagnostic specificity): repeated falls and syncope; transient, unexplained loss of consciousness; systematized delusions; hallucinations other than visual; relative preservation of medial temporal lobe on CT or MRI scan; decreased tracer uptake on SPECT or PET imaging in occipital regions; prominent slow waves on EEG with temporal lobe transient sharp waves
AD: Alzheimer’s disease; DLB: dementia with Lewy bodies; MIBG: metaiodobenzylguanidine; NIA-AA: National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer’s Association; PET: positron emission tomography; REM: rapid eye movement; SPECT: single photon emission computed tomography

Biomarkers for AD, but not DLB

The 2011 diagnostic criteria for AD incorporate biomarkers that can be measured in vivo and reflect speci?c features of disease-related pathophysiologic processes. Biomarkers for AD are divided into 2 categories:11

  • amyloid-beta (Aβ) accumulation: abnormal tracer retention on amyloid positron emission topography (PET) imaging and low cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aβ42
  • neuronal degeneration or injury: elevated CSF tau (total and phosphorylated tau), decreased ?uorodeoxyglucose uptake on PET in temporo-parietal cortices, and atrophy on structural MRI in the hippocampal and temporo-parietal regions.

No clinically applicable genotypic or CSF markers exist to support a DLB diagnosis, but there are many promising candidates, including elevated levels of CSF p-tau 181, CSF levels of alpha- and beta-synuclein,12 and CSF beta-glucocerebrosidase levels.13 PET mapping of brain acetylcholinesterase activity,14 123I-2β-carbomethoxy-3β- (4-iodophenyl)-N-(3-fluoropropyl)nortropane single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) dopamine transporter (DaT) imaging15 and metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) scintigraphy also are promising methods. DaT scan SPECT is FDA-approved for detecting loss of functional dopaminergic neuron terminals in the striatum and can differentiate between AD and DLB with a sensitivity and specificity of 78% to 88% and 94% to 100%, respectively.16 This test is covered by Medicare for differentiating AD and DLB.

Differences in presentation

Cognitive impairment. Contrary to the early memory impairment that characterizes AD, memory deficits in DLB usually appear later in the disease course.5 Patients with DLB manifest greater attentional, visuospatial, and executive impairments than those with AD, whereas AD causes more profound episodic (declarative) memory impairment than DLB. DLB patients show more preserved consolidation and storage of verbal information than AD patients because of less neuroanatomical and cholinergic compromise in the medial temporal lobe. There is no evidence of significant differences in remote memory, semantic memory, and language (naming and fluency).

Compromised attention in DLB may be the basis for fluctuating cognition, a characteristic of the disease. The greater attentional impairment and reaction time variability in DLB compared with AD is evident during complex tasks for attention and may be a function of the executive and visuospatial demands of the tasks.17

Executive functions critical to adaptive, goal-directed behavior are more impaired in DLB than AD. DLB patients are more susceptible to distraction and have difficulty engaging in a task and shifting from 1 task to another. This, together with a tendency for confabulation and perseveration, are signs of executive dysfunction.

 

 

Neuropsychiatric features. DLB patients are more likely than AD patients to exhibit psychiatric symptoms and have more functional impairment.18 In an analysis of autopsy-confirmed cases, hallucinations and delusions were more frequent with Lewy body pathology (75%) than AD (21%) at initial clinical evaluation.18 By the end stages of both illnesses, the degree of psychotic symptoms is comparable.19 Depression is common in DLB; whether base rates of depressed mood and major depression differ between DLB and AD is uncertain.20

Psychosis in AD can be induced by medication or delirium, or triggered by poor sensory perceptions. Psychotic symptoms occur more frequently during the moderate and advanced stages of AD, when patients present with visual hallucinations, delusions, or delusional misidentifications. As many as 10% to 20% of patients with AD experience hallucinations, typically visual. Delusions occur in 30% to 50% of AD patients, usually in the later stages of the disease. The most common delusional themes are infidelity, theft, and paranoia. Female sex is a risk factor for psychosis in AD. Delusions co-occur with aggression, anxiety, and aberrant motor behavior.

Visual hallucinations—mostly vivid, well-formed, false perceptions of insects, animals, or people—are the defining feature of DLB.21 Many patients recognize that they are experiencing visual hallucinations and can ignore them. DLB patients also may experience visual illusions, such as misperceiving household objects as living beings. Delusions—typically paranoid—are common among DLB patients, as are depression and anxiety.1 Agitation or aggressive behavior tends to occur late in the illness, if at all.

The causes of psychotic symptoms in DLB are not fully understood, but dopamine dysfunction likely is involved in hallucinations, delusions, and agitation, and serotonin dysfunction may be associated with depression and anxiety. Rapid eye movement (REM) sleep/wakefulness dysregulation, in which the dream imagery of REM sleep may occur during wakefulness, also has been proposed as a mechanism for visual hallucinations in DLB.22 In DLB, psychotic symptoms occur early and are a hallmark of this illness, whereas in AD they usually occur in the middle to late stages of the disease.

Motor symptoms. In AD, extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) are common later in the disease, are strongly correlated with disease severity, and are a strong, independent predictor of depression severity.23 EPS are more common in DLB than in AD24 and DLB patients are at higher risk of developing EPS even with low doses of typical antipsychotics, compared with AD patients.25

Other symptoms. REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD) is characterized by enacting dreams—often violent—during REM sleep. RBD is common in DLB and many patients also have excessive daytime somnolence. Other sleep disorders in DLB include insomnia, obstructive sleep apnea, central sleep apnea, restless legs syndrome, and periodic limb movements during sleep.

In AD patients, common sleep behaviors include confusion in the early evening (“sundowning”) and frequent nighttime awakenings, often accompanied by wandering.26 Orthostatic hypotension, impotence, urinary incontinence, and constipation are common in DLB. Lack of insight concerning personal cognitive, mood, and behavioral state is highly prevalent in AD patients and more common than in DLB.

Diagnostic evaluation

Because there are no definitive clinical markers for DLB, diagnosis is based on a detailed clinical and family history from the patient and a reliable informant, as well as a physical, neurologic, and mental status examination that looks for associated noncognitive symptoms, and neuropsychological evaluation. Reasons DLB may be misdiagnosed include:

  • Some “core” clinical features of DLB may not appear or may overlap with AD.
  • Presence and severity of concurrent AD pathology in DLB may modify the clinical presentation, with decreased rates of hallucinations and parkinsonism and increased neurofibrillary tangles.
  • Failure to reliably identify fluctuations—variations in cognition and arousal, such as periods of unresponsiveness while awake (“zoning out”), excessive daytime somnolence, and disorganized speech.27

Detecting and characterizing cognitive deficits in dementia patients using neuropsychological testing is important in establishing a clinical diagnosis, determining baseline levels of impairment, forming a prognosis, and initiating disease-specific treatments. Differences in neuropsychological findings in AD and DLB are outlined in Table 2.16,28-33 Several studies have suggested using these measures to differentiate patients with DLB from those with AD.20

Table 2

Diagnostic testing for Alzheimer’s disease and dementia with Lewy bodies

Alzheimer’s diseaseDementia with Lewy bodies
Neuropsychological testing findings
Relatively more impairment on verbal memory tasks, delayed recall, delayed recognition, and encoding and storing information.28 Dysfunction of episodic memory functionRelatively more impairment on attention or concentration, verbal fluency, visuoperceptual, visuoconstructive, visual memory tests, and frontal executive functions.28 Relatively preserved confrontation naming and verbal memory
MRI findings
Diffuse cortical atrophy, relatively greater volume loss in hippocampus and medial temporal lobe structures (strong correlation with severity)29Mild generalized cerebral cortical atrophy with minimal hippocampal atrophy and relative preservation of medial temporal lobe structures30
[18F]FDG PET
Widespread metabolic deficits in neocortical association areas, with sparing of the basal ganglia, thalamus, cerebellum, primary sensory motor cortex, and visual cortexWidespread cortical hypometabolism, more marked in primary visual and occipital association areas, and less severe in parietal, frontal, and anterior cingulate cortices.31 Severe cholinergic deafferentation of the neocortex, particularly in posterior cortical regions32
Single photon emission computed tomography
Parietotemporal hypoperfusionOccipital hypoperfusion
123I-FP-CIT SPECT (DaT scan)
No significant loss of DaTLow nigrostriatal terminal density of DaT caused by severe nigrostriatal degeneration16
Myocardial scintigraphy with MIBG
No significant change in MIBG uptakeDecreased MIBG uptake33
123I-FP-CIT: 123I-2β-carbomethoxy-3β-(4-iodophenyl)-N-(3-fluoropropyl)nortropane; DaT: dopamine transporter; FDG PET: [18F]-fluoro-d-glucose positron emission tomography; MIBG: metaiodobenzylguanidine; SPECT: single photon emission computed tomography
 

 

Evidence is insufficient to support using electroencephalographic and polysomnographic studies when initially evaluating patients with dementia. Brain CT or MRI are recommended as part of the initial evaluation of dementia patients to exclude treatable causes of dementia and help clarify the differential diagnosis. Occipital hypometabolism and hypoperfusion demonstrated on PET and SPECT imaging have high sensitivity and specificity for differentiating AD from DLB.

To diagnose DLB more consistently, look for core features of the disease, RBD, antipsychotic hypersensitivity, and decreased striatal binding at presynaptic DaT sites.15 Abnormal (low binding) DaT activity is the most reliable diagnostic marker for DLB.34 Myocardial scintigraphy with MIBG is sensitive to pathologic changes of DLB before clinical expression and could overcome the difficulties of using clinical criteria alone to identify patients with DLB.35 MIBG scintigraphy may be preferred to DaT scan because it is less expensive and its sensitivity and specificity to DLB are independent of the presence of parkinsonism.35

For an overview of pharmacotherapy options for patients with AD or DLB, see Box 2.

Box 2

Treatments for Alzheimer’s disease and dementia with Lewy bodies

Pharmacotherapy options for patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) or dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) include cholinesterase inhibitors, memantine, antipsychotics, and other agents.

Cholinesterase inhibitors. Donepezil, rivastigmine, and galantamine are FDA-approved for treating AD. Their efficacy appears to be similar, so the choice of agent is based largely on cost, patient tolerability, and physician experience.

No medications are FDA-approved for treating DLB. Neocortical cholinergic activity assessed by choline acetyltransferase levels is more severely depleted in DLB than in AD, and this deficit is correlated with the presence of visual hallucinations and global severity of cognitive impairment.a Therefore, drugs that enhance central cholinergic function offer a therapeutic approach for DLB; cognitive and hallucinatory symptoms are the anticipated targets. Multiple anecdotal reports, open-label studies,b,c and 1 randomized, placebo-controlled triald suggest that cholinesterase inhibitors are efficacious in DLB, with reported benefits in cognition, fluctuations, psychotic symptoms, and parkinsonian symptoms. A 20-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter studyd of patients with DLB found rivastigmine, 6 to 12 mg/d, was superior to placebo. Patients receiving rivastigmine exhibited significantly reduced anxiety, delusions, and hallucinations and significantly better performance on a computerized battery of neuropsychological tests, especially tasks that required sustained attention. Differences between rivastigmine and placebo disappeared after drug discontinuation.

Memantine is a noncompetitive antagonist of N-methyl-d-aspartate receptors that is effective in AD.e The possible involvement of glutamate in DLB has provided a rationale for treating DLB with memantine. Two randomized controlled trials in DLB found that patients treated with memantine for 24 weeks performed better on Clinical Global Impression of Change, but not on most other secondary outcome measures.f,g In both studies, memantine was well tolerated. However, other studies have noted worsening of delusions and hallucinations with memantine in DLB patients.h

Antipsychotics. Agitation is common in moderate and advanced AD. Atypical antipsychotics have been used with variable efficacy to treat agitation, but their use is associated with excess mortality. DLB patients pose a considerable therapeutic challenge because antipsychotics—the mainstay of treatment of psychosis and behavioral problems in most other disorders—can provoke severe, irreversible, and often fatal sensitivity reactions in this type of dementia.i A 2- to 3-fold increased mortality risk associated with antipsychotic sensitivity reactions in DLB is partly mediated via acute blockade of postsynaptic dopamine D2 receptors in the striatum. For severe and disabling psychosis, a trial of a cholinesterase inhibitor and/or lowering the dose of antiparkinsonian medication should be considered first. In urgent situations, small doses of an atypical antipsychotic that is least associated with parkinsonism side effects—such as quetiapine or aripiprazole—should be used.

Other treatments. Treatment of parkinsonian symptoms in DLB patients is similar to that for Parkinson’s disease, but the risk of psychotic symptoms in DLB warrants a conservative approach. Levodopa seems to be more effective than dopamine agonists and produces fewer side effects.j Rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder often responds to low doses of clonazepam (0.25 to 1.5 mg). Depression and anxiety disorders are common in AD at all stages and their treatment is not fundamentally different than in geriatric patients without dementia. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and electroconvulsive therapy have been used successfully in depressed patients with AD or DLB.k,l

Disease-modifying treatments. Researchers are evaluating an array of antiamyloid and neuroprotective therapeutic approaches for AD based on the hypothesis that amyloid-beta protein plays a pivotal role in disease onset and progression. Interventions that reduce amyloid production, limit aggregation, or increase clearance may block the cascade of events comprising AD pathogenesis. Reducing tau hyperphosphorylation, limiting oxidation and excitotoxicity, and controlling inflammation also may be beneficial strategies. Potentially neuroprotective and restorative treatments such as neurotrophins, neurotrophic factor enhancers, and stem cell-related approaches also are being investigated.

There are no large-scale studies of disease-modifying treatments for DLB. Potential areas of research include the relationship between proteasome function and a-synuclein pathology, the role of beta-synuclein, and the impact of alterations to alpha-synuclein on its propensity to aggregate.

References

a. Ballard C, Ziabreva I, Perry R, et al. Differences in neuropathologic characteristics across the Lewy body dementia spectrum. Neurology. 2006;67(11):1931-1934.

b. Beversdorf DQ, Warner JL, Davis RA, et al. Donepezil in the treatment of dementia with lewy bodies. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2004;12(5):542-544.

c. Edwards K, Royall D, Hershey L, et al. Efficacy and safety of galantamine in patients with dementia with Lewy bodies: a 24-week open-label study. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2007;23(6):401-405.

d. McKeith I, Del Ser T, Spano P, et al. Efficacy of rivastigmine in dementia with Lewy bodies: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled international study. Lancet. 2000;356(9247):2031-2036.

e. Tariot PN, Farlow MR, Grossberg GT, et al. Memantine treatment in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer disease already receiving donepezil: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2004;291(3):317-324.

f. Aarsland D, Ballard C, Walker Z, et al. Memantine in patients with Parkinson’s disease dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8(7):613-618.

g. Emre M, Tsolaki M, Bonuccelli U, et al. Memantine for patients with Parkinson’s disease dementia or dementia with Lewy bodies: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9(10):969-977.

h. Ridha BH, Josephs KA, Rossor MN. Delusions and hallucinations in dementia with Lewy bodies: worsening with memantine. Neurology. 2005;65(3):481-482.

i. McKeith I, Fairbairn A, Perry R, et al. Neuroleptic sensitivity in patients with senile dementia of Lewy body type. BMJ. 1992;305(6855):673-678.

j. Fernandez HH, Wu CK, Ott BR. Pharmacotherapy of dementia with Lewy bodies. Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2003;4(11):2027-2037.

k. Swartz M, Barak Y, Mirecki I, et al. Treating depression in Alzheimer’s disease: integration of differing guidelines. Int Psychogeriatr. 2000;12(3):353-358.

l. Takahashi S, Mizukami K, Yasuno F, et al. Depression associated with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and the effect of somatotherapy. Psychogeriatrics. 2009;9(2):56-61.

 

 

Related Resources

  • Hanyu H, Sato T, Hirao K, et al. Differences in clinical course between dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer’s disease. Eur J Neurol. 2009;16(2):212-217.
  • Walker Z, McKeith I, Rodda J, et al. Comparison of cognitive decline between dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer’s disease: a cohort study. BMJ Open. 2012;2:e000380.

Drug Brand Names

  • Aripiprazole • Abilify
  • Clonazepam • Klonopin
  • Donepezil • Aricept
  • Galantamine • Razadyne, Reminyl
  • Levodopa • Dopar, Larodopa
  • Memantine • Namenda
  • Quetiapine • Seroquel
  • Rivastigmine • Exelon

Disclosure

Drs. Bishnoi and Manepalli report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

Dr. Grossberg serves as a consultant to Forest, Janssen, Novartis, and Pfizer. His department receives research funding from Novartis, Janssen, and Pfizer.

References

1. McKeith IG, Galasko D, Kosaka K, et al. Consensus guidelines for the clinical and pathologic diagnosis of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB): report of the consortium on DLB international workshop. Neurology. 1996;47(5):1113-1124.

2. Buracchio T, Arvanitakis Z, Gorbien M. Dementia with Lewy bodies: current concepts. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2005;20(5):306-320.

3. Fujishiro H, Iseki E, Higashi S, et al. Distribution of cerebral amyloid deposition and its relevance to clinical phenotype in Lewy body dementia. Neurosci Lett. 2010;486(1):19-23.

4. Kosaka K. Diffuse Lewy body disease. Neuropathology. 2000;20(suppl):S73-S78.

5. McKeith IG, Dickson DW, Lowe J, et al. Consortium on DLB. Diagnosis and management of dementia with Lewy bodies: third report of the DLB Consortium. Neurology. 2005;65(12):1863-1872.

6. Cummings JL, Cole G. Alzheimer disease. JAMA. 2002;287(18):2335-2338.

7. Zaccai J, McCracken C, Brayne C. A systematic review of prevalence and incidence studies of dementia with Lewy bodies. Age Ageing. 2005;34(6):561-566.

8. Bradshaw J, Saling M, Hopwood M, et al. Fluctuating cognition in dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer’s disease is qualitatively distinct. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004;75(3):382-387.

9. Singleton AB, Wharton A, O’Brien KK, et al. Clinical and neuropathological correlates of apolipoprotein E genotype in dementia with Lewy bodies. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2002;14(4):167-175.

10. McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H, et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):263-269.

11. Jack CR, Jr, Albert MS, Knopman DS, et al. Introduction to the recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):257-262.

12. Mollenhauer B, Cullen V, Kahn I, et al. Direct quantification of CSF alpha-synuclein by ELISA and first cross-sectional study in patients with neurodegeneration. Exp Neurol. 2008;213(2):315-325.

13. Parnetti L, Balducci C, Pierguidi L, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid beta-glucocerebrosidase activity is reduced in dementia with Lewy bodies. Neurobiol Dis. 2009;34(3):484-486.

14. Shimada H, Hirano S, Shinotoh H, et al. Mapping of brain acetylcholinesterase alterations in Lewy body disease by PET. Neurology. 2009;73(4):273-278.

15. McKeith I, O’Brien J, Walker Z, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of dopamine transporter imaging with 123I-FP-CIT SPECT in dementia with Lewy bodies: a phase III, multicentre study. Lancet Neurol. 2007;6(4):305-313.

16. Walker Z, Jaros E, Walker RW, et al. Dementia with Lewy bodies: a comparison of clinical diagnosis, FP-CIT single photon emission computed tomography imaging and autopsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007;78(11):1176-1181.

17. Bradshaw JM, Saling M, Anderson V, et al. Higher cortical deficits influence attentional processing in dementia with Lewy bodies, relative to patients with dementia of the Alzheimer’s type and controls. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2006;77(10):1129-1135.

18. Weiner MF, Hynan LS, Parikh B, et al. Can Alzheimer’s disease and dementias with Lewy bodies be distinguished clinically? J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2003;16(4):245-250.

19. Stavitsky K, Brickman AM, Scarmeas N, et al. The progression of cognition, psychiatric symptoms, and functional abilities in dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol. 2006;63(10):1450-1456.

20. Ferman TJ, Smith GE, Boeve BF, et al. Neuropsychological differentiation of dementia with Lewy bodies from normal aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Clin Neuropsychol. 2006;20(4):623-636.

21. McKeith IG, Perry EK, Perry RH. Report of the second dementia with Lewy body international workshop: diagnosis and treatment. Consortium on Dementia with Lewy Bodies. Neurology. 1999;53(5):902-905.

22. Boeve BF, Silber MH, Ferman TJ, et al. Association of REM sleep behavior disorder and neurodegenerative disease may reflect an underlying synucleinopathy. Mov Disord. 2001;16(4):622-630.

23. Portet F, Scarmeas N, Cosentino S, et al. Extrapyramidal signs before and after diagnosis of incident Alzheimer disease in a prospective population study. Arch Neurol. 2009;66(9):1120-1126.

24. McKeith I, Fairbairn A, Perry R, et al. Neuroleptic sensitivity in patients with senile dementia of Lewy body type. BMJ. 1992;305(6855):673-678.

25. Tarawneh R, Galvin JE. Distinguishing Lewy body dementias from Alzheimer’s disease. Expert Rev Neurother. 2007;7(11):1499-1516.

26. Ancoli-Israel S, Klauber MR, Gillin JC, et al. Sleep in non-institutionalized Alzheimer’s disease patients. Aging (Milano). 1994;6(6):451-458.

27. Ferman TJ, Smith GE, Boeve BF, et al. DLB fluctuations: specific features that reliably differentiate DLB from AD and normal aging. Neurology. 2004;62(2):181-187.

28. Salmon DP, Galasko D, Hansen LA, et al. Neuropsychological deficits associated with diffuse Lewy body disease. Brain Cogn. 1996;31(2):148-165.

29. Jack CR, Jr, Petersen RC, Xu Y, et al. Rates of hippocampal atrophy correlate with change in clinical status in aging and AD. Neurology. 2000;55(4):484-489.

30. Burton EJ, Barber R, Mukaetova-Ladinska EB, et al. Medial temporal lobe atrophy on MRI differentiates Alzheimer’s disease from dementia with Lewy bodies and vascular cognitive impairment: a prospective study with pathological verification of diagnosis. Brain. 2009;132(pt 1):195-203.

31. Ishii K, Soma T, Kono AK, et al. Comparison of regional brain volume and glucose metabolism between patients with mild dementia with lewy bodies and those with mild Alzheimer’s disease. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(5):704-711.

32. Klein JC, Eggers C, Kalbe E, et al. Neurotransmitter changes in dementia with Lewy bodies and Parkinson disease dementia in vivo. Neurology. 2010;74(11):885-892.

33. Fujishiro H, Nakamura S, Kitazawa M, et al. Early detection of dementia with Lewy bodies in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment using 123I-MIBG cardiac scintigraphy. J Neurol Sci. 2012;315(1-2):115-119.

34. O’Brien JT, McKeith IG, Walker Z, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 123I-FP-CIT SPECT in possible dementia with Lewy bodies. Br J Psychiatry. 2009;194:34-39.

35. Yoshita M, Taki J, Yokoyama K, et al. Value of 123I-MIBG radioactivity in the differential diagnosis of DLB from AD. Neurology. 2006;66(12):1850-1854.

References

1. McKeith IG, Galasko D, Kosaka K, et al. Consensus guidelines for the clinical and pathologic diagnosis of dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB): report of the consortium on DLB international workshop. Neurology. 1996;47(5):1113-1124.

2. Buracchio T, Arvanitakis Z, Gorbien M. Dementia with Lewy bodies: current concepts. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2005;20(5):306-320.

3. Fujishiro H, Iseki E, Higashi S, et al. Distribution of cerebral amyloid deposition and its relevance to clinical phenotype in Lewy body dementia. Neurosci Lett. 2010;486(1):19-23.

4. Kosaka K. Diffuse Lewy body disease. Neuropathology. 2000;20(suppl):S73-S78.

5. McKeith IG, Dickson DW, Lowe J, et al. Consortium on DLB. Diagnosis and management of dementia with Lewy bodies: third report of the DLB Consortium. Neurology. 2005;65(12):1863-1872.

6. Cummings JL, Cole G. Alzheimer disease. JAMA. 2002;287(18):2335-2338.

7. Zaccai J, McCracken C, Brayne C. A systematic review of prevalence and incidence studies of dementia with Lewy bodies. Age Ageing. 2005;34(6):561-566.

8. Bradshaw J, Saling M, Hopwood M, et al. Fluctuating cognition in dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer’s disease is qualitatively distinct. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004;75(3):382-387.

9. Singleton AB, Wharton A, O’Brien KK, et al. Clinical and neuropathological correlates of apolipoprotein E genotype in dementia with Lewy bodies. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2002;14(4):167-175.

10. McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H, et al. The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):263-269.

11. Jack CR, Jr, Albert MS, Knopman DS, et al. Introduction to the recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer’s Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimers Dement. 2011;7(3):257-262.

12. Mollenhauer B, Cullen V, Kahn I, et al. Direct quantification of CSF alpha-synuclein by ELISA and first cross-sectional study in patients with neurodegeneration. Exp Neurol. 2008;213(2):315-325.

13. Parnetti L, Balducci C, Pierguidi L, et al. Cerebrospinal fluid beta-glucocerebrosidase activity is reduced in dementia with Lewy bodies. Neurobiol Dis. 2009;34(3):484-486.

14. Shimada H, Hirano S, Shinotoh H, et al. Mapping of brain acetylcholinesterase alterations in Lewy body disease by PET. Neurology. 2009;73(4):273-278.

15. McKeith I, O’Brien J, Walker Z, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of dopamine transporter imaging with 123I-FP-CIT SPECT in dementia with Lewy bodies: a phase III, multicentre study. Lancet Neurol. 2007;6(4):305-313.

16. Walker Z, Jaros E, Walker RW, et al. Dementia with Lewy bodies: a comparison of clinical diagnosis, FP-CIT single photon emission computed tomography imaging and autopsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2007;78(11):1176-1181.

17. Bradshaw JM, Saling M, Anderson V, et al. Higher cortical deficits influence attentional processing in dementia with Lewy bodies, relative to patients with dementia of the Alzheimer’s type and controls. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2006;77(10):1129-1135.

18. Weiner MF, Hynan LS, Parikh B, et al. Can Alzheimer’s disease and dementias with Lewy bodies be distinguished clinically? J Geriatr Psychiatry Neurol. 2003;16(4):245-250.

19. Stavitsky K, Brickman AM, Scarmeas N, et al. The progression of cognition, psychiatric symptoms, and functional abilities in dementia with Lewy bodies and Alzheimer disease. Arch Neurol. 2006;63(10):1450-1456.

20. Ferman TJ, Smith GE, Boeve BF, et al. Neuropsychological differentiation of dementia with Lewy bodies from normal aging and Alzheimer’s disease. Clin Neuropsychol. 2006;20(4):623-636.

21. McKeith IG, Perry EK, Perry RH. Report of the second dementia with Lewy body international workshop: diagnosis and treatment. Consortium on Dementia with Lewy Bodies. Neurology. 1999;53(5):902-905.

22. Boeve BF, Silber MH, Ferman TJ, et al. Association of REM sleep behavior disorder and neurodegenerative disease may reflect an underlying synucleinopathy. Mov Disord. 2001;16(4):622-630.

23. Portet F, Scarmeas N, Cosentino S, et al. Extrapyramidal signs before and after diagnosis of incident Alzheimer disease in a prospective population study. Arch Neurol. 2009;66(9):1120-1126.

24. McKeith I, Fairbairn A, Perry R, et al. Neuroleptic sensitivity in patients with senile dementia of Lewy body type. BMJ. 1992;305(6855):673-678.

25. Tarawneh R, Galvin JE. Distinguishing Lewy body dementias from Alzheimer’s disease. Expert Rev Neurother. 2007;7(11):1499-1516.

26. Ancoli-Israel S, Klauber MR, Gillin JC, et al. Sleep in non-institutionalized Alzheimer’s disease patients. Aging (Milano). 1994;6(6):451-458.

27. Ferman TJ, Smith GE, Boeve BF, et al. DLB fluctuations: specific features that reliably differentiate DLB from AD and normal aging. Neurology. 2004;62(2):181-187.

28. Salmon DP, Galasko D, Hansen LA, et al. Neuropsychological deficits associated with diffuse Lewy body disease. Brain Cogn. 1996;31(2):148-165.

29. Jack CR, Jr, Petersen RC, Xu Y, et al. Rates of hippocampal atrophy correlate with change in clinical status in aging and AD. Neurology. 2000;55(4):484-489.

30. Burton EJ, Barber R, Mukaetova-Ladinska EB, et al. Medial temporal lobe atrophy on MRI differentiates Alzheimer’s disease from dementia with Lewy bodies and vascular cognitive impairment: a prospective study with pathological verification of diagnosis. Brain. 2009;132(pt 1):195-203.

31. Ishii K, Soma T, Kono AK, et al. Comparison of regional brain volume and glucose metabolism between patients with mild dementia with lewy bodies and those with mild Alzheimer’s disease. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(5):704-711.

32. Klein JC, Eggers C, Kalbe E, et al. Neurotransmitter changes in dementia with Lewy bodies and Parkinson disease dementia in vivo. Neurology. 2010;74(11):885-892.

33. Fujishiro H, Nakamura S, Kitazawa M, et al. Early detection of dementia with Lewy bodies in patients with amnestic mild cognitive impairment using 123I-MIBG cardiac scintigraphy. J Neurol Sci. 2012;315(1-2):115-119.

34. O’Brien JT, McKeith IG, Walker Z, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of 123I-FP-CIT SPECT in possible dementia with Lewy bodies. Br J Psychiatry. 2009;194:34-39.

35. Yoshita M, Taki J, Yokoyama K, et al. Value of 123I-MIBG radioactivity in the differential diagnosis of DLB from AD. Neurology. 2006;66(12):1850-1854.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(11)
Page Number
22-30
Page Number
22-30
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Differentiating Alzheimer’s disease from dementia with Lewy bodies
Display Headline
Differentiating Alzheimer’s disease from dementia with Lewy bodies
Legacy Keywords
Alzheimer's disease; dementia; dementia with Lewy bodies; Lewy bodies
Legacy Keywords
Alzheimer's disease; dementia; dementia with Lewy bodies; Lewy bodies
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Safer use of benzodiazepines for alcohol detoxification

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Safer use of benzodiazepines for alcohol detoxification

Dr. Spiegel: Factors that can result in false positive scores on the CIWA-Ar

Clinicians often use the symptom-triggered Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol Scale, Revised (CIWA-Ar)1 to assess patients’ risk for alcohol withdrawal because it has well-documented reliability, reproducibility, and validity based on comparison with ratings by expert clinicians.2,3 The CIWA-Ar commonly is used to determine when to administer lorazepam to limit or prevent morbidity and mortality in patients who are at risk of or are experiencing alcohol withdrawal. Refined to a list of 10 signs and symptoms, the CIWA-Ar is easy to administer and useful in a variety of clinical settings. The maximum score is 67, and patients with a score >15 are at increased risk for severe alcohol withdrawal.1 For a downloadable copy of the CIWA-Ar, click here.

Despite the benefits of using the CIWA-Ar, qualitative description of certain alcohol withdrawal symptoms is prone to subjective misinterpretation and can result in falsely elevated scores, excessive benzodiazepine administration, and associated sequelae.4 This article describes such a scenario, and examines factors that can contribute to a falsely elevated CIWA-Ar score.

CASE REPORT: Resistant alcohol withdrawal

Mr. J, age 24, is referred to the consultation-liaison service at our teaching hospital for “overall psychiatric assessment and help with alcohol withdrawal.” When brought to the hospital, Mr. J was experiencing diaphoresis and tachycardia. During the interview, he says he “experiences withdrawal symptoms all the time, so I am familiar with the signs.”

Mr. J is cooperative with the interview. Psychomotor agitation or retardation is not noted. His speech is goal-directed, his mood is “calm,” and his affect is within normal range. His thought content is devoid of psychoses or lethal ideations. On Mini-Mental State Examination, Mr. J scores 28 out of 30, which indicates normal cognitive functioning. He reports drinking eight 40-oz bottles of beer daily for the past 3 months. He started drinking alcohol at age 14 and has had only one 1-year period of sobriety. He denies using illicit drugs and his urine drug screen is unremarkable. Mr. J has a history of delirium tremens (DTs), no significant medical history, and was not taking any medications when admitted. His psychiatric history includes generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and antisocial personality disorder and his family history is significant for alcohol dependence.

Laboratory workup is unremarkable except for a blood alcohol level of 0.23%. Review of systems is significant for mild tremor but no other symptoms of alcohol withdrawal. Physical examination is within normal limits.

Mr. J is started on a symptom-trigger alcohol detoxification protocol using the CIWA-Ar. Based on an elevated CIWA-Ar score of 33, he receives lorazepam IV, 11 mg on his first day of hospitalization and 8 mg on the second day. On the third day, Mr. J is agitated and pulls his IV lines in an attempt to leave. Over the next 24 hours, his blood pressure ranges from 136/90 mm Hg to 169/92 mm Hg and his pulse ranges from 94 to 115 beats per minute. He is given lorazepam, 30 mg, and is transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU).

At this time, Mr. J’s Delirium Rating Scale (DRS) score is 20 (maximum: 32). He remains in the ICU on lorazepam, 25 mg/hr. After 3 days in the ICU, lorazepam is titrated and stopped 2 days later. After lorazepam is stopped, Mr. J’s DRS score is 0, his vital signs are stable, and he no longer demonstrates signs or symptoms of DTs or alcohol withdrawal. He is discharged 1 day later.

Symptom-triggered treatment

Alcohol withdrawal symptoms mainly are caused by the effects of chronic alcohol exposure on brain γ–aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate systems; benzodiazepines are the standard of care (Box).5,6 Mr. J had a history of DTs, which is a risk factor for more severe alcohol withdrawal symptoms and recurrence of DTs.7 Some authors report that fixed dosing intervals are the “gold standard therapy” for alcohol withdrawal, and may be preferable for patients with a history of DTs.8 However, Mr. J was placed on a symptom-triggered protocol, which is standard at our hospital. The decision to implement this protocol was based on concerns of oversedation and possible respiratory suppression. Clinical trials have demonstrated that compared with fixed scheduled therapy for alcohol withdrawal, symptom-triggered protocols result in a reduced need for benzodiazepines (Table).

This treatment strategy requires frequent patient reevaluations—particularly early on—with attention to signs and symptoms of alcohol withdrawal and excessive sedation from medications. Additionally, although most patients with alcohol withdrawal respond to standard treatment that includes benzodiazepines, optimal nutrition, and good supportive care, a subgroup may resist therapy (resistant alcohol withdrawal). Therefore, Mr. J—and others with resistant alcohol withdrawal—may require large doses of benzodiazepines and additional sedatives and undergo complicated hospitalizations.9 Nonetheless, as exemplified by Mr. J, symptom-triggered protocols for alcohol withdrawal can result in potential morbidity and mortality.

 

 

Box

Causes and treatment of alcohol withdrawal symptoms

Common symptoms of alcohol withdrawal include autonomic hyperactivity, tremor, insomnia, nausea, vomiting, agitation, anxiety, grand mal seizures, and transient visual, tactile, or auditory hallucinations.5 These symptoms result, in part, from the effects of chronic alcohol exposure on brain γ–aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate systems. Alcohol acutely enhances presynaptic GABA release through allosteric modulation at GABAA receptors and inhibits glutamate function through antagonism of N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptors. Chronic alcohol exposure elicits compensatory downregulated GABAA and upregulated NMDA expression.

When alcohol intake abruptly stops and its acute effects dissipate, the sudden reduction in GABAergic tone and increase in glutamatergic tone cause alcohol withdrawal symptoms.6 Benzodiazepines, which bind at the benzodiazepine site on the GABAA receptor and, similar to alcohol, acutely enhance GABA and inhibit glutamate signaling, are the standard of care for alcohol withdrawal because they reduce anxiety and the risk of seizures and delirium tremens, which is a severe form of alcohol withdrawal characterized by disturbance in consciousness and cognition and hallucinations.5,6


Table

Benefits of symptom-triggered vs fixed scheduled therapy for alcohol withdrawal

 STFSBenefits of ST
Efficacy in alcohol withdrawalYesYes 
Flexibility in dosing with fluctuations in CIWA-Ar scoreYesNoLess medication can be given overall if alcohol withdrawal signs resolve rapidly
Lower total benzodiazepine doses+Smaller chance of side effects such as oversedation, paradoxical agitation, delirium due to benzodiazepine intoxication, or respiratory depression
Fewer complications of higher benzodiazepine doses+Reduced risk of prolonged hospitalization, morbidity from aspiration pneumonia, or need to administer a reversal agent such as flumazenil
+ = more likely; – = less likely
CIWA-Ar: Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised; FS: fixed scheduled; ST: symptom-triggered
Bibliography
Amato L, Minozzi S, Vecchi S, et al. Benzodiazepines for alcohol withdrawal. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(3):CD005063. Cassidy EM, O’Sullivan I, Bradshaw P, et al. Symptom-triggered benzodiazepine therapy for alcohol withdrawal syndrome in the emergency department: a comparison with the standard fixed dose benzodiazepine regimen [published online ahead of print October 19, 2011]. Emerg Med J. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2011-200509. Daeppen JB, Gache P, Landry U, et al. Symptom-triggered vs fixed-schedule doses of benzodiazepine for alcohol withdrawal: a randomized treatment trial. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162(10):1117-1121. DeCarolis DD, Rice KL, Ho L, et al. Symptom-driven lorazepam protocol for treatment of severe alcohol withdrawal delirium in the intensive care unit. Pharmacotherapy. 2007;27(4):510-518. Jaeger TM, Lohr RH, Pankratz VS. Symptom-triggered therapy for alcohol withdrawal syndrome in medical inpatients. Mayo Clin Proc. 2001;76(7):695-701. Weaver MF, Hoffman HJ, Johnson RE, et al. Alcohol withdrawal pharmacotherapy for inpatients with medical comorbidity. J Addict Dis. 2006;25(2):17-24.

Factors influencing CIWA-Ar score

Vital signs monitoring. One limitation of the CIWA-Ar is that vital signs—an objective measurement of alcohol withdrawal— are not used to determine the score. Indeed, Mr. J presented with vital sign dysregulation. However, research suggests that the best predictor of high withdrawal scores includes groups of symptoms rather than individual symptoms.10 In that study, pulse and blood pressure did not correlate with withdrawal severity. Pulse and blood pressure elevations occur in alcohol withdrawal, but other signs and symptoms are more reliable in assessing withdrawal severity. This is clinically important because physicians often prescribe medications for alcohol withdrawal treatment based on pulse and blood pressure measures.1 This needs to be balanced against research that found a systolic blood pressure >150 mm Hg and axillary temperature >38°C can predict development of DTs in patients experiencing alcohol withdrawal.7

Lorazepam-induced disinhibition. Benzodiazepines affect functions associated with processing within the orbital prefrontal cortex,11 including response inhibition and socially acceptable behavior, and impairment in this functioning can result in behavioral disinhibition.12 This effect could account for the apparent paradoxical clinical observation of aggression in benzodiazepine-sedated patients.13 Because agitation is scored on the CIWA-Ar,1,10 falsely elevated scores caused by interpreting benzodiazepine-induced aggression as agitation could result in patients (such as Mr. J) receiving more lorazepam, therefore perpetuating this cycle.

Comorbid anxiety disorders also could falsely accentuate CIWA-Ar scores. For example, the odds of an alcohol dependence diagnosis are 2 to 3 times greater among patients with an anxiety disorder.14 Additionally, the lifetime prevalence of comorbid alcohol dependence for patients with GAD—such as Mr. J— is 30% to 35%.14,15

Alcohol withdrawal can be more severe in patients with alcohol dependence and anxiety disorders because evidence suggests the neurochemical processes underlying both are similar and potentially additive. Studies have shown that these dual diagnosis patients experience more severe symptoms of alcohol withdrawal as assessed by total CIWA-Ar score than those without an anxiety disorder.15 Although such patients may require more aggressive pharmacologic treatment, the dangers of higher benzodiazepine dosages may be even greater.

 

 

Benzodiazepine-induced delirium. A recent meta-analysis suggested that benzodiazepines may be associated with an increased risk of delirium.16 Longer-acting benzodiazepines may be associated with increased risk of delirium compared with short-acting agents, and higher doses during a 24-hour period may be associated with increased risk of delirium compared with lower doses. However, wide confidence intervals imply significant uncertainty with these results, and not all patients in the studies reviewed were undergoing alcohol detoxification.16 Benzodiazepines have been reported to accentuate delirium when used to treat DTs.17

We postulate that although Mr. J received lorazepam—a short- to moderate-acting benzodiazepine with a half-life of 12 to 16 hours18—the cumulative dose was high enough to have accentuated—rather than attenuated—delirium.16

Personality disorders. Comorbid alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and personality disorders are well documented. One study found the prevalence of personality disorders in AUDs ranged from 22% to 78%.19 Psychologically, drinking to cope with negative subjective states and emotions (coping motives) and drinking to enhance positive emotions (enhancement motives) may explain the relation between Cluster B personality disorders and AUDs.20

Research on prefrontal functioning in alcoholics and individuals with antisocial personality disorder symptoms has suggested that both groups may be impaired on tasks sensitive to compromised orbitofrontal functioning.21 The orbitofrontal system is essential for maintaining normal inhibitory influences on behavior.22 Benzodiazepines can increase the likelihood of developing disinhibition or impulsivity, which are symptoms of antisocial personality disorder. Because Mr. J had antisocial personality disorder, treating his alcohol withdrawal with a benzodiazepine could have accentuated these symptoms, which were subsequently “treated” with additional lorazepam, therefore worsening the cycle.

Medical comorbidities. The CIWA-Ar relies on autonomic signs and subjective symptoms and was not designed for use in nonverbal patients in the ICU. It is possible that the presence of other acute illnesses may contribute to increased CIWA-Ar scores, but we are unaware of any studies that have evaluated such factors.23

However, tremor, which is scored on the CIWA-Ar, can falsely elevate scores if it is caused by something other than acute alcohol withdrawal. Although essential tremors attenuate with acute alcohol use, chronic alcohol use can result in parkinsonism with a resting tremor, and cerebellar degeneration, which can include an action tremor and cerebellar 3-Hz leg tremor.24 Finally, hepatic encephalopathy—a neuropsychiatric syndrome characterized by disturbances in consciousness, mood, behavior, and cognition—can occur in patients with advanced liver disease, which may be precipitated by alcohol use. The clinical presentation and symptom severity of hepatic encephalopathy varies from minor cognitive impairment to gross disorientation, confusion, and agitation,25 all of which can elevate CIWA-Ar scores.

The role of disinhibition

Disinhibition could serve as the “final common pathway” through which CIWA-Ar scores can be falsely elevated.11 For a Figure that illustrates this, see below. Mr. J presented with several variables that could have elevated his CIWA-Ar score; additional potential factors include other psychiatric diagnoses such as bipolar disorder, opiate withdrawal, dementia, drug-seeking behavior, or malingering.26,27

Treating disinhibition in patients with alcohol withdrawal. Continuing to administer escalating doses of benzodiazepines is counterintuitive for benzodiazepine-induced disinhibition. In a study of alcohol withdrawal in rats, antipsychotics evaluated had some beneficial effects on alcohol withdrawal signs.28 In this study, the comparative effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics was as follows: risperidone = quetiapine > ziprasidone > clozapine > olanzapine.

The American Society of Addiction Medicine’s practice guideline advises against using antipsychotics as the sole agent for DTs because these agents are associated with a longer duration of delirium, higher complication rates, and higher mortality.28 However, antipsychotics have a role as an adjunct to benzodiazepines when benzodiazepines don’t sufficiently control agitation, thought disorder, or perceptual disturbances. Although haloperidol use is well established in this scenario, chlorpromazine is contraindicated because it is epileptogenic, and little information is available on atypical antipsychotics.29 If Mr. J had not responded to tapering lorazepam, evidence would support using haloperidol.


Figure: Unifying concept for pathological BZ administration during alcohol withdrawal syndrome: Disinhibition
AWS: alcohol withdrawal syndrome; BZ: benzodiazepine; CIWA-Ar: Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised; GABA: γ-aminobutyric acid
Source: Reference 11
Related Resources

  • Myrick H, Anton RF. Treatment of alcohol withdrawal. Alcohol Health & Research World. 1998;22(1):38-43. http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh22-1/38-43.pdf.
  • Amato L, Minozzi S, Davoli M. Efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of the Alcohol Withdrawal Syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(6):CD008537.

Drug Brand Names

 

 

  • Chlorpromazine • Thorazine
  • Clozapine • Clozaril
  • Flumazenil • Romazicon
  • Haloperidol • Haldol
  • Lorazepam • Ativan
  • Olanzapine • Zyprexa
  • Quetiapine • Seroquel
  • Risperidone • Risperdal
  • Ziprasidone • Geodon

Disclosures

Dr. Spiegel is on the speaker’s bureau of Sunovion Pharmaceuticals.

Drs. Kumari and Petri report no financial relationships with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Amy Herndon for her help in preparing this article.

References

1. Sullivan JT, Sykora K, Schneiderman J, et al. Assessment of alcohol withdrawal: the revised clinical institute withdrawal assessment for alcohol scale (CIWA-Ar). Br J Addict. 1989;84(11):1353-1357.

2. Knott DH, Lerner WD, Davis-Knott T, et al. Decision for alcohol detoxication: a method to standardize patient evaluation. Postgrad Med. 1981;69(5):65-69, 72-75, 78.

3. Wiehl WO, Hayner G, Galloway G. Haight Ashbury Free Clinics’ drug detoxification protocols—Part 4: alcohol. J Psychoactive Drugs. 1994;26(1):57-59.

4. Bostwick JM, Lapid MI. False positives on the clinical institute withdrawal assessment for alcohol-revised: is this scale appropriate for use in the medically ill? Psychosomatics. 2004;45(3):256-261.

5. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed text rev. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.

6. Schacht JP, Randall PK, Waid LR, et al. Neurocognitive performance, alcohol withdrawal, and effects of a combination of flumazenil and gabapentin in alcohol dependence. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2011;35(11):2030-2038.

7. Monte R, Rabuñal R, Casariego E, et al. Risk factors for delirium tremens in patients with alcohol withdrawal syndrome in a hospital setting. Eur J Intern Med. 2009;20(7):690-694.

8. Saitz R, O’Malley SS. Pharmacotherapies for alcohol abuse. Withdrawal and treatment. Med Clin North Am. 1997;81(4):881-907.

9. Hack JB, Hoffmann RS, Nelson LS. Resistant alcohol withdrawal: does an unexpectedly large sedative requirement identify these patients early? J Med Toxicol. 2006;2(2):55-60.

10. Pittman B, Gueorguieva R, Krupitsky E, et al. Multidimensionality of the Alcohol Withdrawal Symptom Checklist: a factor analysis of the Alcohol Withdrawal Symptom Checklist and CIWA-Ar. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2007;31(4):612-618.

11. Deakin JB, Aitken MR, Dowson JH, et al. Diazepam produces disinhibitory cognitive effects in male volunteers. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2004;173(1-2):88-97.

12. Hornberger M, Geng J, Hodges JR. Convergent grey and white matter evidence of orbitofrontal cortex changes related to disinhibition in behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. Brain. 2011;134(pt 9):2502-2512.

13. Jones KA, Nielsen S, Bruno R, et al. Benzodiazepines - their role in aggression and why GPs should prescribe with caution. Aust Fam Physician. 2011;40(11):862-865.

14. Scott EL, Hulvershorn L. Anxiety disorders with comorbid substance abuse. Psychiatric Times. 2011; 28(9).

15. Faingold CL, Knapp DJ, Chester JA, et al. Integrative neurobiology of the alcohol withdrawal syndrome—from anxiety to seizures. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2004;28(2):268-278.

16. Clegg A, Young JB. Which medications to avoid in people at risk of delirium: a systematic review. Age Ageing. 2011;40(1):23-29.

17. Hecksel KA, Bostwick JM, Jaeger TM, et al. Inappropriate use of symptom-triggered therapy for alcohol withdrawal in the general hospital. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83(3):274-279.

18. Lader M. Benzodiazepines revisited—will we ever learn? Addiction. 2011;106(12):2086-2109.

19. Mellos E, Liappas I, Paparrigopoulos T. Comorbidity of personality disorders with alcohol abuse. In Vivo. 2010;24(5):761-769.

20. Tragesser SL, Sher KJ, Trull TJ, et al. Personality disorder symptoms, drinking motives, and alcohol use and consequences: cross-sectional and prospective mediation. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2007;15(3):282-292.

21. Oscar-Berman M, Valmas MM, Sawyer KS, et al. Frontal brain dysfunction in alcoholism with and without antisocial personality disorder. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2009;5:309-326.

22. Dom G, De Wilde B, Hulstijn W, et al. Behavioural aspects of impulsivity in alcoholics with and without a cluster-B personality disorder. Alcohol Alcohol. 2006;41(4):412-420.

23. de Wit M, Jones DG, Sessler CN, et al. Alcohol-use disorders in the critically ill patient. Chest. 2010;138(4):994-1003.

24. Mostile G, Jankovic J. Alcohol in essential tremor and other movement disorders. Mov Disord. 2010;25(14):2274-2284.

25. Crone CC, Gabriel GM, DiMartini A. An overview of psychiatric issues in liver disease for the consultation-liaison psychiatrist. Psychosomatics. 2006;47(3):188-205.

26. Reoux JP, Oreskovich MR. A comparison of two versions of the clinical institute withdrawal assessment for alcohol: the CIWA-Ar and CIWA-AD. Am J Addict. 2006;15(1):85-93.

27. Gray S, Borgundvaag B, Sirvastava A, et al. Feasibility and reliability of the SHOT: a short scale for measuring pretreatment severity of alcohol withdrawal in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2010;17(10):1048-1054.

28. Uzbay TI. Atypical antipsychotic drugs and ethanol withdrawal syndrome: a review. Alcohol Alcohol. 2012;47(1):33-41.

29. McKeon A, Frye MA, Delanty N. The alcohol withdrawal syndrome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008;79(8):854-862.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

David R. Spiegel, MD
Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA
Neeta Kumari, MD
Psychiatry Resident, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA
Justin D. Petri, MD
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
10-16
Legacy Keywords
benzodiazepines; alcohol detoxification; detox; CIWA-Ar; Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol Scale;Revised
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

David R. Spiegel, MD
Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA
Neeta Kumari, MD
Psychiatry Resident, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA
Justin D. Petri, MD
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA

Author and Disclosure Information

David R. Spiegel, MD
Associate Professor of Clinical Psychiatry, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA
Neeta Kumari, MD
Psychiatry Resident, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA
Justin D. Petri, MD
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Eastern Virginia Medical School, Norfolk, VA

Article PDF
Article PDF

Dr. Spiegel: Factors that can result in false positive scores on the CIWA-Ar

Clinicians often use the symptom-triggered Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol Scale, Revised (CIWA-Ar)1 to assess patients’ risk for alcohol withdrawal because it has well-documented reliability, reproducibility, and validity based on comparison with ratings by expert clinicians.2,3 The CIWA-Ar commonly is used to determine when to administer lorazepam to limit or prevent morbidity and mortality in patients who are at risk of or are experiencing alcohol withdrawal. Refined to a list of 10 signs and symptoms, the CIWA-Ar is easy to administer and useful in a variety of clinical settings. The maximum score is 67, and patients with a score >15 are at increased risk for severe alcohol withdrawal.1 For a downloadable copy of the CIWA-Ar, click here.

Despite the benefits of using the CIWA-Ar, qualitative description of certain alcohol withdrawal symptoms is prone to subjective misinterpretation and can result in falsely elevated scores, excessive benzodiazepine administration, and associated sequelae.4 This article describes such a scenario, and examines factors that can contribute to a falsely elevated CIWA-Ar score.

CASE REPORT: Resistant alcohol withdrawal

Mr. J, age 24, is referred to the consultation-liaison service at our teaching hospital for “overall psychiatric assessment and help with alcohol withdrawal.” When brought to the hospital, Mr. J was experiencing diaphoresis and tachycardia. During the interview, he says he “experiences withdrawal symptoms all the time, so I am familiar with the signs.”

Mr. J is cooperative with the interview. Psychomotor agitation or retardation is not noted. His speech is goal-directed, his mood is “calm,” and his affect is within normal range. His thought content is devoid of psychoses or lethal ideations. On Mini-Mental State Examination, Mr. J scores 28 out of 30, which indicates normal cognitive functioning. He reports drinking eight 40-oz bottles of beer daily for the past 3 months. He started drinking alcohol at age 14 and has had only one 1-year period of sobriety. He denies using illicit drugs and his urine drug screen is unremarkable. Mr. J has a history of delirium tremens (DTs), no significant medical history, and was not taking any medications when admitted. His psychiatric history includes generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and antisocial personality disorder and his family history is significant for alcohol dependence.

Laboratory workup is unremarkable except for a blood alcohol level of 0.23%. Review of systems is significant for mild tremor but no other symptoms of alcohol withdrawal. Physical examination is within normal limits.

Mr. J is started on a symptom-trigger alcohol detoxification protocol using the CIWA-Ar. Based on an elevated CIWA-Ar score of 33, he receives lorazepam IV, 11 mg on his first day of hospitalization and 8 mg on the second day. On the third day, Mr. J is agitated and pulls his IV lines in an attempt to leave. Over the next 24 hours, his blood pressure ranges from 136/90 mm Hg to 169/92 mm Hg and his pulse ranges from 94 to 115 beats per minute. He is given lorazepam, 30 mg, and is transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU).

At this time, Mr. J’s Delirium Rating Scale (DRS) score is 20 (maximum: 32). He remains in the ICU on lorazepam, 25 mg/hr. After 3 days in the ICU, lorazepam is titrated and stopped 2 days later. After lorazepam is stopped, Mr. J’s DRS score is 0, his vital signs are stable, and he no longer demonstrates signs or symptoms of DTs or alcohol withdrawal. He is discharged 1 day later.

Symptom-triggered treatment

Alcohol withdrawal symptoms mainly are caused by the effects of chronic alcohol exposure on brain γ–aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate systems; benzodiazepines are the standard of care (Box).5,6 Mr. J had a history of DTs, which is a risk factor for more severe alcohol withdrawal symptoms and recurrence of DTs.7 Some authors report that fixed dosing intervals are the “gold standard therapy” for alcohol withdrawal, and may be preferable for patients with a history of DTs.8 However, Mr. J was placed on a symptom-triggered protocol, which is standard at our hospital. The decision to implement this protocol was based on concerns of oversedation and possible respiratory suppression. Clinical trials have demonstrated that compared with fixed scheduled therapy for alcohol withdrawal, symptom-triggered protocols result in a reduced need for benzodiazepines (Table).

This treatment strategy requires frequent patient reevaluations—particularly early on—with attention to signs and symptoms of alcohol withdrawal and excessive sedation from medications. Additionally, although most patients with alcohol withdrawal respond to standard treatment that includes benzodiazepines, optimal nutrition, and good supportive care, a subgroup may resist therapy (resistant alcohol withdrawal). Therefore, Mr. J—and others with resistant alcohol withdrawal—may require large doses of benzodiazepines and additional sedatives and undergo complicated hospitalizations.9 Nonetheless, as exemplified by Mr. J, symptom-triggered protocols for alcohol withdrawal can result in potential morbidity and mortality.

 

 

Box

Causes and treatment of alcohol withdrawal symptoms

Common symptoms of alcohol withdrawal include autonomic hyperactivity, tremor, insomnia, nausea, vomiting, agitation, anxiety, grand mal seizures, and transient visual, tactile, or auditory hallucinations.5 These symptoms result, in part, from the effects of chronic alcohol exposure on brain γ–aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate systems. Alcohol acutely enhances presynaptic GABA release through allosteric modulation at GABAA receptors and inhibits glutamate function through antagonism of N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptors. Chronic alcohol exposure elicits compensatory downregulated GABAA and upregulated NMDA expression.

When alcohol intake abruptly stops and its acute effects dissipate, the sudden reduction in GABAergic tone and increase in glutamatergic tone cause alcohol withdrawal symptoms.6 Benzodiazepines, which bind at the benzodiazepine site on the GABAA receptor and, similar to alcohol, acutely enhance GABA and inhibit glutamate signaling, are the standard of care for alcohol withdrawal because they reduce anxiety and the risk of seizures and delirium tremens, which is a severe form of alcohol withdrawal characterized by disturbance in consciousness and cognition and hallucinations.5,6


Table

Benefits of symptom-triggered vs fixed scheduled therapy for alcohol withdrawal

 STFSBenefits of ST
Efficacy in alcohol withdrawalYesYes 
Flexibility in dosing with fluctuations in CIWA-Ar scoreYesNoLess medication can be given overall if alcohol withdrawal signs resolve rapidly
Lower total benzodiazepine doses+Smaller chance of side effects such as oversedation, paradoxical agitation, delirium due to benzodiazepine intoxication, or respiratory depression
Fewer complications of higher benzodiazepine doses+Reduced risk of prolonged hospitalization, morbidity from aspiration pneumonia, or need to administer a reversal agent such as flumazenil
+ = more likely; – = less likely
CIWA-Ar: Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised; FS: fixed scheduled; ST: symptom-triggered
Bibliography
Amato L, Minozzi S, Vecchi S, et al. Benzodiazepines for alcohol withdrawal. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(3):CD005063. Cassidy EM, O’Sullivan I, Bradshaw P, et al. Symptom-triggered benzodiazepine therapy for alcohol withdrawal syndrome in the emergency department: a comparison with the standard fixed dose benzodiazepine regimen [published online ahead of print October 19, 2011]. Emerg Med J. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2011-200509. Daeppen JB, Gache P, Landry U, et al. Symptom-triggered vs fixed-schedule doses of benzodiazepine for alcohol withdrawal: a randomized treatment trial. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162(10):1117-1121. DeCarolis DD, Rice KL, Ho L, et al. Symptom-driven lorazepam protocol for treatment of severe alcohol withdrawal delirium in the intensive care unit. Pharmacotherapy. 2007;27(4):510-518. Jaeger TM, Lohr RH, Pankratz VS. Symptom-triggered therapy for alcohol withdrawal syndrome in medical inpatients. Mayo Clin Proc. 2001;76(7):695-701. Weaver MF, Hoffman HJ, Johnson RE, et al. Alcohol withdrawal pharmacotherapy for inpatients with medical comorbidity. J Addict Dis. 2006;25(2):17-24.

Factors influencing CIWA-Ar score

Vital signs monitoring. One limitation of the CIWA-Ar is that vital signs—an objective measurement of alcohol withdrawal— are not used to determine the score. Indeed, Mr. J presented with vital sign dysregulation. However, research suggests that the best predictor of high withdrawal scores includes groups of symptoms rather than individual symptoms.10 In that study, pulse and blood pressure did not correlate with withdrawal severity. Pulse and blood pressure elevations occur in alcohol withdrawal, but other signs and symptoms are more reliable in assessing withdrawal severity. This is clinically important because physicians often prescribe medications for alcohol withdrawal treatment based on pulse and blood pressure measures.1 This needs to be balanced against research that found a systolic blood pressure >150 mm Hg and axillary temperature >38°C can predict development of DTs in patients experiencing alcohol withdrawal.7

Lorazepam-induced disinhibition. Benzodiazepines affect functions associated with processing within the orbital prefrontal cortex,11 including response inhibition and socially acceptable behavior, and impairment in this functioning can result in behavioral disinhibition.12 This effect could account for the apparent paradoxical clinical observation of aggression in benzodiazepine-sedated patients.13 Because agitation is scored on the CIWA-Ar,1,10 falsely elevated scores caused by interpreting benzodiazepine-induced aggression as agitation could result in patients (such as Mr. J) receiving more lorazepam, therefore perpetuating this cycle.

Comorbid anxiety disorders also could falsely accentuate CIWA-Ar scores. For example, the odds of an alcohol dependence diagnosis are 2 to 3 times greater among patients with an anxiety disorder.14 Additionally, the lifetime prevalence of comorbid alcohol dependence for patients with GAD—such as Mr. J— is 30% to 35%.14,15

Alcohol withdrawal can be more severe in patients with alcohol dependence and anxiety disorders because evidence suggests the neurochemical processes underlying both are similar and potentially additive. Studies have shown that these dual diagnosis patients experience more severe symptoms of alcohol withdrawal as assessed by total CIWA-Ar score than those without an anxiety disorder.15 Although such patients may require more aggressive pharmacologic treatment, the dangers of higher benzodiazepine dosages may be even greater.

 

 

Benzodiazepine-induced delirium. A recent meta-analysis suggested that benzodiazepines may be associated with an increased risk of delirium.16 Longer-acting benzodiazepines may be associated with increased risk of delirium compared with short-acting agents, and higher doses during a 24-hour period may be associated with increased risk of delirium compared with lower doses. However, wide confidence intervals imply significant uncertainty with these results, and not all patients in the studies reviewed were undergoing alcohol detoxification.16 Benzodiazepines have been reported to accentuate delirium when used to treat DTs.17

We postulate that although Mr. J received lorazepam—a short- to moderate-acting benzodiazepine with a half-life of 12 to 16 hours18—the cumulative dose was high enough to have accentuated—rather than attenuated—delirium.16

Personality disorders. Comorbid alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and personality disorders are well documented. One study found the prevalence of personality disorders in AUDs ranged from 22% to 78%.19 Psychologically, drinking to cope with negative subjective states and emotions (coping motives) and drinking to enhance positive emotions (enhancement motives) may explain the relation between Cluster B personality disorders and AUDs.20

Research on prefrontal functioning in alcoholics and individuals with antisocial personality disorder symptoms has suggested that both groups may be impaired on tasks sensitive to compromised orbitofrontal functioning.21 The orbitofrontal system is essential for maintaining normal inhibitory influences on behavior.22 Benzodiazepines can increase the likelihood of developing disinhibition or impulsivity, which are symptoms of antisocial personality disorder. Because Mr. J had antisocial personality disorder, treating his alcohol withdrawal with a benzodiazepine could have accentuated these symptoms, which were subsequently “treated” with additional lorazepam, therefore worsening the cycle.

Medical comorbidities. The CIWA-Ar relies on autonomic signs and subjective symptoms and was not designed for use in nonverbal patients in the ICU. It is possible that the presence of other acute illnesses may contribute to increased CIWA-Ar scores, but we are unaware of any studies that have evaluated such factors.23

However, tremor, which is scored on the CIWA-Ar, can falsely elevate scores if it is caused by something other than acute alcohol withdrawal. Although essential tremors attenuate with acute alcohol use, chronic alcohol use can result in parkinsonism with a resting tremor, and cerebellar degeneration, which can include an action tremor and cerebellar 3-Hz leg tremor.24 Finally, hepatic encephalopathy—a neuropsychiatric syndrome characterized by disturbances in consciousness, mood, behavior, and cognition—can occur in patients with advanced liver disease, which may be precipitated by alcohol use. The clinical presentation and symptom severity of hepatic encephalopathy varies from minor cognitive impairment to gross disorientation, confusion, and agitation,25 all of which can elevate CIWA-Ar scores.

The role of disinhibition

Disinhibition could serve as the “final common pathway” through which CIWA-Ar scores can be falsely elevated.11 For a Figure that illustrates this, see below. Mr. J presented with several variables that could have elevated his CIWA-Ar score; additional potential factors include other psychiatric diagnoses such as bipolar disorder, opiate withdrawal, dementia, drug-seeking behavior, or malingering.26,27

Treating disinhibition in patients with alcohol withdrawal. Continuing to administer escalating doses of benzodiazepines is counterintuitive for benzodiazepine-induced disinhibition. In a study of alcohol withdrawal in rats, antipsychotics evaluated had some beneficial effects on alcohol withdrawal signs.28 In this study, the comparative effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics was as follows: risperidone = quetiapine > ziprasidone > clozapine > olanzapine.

The American Society of Addiction Medicine’s practice guideline advises against using antipsychotics as the sole agent for DTs because these agents are associated with a longer duration of delirium, higher complication rates, and higher mortality.28 However, antipsychotics have a role as an adjunct to benzodiazepines when benzodiazepines don’t sufficiently control agitation, thought disorder, or perceptual disturbances. Although haloperidol use is well established in this scenario, chlorpromazine is contraindicated because it is epileptogenic, and little information is available on atypical antipsychotics.29 If Mr. J had not responded to tapering lorazepam, evidence would support using haloperidol.


Figure: Unifying concept for pathological BZ administration during alcohol withdrawal syndrome: Disinhibition
AWS: alcohol withdrawal syndrome; BZ: benzodiazepine; CIWA-Ar: Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised; GABA: γ-aminobutyric acid
Source: Reference 11
Related Resources

  • Myrick H, Anton RF. Treatment of alcohol withdrawal. Alcohol Health & Research World. 1998;22(1):38-43. http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh22-1/38-43.pdf.
  • Amato L, Minozzi S, Davoli M. Efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of the Alcohol Withdrawal Syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(6):CD008537.

Drug Brand Names

 

 

  • Chlorpromazine • Thorazine
  • Clozapine • Clozaril
  • Flumazenil • Romazicon
  • Haloperidol • Haldol
  • Lorazepam • Ativan
  • Olanzapine • Zyprexa
  • Quetiapine • Seroquel
  • Risperidone • Risperdal
  • Ziprasidone • Geodon

Disclosures

Dr. Spiegel is on the speaker’s bureau of Sunovion Pharmaceuticals.

Drs. Kumari and Petri report no financial relationships with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Amy Herndon for her help in preparing this article.

Dr. Spiegel: Factors that can result in false positive scores on the CIWA-Ar

Clinicians often use the symptom-triggered Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol Scale, Revised (CIWA-Ar)1 to assess patients’ risk for alcohol withdrawal because it has well-documented reliability, reproducibility, and validity based on comparison with ratings by expert clinicians.2,3 The CIWA-Ar commonly is used to determine when to administer lorazepam to limit or prevent morbidity and mortality in patients who are at risk of or are experiencing alcohol withdrawal. Refined to a list of 10 signs and symptoms, the CIWA-Ar is easy to administer and useful in a variety of clinical settings. The maximum score is 67, and patients with a score >15 are at increased risk for severe alcohol withdrawal.1 For a downloadable copy of the CIWA-Ar, click here.

Despite the benefits of using the CIWA-Ar, qualitative description of certain alcohol withdrawal symptoms is prone to subjective misinterpretation and can result in falsely elevated scores, excessive benzodiazepine administration, and associated sequelae.4 This article describes such a scenario, and examines factors that can contribute to a falsely elevated CIWA-Ar score.

CASE REPORT: Resistant alcohol withdrawal

Mr. J, age 24, is referred to the consultation-liaison service at our teaching hospital for “overall psychiatric assessment and help with alcohol withdrawal.” When brought to the hospital, Mr. J was experiencing diaphoresis and tachycardia. During the interview, he says he “experiences withdrawal symptoms all the time, so I am familiar with the signs.”

Mr. J is cooperative with the interview. Psychomotor agitation or retardation is not noted. His speech is goal-directed, his mood is “calm,” and his affect is within normal range. His thought content is devoid of psychoses or lethal ideations. On Mini-Mental State Examination, Mr. J scores 28 out of 30, which indicates normal cognitive functioning. He reports drinking eight 40-oz bottles of beer daily for the past 3 months. He started drinking alcohol at age 14 and has had only one 1-year period of sobriety. He denies using illicit drugs and his urine drug screen is unremarkable. Mr. J has a history of delirium tremens (DTs), no significant medical history, and was not taking any medications when admitted. His psychiatric history includes generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and antisocial personality disorder and his family history is significant for alcohol dependence.

Laboratory workup is unremarkable except for a blood alcohol level of 0.23%. Review of systems is significant for mild tremor but no other symptoms of alcohol withdrawal. Physical examination is within normal limits.

Mr. J is started on a symptom-trigger alcohol detoxification protocol using the CIWA-Ar. Based on an elevated CIWA-Ar score of 33, he receives lorazepam IV, 11 mg on his first day of hospitalization and 8 mg on the second day. On the third day, Mr. J is agitated and pulls his IV lines in an attempt to leave. Over the next 24 hours, his blood pressure ranges from 136/90 mm Hg to 169/92 mm Hg and his pulse ranges from 94 to 115 beats per minute. He is given lorazepam, 30 mg, and is transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU).

At this time, Mr. J’s Delirium Rating Scale (DRS) score is 20 (maximum: 32). He remains in the ICU on lorazepam, 25 mg/hr. After 3 days in the ICU, lorazepam is titrated and stopped 2 days later. After lorazepam is stopped, Mr. J’s DRS score is 0, his vital signs are stable, and he no longer demonstrates signs or symptoms of DTs or alcohol withdrawal. He is discharged 1 day later.

Symptom-triggered treatment

Alcohol withdrawal symptoms mainly are caused by the effects of chronic alcohol exposure on brain γ–aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate systems; benzodiazepines are the standard of care (Box).5,6 Mr. J had a history of DTs, which is a risk factor for more severe alcohol withdrawal symptoms and recurrence of DTs.7 Some authors report that fixed dosing intervals are the “gold standard therapy” for alcohol withdrawal, and may be preferable for patients with a history of DTs.8 However, Mr. J was placed on a symptom-triggered protocol, which is standard at our hospital. The decision to implement this protocol was based on concerns of oversedation and possible respiratory suppression. Clinical trials have demonstrated that compared with fixed scheduled therapy for alcohol withdrawal, symptom-triggered protocols result in a reduced need for benzodiazepines (Table).

This treatment strategy requires frequent patient reevaluations—particularly early on—with attention to signs and symptoms of alcohol withdrawal and excessive sedation from medications. Additionally, although most patients with alcohol withdrawal respond to standard treatment that includes benzodiazepines, optimal nutrition, and good supportive care, a subgroup may resist therapy (resistant alcohol withdrawal). Therefore, Mr. J—and others with resistant alcohol withdrawal—may require large doses of benzodiazepines and additional sedatives and undergo complicated hospitalizations.9 Nonetheless, as exemplified by Mr. J, symptom-triggered protocols for alcohol withdrawal can result in potential morbidity and mortality.

 

 

Box

Causes and treatment of alcohol withdrawal symptoms

Common symptoms of alcohol withdrawal include autonomic hyperactivity, tremor, insomnia, nausea, vomiting, agitation, anxiety, grand mal seizures, and transient visual, tactile, or auditory hallucinations.5 These symptoms result, in part, from the effects of chronic alcohol exposure on brain γ–aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate systems. Alcohol acutely enhances presynaptic GABA release through allosteric modulation at GABAA receptors and inhibits glutamate function through antagonism of N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptors. Chronic alcohol exposure elicits compensatory downregulated GABAA and upregulated NMDA expression.

When alcohol intake abruptly stops and its acute effects dissipate, the sudden reduction in GABAergic tone and increase in glutamatergic tone cause alcohol withdrawal symptoms.6 Benzodiazepines, which bind at the benzodiazepine site on the GABAA receptor and, similar to alcohol, acutely enhance GABA and inhibit glutamate signaling, are the standard of care for alcohol withdrawal because they reduce anxiety and the risk of seizures and delirium tremens, which is a severe form of alcohol withdrawal characterized by disturbance in consciousness and cognition and hallucinations.5,6


Table

Benefits of symptom-triggered vs fixed scheduled therapy for alcohol withdrawal

 STFSBenefits of ST
Efficacy in alcohol withdrawalYesYes 
Flexibility in dosing with fluctuations in CIWA-Ar scoreYesNoLess medication can be given overall if alcohol withdrawal signs resolve rapidly
Lower total benzodiazepine doses+Smaller chance of side effects such as oversedation, paradoxical agitation, delirium due to benzodiazepine intoxication, or respiratory depression
Fewer complications of higher benzodiazepine doses+Reduced risk of prolonged hospitalization, morbidity from aspiration pneumonia, or need to administer a reversal agent such as flumazenil
+ = more likely; – = less likely
CIWA-Ar: Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised; FS: fixed scheduled; ST: symptom-triggered
Bibliography
Amato L, Minozzi S, Vecchi S, et al. Benzodiazepines for alcohol withdrawal. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(3):CD005063. Cassidy EM, O’Sullivan I, Bradshaw P, et al. Symptom-triggered benzodiazepine therapy for alcohol withdrawal syndrome in the emergency department: a comparison with the standard fixed dose benzodiazepine regimen [published online ahead of print October 19, 2011]. Emerg Med J. doi: 10.1136/emermed-2011-200509. Daeppen JB, Gache P, Landry U, et al. Symptom-triggered vs fixed-schedule doses of benzodiazepine for alcohol withdrawal: a randomized treatment trial. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162(10):1117-1121. DeCarolis DD, Rice KL, Ho L, et al. Symptom-driven lorazepam protocol for treatment of severe alcohol withdrawal delirium in the intensive care unit. Pharmacotherapy. 2007;27(4):510-518. Jaeger TM, Lohr RH, Pankratz VS. Symptom-triggered therapy for alcohol withdrawal syndrome in medical inpatients. Mayo Clin Proc. 2001;76(7):695-701. Weaver MF, Hoffman HJ, Johnson RE, et al. Alcohol withdrawal pharmacotherapy for inpatients with medical comorbidity. J Addict Dis. 2006;25(2):17-24.

Factors influencing CIWA-Ar score

Vital signs monitoring. One limitation of the CIWA-Ar is that vital signs—an objective measurement of alcohol withdrawal— are not used to determine the score. Indeed, Mr. J presented with vital sign dysregulation. However, research suggests that the best predictor of high withdrawal scores includes groups of symptoms rather than individual symptoms.10 In that study, pulse and blood pressure did not correlate with withdrawal severity. Pulse and blood pressure elevations occur in alcohol withdrawal, but other signs and symptoms are more reliable in assessing withdrawal severity. This is clinically important because physicians often prescribe medications for alcohol withdrawal treatment based on pulse and blood pressure measures.1 This needs to be balanced against research that found a systolic blood pressure >150 mm Hg and axillary temperature >38°C can predict development of DTs in patients experiencing alcohol withdrawal.7

Lorazepam-induced disinhibition. Benzodiazepines affect functions associated with processing within the orbital prefrontal cortex,11 including response inhibition and socially acceptable behavior, and impairment in this functioning can result in behavioral disinhibition.12 This effect could account for the apparent paradoxical clinical observation of aggression in benzodiazepine-sedated patients.13 Because agitation is scored on the CIWA-Ar,1,10 falsely elevated scores caused by interpreting benzodiazepine-induced aggression as agitation could result in patients (such as Mr. J) receiving more lorazepam, therefore perpetuating this cycle.

Comorbid anxiety disorders also could falsely accentuate CIWA-Ar scores. For example, the odds of an alcohol dependence diagnosis are 2 to 3 times greater among patients with an anxiety disorder.14 Additionally, the lifetime prevalence of comorbid alcohol dependence for patients with GAD—such as Mr. J— is 30% to 35%.14,15

Alcohol withdrawal can be more severe in patients with alcohol dependence and anxiety disorders because evidence suggests the neurochemical processes underlying both are similar and potentially additive. Studies have shown that these dual diagnosis patients experience more severe symptoms of alcohol withdrawal as assessed by total CIWA-Ar score than those without an anxiety disorder.15 Although such patients may require more aggressive pharmacologic treatment, the dangers of higher benzodiazepine dosages may be even greater.

 

 

Benzodiazepine-induced delirium. A recent meta-analysis suggested that benzodiazepines may be associated with an increased risk of delirium.16 Longer-acting benzodiazepines may be associated with increased risk of delirium compared with short-acting agents, and higher doses during a 24-hour period may be associated with increased risk of delirium compared with lower doses. However, wide confidence intervals imply significant uncertainty with these results, and not all patients in the studies reviewed were undergoing alcohol detoxification.16 Benzodiazepines have been reported to accentuate delirium when used to treat DTs.17

We postulate that although Mr. J received lorazepam—a short- to moderate-acting benzodiazepine with a half-life of 12 to 16 hours18—the cumulative dose was high enough to have accentuated—rather than attenuated—delirium.16

Personality disorders. Comorbid alcohol use disorders (AUDs) and personality disorders are well documented. One study found the prevalence of personality disorders in AUDs ranged from 22% to 78%.19 Psychologically, drinking to cope with negative subjective states and emotions (coping motives) and drinking to enhance positive emotions (enhancement motives) may explain the relation between Cluster B personality disorders and AUDs.20

Research on prefrontal functioning in alcoholics and individuals with antisocial personality disorder symptoms has suggested that both groups may be impaired on tasks sensitive to compromised orbitofrontal functioning.21 The orbitofrontal system is essential for maintaining normal inhibitory influences on behavior.22 Benzodiazepines can increase the likelihood of developing disinhibition or impulsivity, which are symptoms of antisocial personality disorder. Because Mr. J had antisocial personality disorder, treating his alcohol withdrawal with a benzodiazepine could have accentuated these symptoms, which were subsequently “treated” with additional lorazepam, therefore worsening the cycle.

Medical comorbidities. The CIWA-Ar relies on autonomic signs and subjective symptoms and was not designed for use in nonverbal patients in the ICU. It is possible that the presence of other acute illnesses may contribute to increased CIWA-Ar scores, but we are unaware of any studies that have evaluated such factors.23

However, tremor, which is scored on the CIWA-Ar, can falsely elevate scores if it is caused by something other than acute alcohol withdrawal. Although essential tremors attenuate with acute alcohol use, chronic alcohol use can result in parkinsonism with a resting tremor, and cerebellar degeneration, which can include an action tremor and cerebellar 3-Hz leg tremor.24 Finally, hepatic encephalopathy—a neuropsychiatric syndrome characterized by disturbances in consciousness, mood, behavior, and cognition—can occur in patients with advanced liver disease, which may be precipitated by alcohol use. The clinical presentation and symptom severity of hepatic encephalopathy varies from minor cognitive impairment to gross disorientation, confusion, and agitation,25 all of which can elevate CIWA-Ar scores.

The role of disinhibition

Disinhibition could serve as the “final common pathway” through which CIWA-Ar scores can be falsely elevated.11 For a Figure that illustrates this, see below. Mr. J presented with several variables that could have elevated his CIWA-Ar score; additional potential factors include other psychiatric diagnoses such as bipolar disorder, opiate withdrawal, dementia, drug-seeking behavior, or malingering.26,27

Treating disinhibition in patients with alcohol withdrawal. Continuing to administer escalating doses of benzodiazepines is counterintuitive for benzodiazepine-induced disinhibition. In a study of alcohol withdrawal in rats, antipsychotics evaluated had some beneficial effects on alcohol withdrawal signs.28 In this study, the comparative effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics was as follows: risperidone = quetiapine > ziprasidone > clozapine > olanzapine.

The American Society of Addiction Medicine’s practice guideline advises against using antipsychotics as the sole agent for DTs because these agents are associated with a longer duration of delirium, higher complication rates, and higher mortality.28 However, antipsychotics have a role as an adjunct to benzodiazepines when benzodiazepines don’t sufficiently control agitation, thought disorder, or perceptual disturbances. Although haloperidol use is well established in this scenario, chlorpromazine is contraindicated because it is epileptogenic, and little information is available on atypical antipsychotics.29 If Mr. J had not responded to tapering lorazepam, evidence would support using haloperidol.


Figure: Unifying concept for pathological BZ administration during alcohol withdrawal syndrome: Disinhibition
AWS: alcohol withdrawal syndrome; BZ: benzodiazepine; CIWA-Ar: Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment of Alcohol Scale, Revised; GABA: γ-aminobutyric acid
Source: Reference 11
Related Resources

  • Myrick H, Anton RF. Treatment of alcohol withdrawal. Alcohol Health & Research World. 1998;22(1):38-43. http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh22-1/38-43.pdf.
  • Amato L, Minozzi S, Davoli M. Efficacy and safety of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of the Alcohol Withdrawal Syndrome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;(6):CD008537.

Drug Brand Names

 

 

  • Chlorpromazine • Thorazine
  • Clozapine • Clozaril
  • Flumazenil • Romazicon
  • Haloperidol • Haldol
  • Lorazepam • Ativan
  • Olanzapine • Zyprexa
  • Quetiapine • Seroquel
  • Risperidone • Risperdal
  • Ziprasidone • Geodon

Disclosures

Dr. Spiegel is on the speaker’s bureau of Sunovion Pharmaceuticals.

Drs. Kumari and Petri report no financial relationships with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Amy Herndon for her help in preparing this article.

References

1. Sullivan JT, Sykora K, Schneiderman J, et al. Assessment of alcohol withdrawal: the revised clinical institute withdrawal assessment for alcohol scale (CIWA-Ar). Br J Addict. 1989;84(11):1353-1357.

2. Knott DH, Lerner WD, Davis-Knott T, et al. Decision for alcohol detoxication: a method to standardize patient evaluation. Postgrad Med. 1981;69(5):65-69, 72-75, 78.

3. Wiehl WO, Hayner G, Galloway G. Haight Ashbury Free Clinics’ drug detoxification protocols—Part 4: alcohol. J Psychoactive Drugs. 1994;26(1):57-59.

4. Bostwick JM, Lapid MI. False positives on the clinical institute withdrawal assessment for alcohol-revised: is this scale appropriate for use in the medically ill? Psychosomatics. 2004;45(3):256-261.

5. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed text rev. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.

6. Schacht JP, Randall PK, Waid LR, et al. Neurocognitive performance, alcohol withdrawal, and effects of a combination of flumazenil and gabapentin in alcohol dependence. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2011;35(11):2030-2038.

7. Monte R, Rabuñal R, Casariego E, et al. Risk factors for delirium tremens in patients with alcohol withdrawal syndrome in a hospital setting. Eur J Intern Med. 2009;20(7):690-694.

8. Saitz R, O’Malley SS. Pharmacotherapies for alcohol abuse. Withdrawal and treatment. Med Clin North Am. 1997;81(4):881-907.

9. Hack JB, Hoffmann RS, Nelson LS. Resistant alcohol withdrawal: does an unexpectedly large sedative requirement identify these patients early? J Med Toxicol. 2006;2(2):55-60.

10. Pittman B, Gueorguieva R, Krupitsky E, et al. Multidimensionality of the Alcohol Withdrawal Symptom Checklist: a factor analysis of the Alcohol Withdrawal Symptom Checklist and CIWA-Ar. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2007;31(4):612-618.

11. Deakin JB, Aitken MR, Dowson JH, et al. Diazepam produces disinhibitory cognitive effects in male volunteers. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2004;173(1-2):88-97.

12. Hornberger M, Geng J, Hodges JR. Convergent grey and white matter evidence of orbitofrontal cortex changes related to disinhibition in behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. Brain. 2011;134(pt 9):2502-2512.

13. Jones KA, Nielsen S, Bruno R, et al. Benzodiazepines - their role in aggression and why GPs should prescribe with caution. Aust Fam Physician. 2011;40(11):862-865.

14. Scott EL, Hulvershorn L. Anxiety disorders with comorbid substance abuse. Psychiatric Times. 2011; 28(9).

15. Faingold CL, Knapp DJ, Chester JA, et al. Integrative neurobiology of the alcohol withdrawal syndrome—from anxiety to seizures. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2004;28(2):268-278.

16. Clegg A, Young JB. Which medications to avoid in people at risk of delirium: a systematic review. Age Ageing. 2011;40(1):23-29.

17. Hecksel KA, Bostwick JM, Jaeger TM, et al. Inappropriate use of symptom-triggered therapy for alcohol withdrawal in the general hospital. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83(3):274-279.

18. Lader M. Benzodiazepines revisited—will we ever learn? Addiction. 2011;106(12):2086-2109.

19. Mellos E, Liappas I, Paparrigopoulos T. Comorbidity of personality disorders with alcohol abuse. In Vivo. 2010;24(5):761-769.

20. Tragesser SL, Sher KJ, Trull TJ, et al. Personality disorder symptoms, drinking motives, and alcohol use and consequences: cross-sectional and prospective mediation. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2007;15(3):282-292.

21. Oscar-Berman M, Valmas MM, Sawyer KS, et al. Frontal brain dysfunction in alcoholism with and without antisocial personality disorder. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2009;5:309-326.

22. Dom G, De Wilde B, Hulstijn W, et al. Behavioural aspects of impulsivity in alcoholics with and without a cluster-B personality disorder. Alcohol Alcohol. 2006;41(4):412-420.

23. de Wit M, Jones DG, Sessler CN, et al. Alcohol-use disorders in the critically ill patient. Chest. 2010;138(4):994-1003.

24. Mostile G, Jankovic J. Alcohol in essential tremor and other movement disorders. Mov Disord. 2010;25(14):2274-2284.

25. Crone CC, Gabriel GM, DiMartini A. An overview of psychiatric issues in liver disease for the consultation-liaison psychiatrist. Psychosomatics. 2006;47(3):188-205.

26. Reoux JP, Oreskovich MR. A comparison of two versions of the clinical institute withdrawal assessment for alcohol: the CIWA-Ar and CIWA-AD. Am J Addict. 2006;15(1):85-93.

27. Gray S, Borgundvaag B, Sirvastava A, et al. Feasibility and reliability of the SHOT: a short scale for measuring pretreatment severity of alcohol withdrawal in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2010;17(10):1048-1054.

28. Uzbay TI. Atypical antipsychotic drugs and ethanol withdrawal syndrome: a review. Alcohol Alcohol. 2012;47(1):33-41.

29. McKeon A, Frye MA, Delanty N. The alcohol withdrawal syndrome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008;79(8):854-862.

References

1. Sullivan JT, Sykora K, Schneiderman J, et al. Assessment of alcohol withdrawal: the revised clinical institute withdrawal assessment for alcohol scale (CIWA-Ar). Br J Addict. 1989;84(11):1353-1357.

2. Knott DH, Lerner WD, Davis-Knott T, et al. Decision for alcohol detoxication: a method to standardize patient evaluation. Postgrad Med. 1981;69(5):65-69, 72-75, 78.

3. Wiehl WO, Hayner G, Galloway G. Haight Ashbury Free Clinics’ drug detoxification protocols—Part 4: alcohol. J Psychoactive Drugs. 1994;26(1):57-59.

4. Bostwick JM, Lapid MI. False positives on the clinical institute withdrawal assessment for alcohol-revised: is this scale appropriate for use in the medically ill? Psychosomatics. 2004;45(3):256-261.

5. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed text rev. Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.

6. Schacht JP, Randall PK, Waid LR, et al. Neurocognitive performance, alcohol withdrawal, and effects of a combination of flumazenil and gabapentin in alcohol dependence. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2011;35(11):2030-2038.

7. Monte R, Rabuñal R, Casariego E, et al. Risk factors for delirium tremens in patients with alcohol withdrawal syndrome in a hospital setting. Eur J Intern Med. 2009;20(7):690-694.

8. Saitz R, O’Malley SS. Pharmacotherapies for alcohol abuse. Withdrawal and treatment. Med Clin North Am. 1997;81(4):881-907.

9. Hack JB, Hoffmann RS, Nelson LS. Resistant alcohol withdrawal: does an unexpectedly large sedative requirement identify these patients early? J Med Toxicol. 2006;2(2):55-60.

10. Pittman B, Gueorguieva R, Krupitsky E, et al. Multidimensionality of the Alcohol Withdrawal Symptom Checklist: a factor analysis of the Alcohol Withdrawal Symptom Checklist and CIWA-Ar. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2007;31(4):612-618.

11. Deakin JB, Aitken MR, Dowson JH, et al. Diazepam produces disinhibitory cognitive effects in male volunteers. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2004;173(1-2):88-97.

12. Hornberger M, Geng J, Hodges JR. Convergent grey and white matter evidence of orbitofrontal cortex changes related to disinhibition in behavioural variant frontotemporal dementia. Brain. 2011;134(pt 9):2502-2512.

13. Jones KA, Nielsen S, Bruno R, et al. Benzodiazepines - their role in aggression and why GPs should prescribe with caution. Aust Fam Physician. 2011;40(11):862-865.

14. Scott EL, Hulvershorn L. Anxiety disorders with comorbid substance abuse. Psychiatric Times. 2011; 28(9).

15. Faingold CL, Knapp DJ, Chester JA, et al. Integrative neurobiology of the alcohol withdrawal syndrome—from anxiety to seizures. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2004;28(2):268-278.

16. Clegg A, Young JB. Which medications to avoid in people at risk of delirium: a systematic review. Age Ageing. 2011;40(1):23-29.

17. Hecksel KA, Bostwick JM, Jaeger TM, et al. Inappropriate use of symptom-triggered therapy for alcohol withdrawal in the general hospital. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83(3):274-279.

18. Lader M. Benzodiazepines revisited—will we ever learn? Addiction. 2011;106(12):2086-2109.

19. Mellos E, Liappas I, Paparrigopoulos T. Comorbidity of personality disorders with alcohol abuse. In Vivo. 2010;24(5):761-769.

20. Tragesser SL, Sher KJ, Trull TJ, et al. Personality disorder symptoms, drinking motives, and alcohol use and consequences: cross-sectional and prospective mediation. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol. 2007;15(3):282-292.

21. Oscar-Berman M, Valmas MM, Sawyer KS, et al. Frontal brain dysfunction in alcoholism with and without antisocial personality disorder. Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2009;5:309-326.

22. Dom G, De Wilde B, Hulstijn W, et al. Behavioural aspects of impulsivity in alcoholics with and without a cluster-B personality disorder. Alcohol Alcohol. 2006;41(4):412-420.

23. de Wit M, Jones DG, Sessler CN, et al. Alcohol-use disorders in the critically ill patient. Chest. 2010;138(4):994-1003.

24. Mostile G, Jankovic J. Alcohol in essential tremor and other movement disorders. Mov Disord. 2010;25(14):2274-2284.

25. Crone CC, Gabriel GM, DiMartini A. An overview of psychiatric issues in liver disease for the consultation-liaison psychiatrist. Psychosomatics. 2006;47(3):188-205.

26. Reoux JP, Oreskovich MR. A comparison of two versions of the clinical institute withdrawal assessment for alcohol: the CIWA-Ar and CIWA-AD. Am J Addict. 2006;15(1):85-93.

27. Gray S, Borgundvaag B, Sirvastava A, et al. Feasibility and reliability of the SHOT: a short scale for measuring pretreatment severity of alcohol withdrawal in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med. 2010;17(10):1048-1054.

28. Uzbay TI. Atypical antipsychotic drugs and ethanol withdrawal syndrome: a review. Alcohol Alcohol. 2012;47(1):33-41.

29. McKeon A, Frye MA, Delanty N. The alcohol withdrawal syndrome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008;79(8):854-862.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Page Number
10-16
Page Number
10-16
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Safer use of benzodiazepines for alcohol detoxification
Display Headline
Safer use of benzodiazepines for alcohol detoxification
Legacy Keywords
benzodiazepines; alcohol detoxification; detox; CIWA-Ar; Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol Scale;Revised
Legacy Keywords
benzodiazepines; alcohol detoxification; detox; CIWA-Ar; Clinical Institute Withdrawal Assessment for Alcohol Scale;Revised
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Electroconvulsive therapy: How modern techniques improve patient outcomes

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Electroconvulsive therapy: How modern techniques improve patient outcomes

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) has remained one of the most effective treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD) since it was introduced >70 years ago.1 ECT’s primary indication is severe, treatment-resistant MDD but sometimes it is used to treat other disorders, including bipolar mania and schizophrenia. In ECT, electrical current is delivered to a patient’s brain via electrodes placed on the scalp to induce a seizure while the patient is under anesthesia and a muscle relaxant. ECT’s exact mechanism of action for MDD is unknown, but researchers believe it may relieve depressive symptoms by regulating functional disturbances in relevant neural circuits.2

Research has shown that 64% to 87% of patients with severe MDD respond to ECT, with response rates as high as 95% for patients with MDD with psychotic features.3-5 Although patients may respond more quickly, 6 to 12 sessions typically are required to resolve a severe depressive episode.2

Despite ECT’s proven effectiveness, several factors have limited its widespread use, including limited access and expertise, adverse cognitive effects such as memory impairment, and negative public perception based on how ECT was administered decades ago.2 This article describes current methods of administering ECT, and how these changes have helped minimize these concerns while retaining efficacy.

Modern ECT practices

Since ECT was first used in the 1930s, clinicians have made many modifications to improve its efficacy and safety. Refinements to how ECT is administered include changing waveform parameters, individualizing dosing to seizure threshold, and altering electrode placement.6,7

Pulse width. Most ECT devices used today feature a constant-current output stimulator8 that allows continuous current regulation.7 Total charge, in millicoulombs (mC), is the common metric.7 Pulse width is a commonly altered waveform parameter in ECT delivery. Most research supports administering repeated brief or ultra-brief pulses (0.5 to 2 milliseconds), which is associated with greater charge efficiency and fewer side effects than traditional sine wave ECT dosing.8,9 Using a brief or ultra-brief pulse width increases clinical efficiency and decreases side effects because it focuses the stimulus on brain regions that regulate mood while limiting stimulation of brain regions involved in cognitive functioning.7 With brief-pulse stimulus, a patient’s cognitive performance may return to baseline levels within 3 days of treatment.6 Increasing evidence demonstrates that using a larger number of pulses with a brief pulse width and amplitude enhances ECT’s antidepressant effects while reducing unwanted neurocognitive side effects.7

Dosing and duration. In terms of clinical efficacy, how much the electrical stimulus exceeds a patient’s seizure threshold— the minimum amount of electrical charge that induces a generalized CNS seizure10—is more important than the absolute intensity of the stimulus.1 The degree to which the stimulus should exceed the seizure threshold depends on electrode placement, which is described below.

Acute therapy patients typically receive 2 to 3 treatments each week,11,12 culminating in 12 to 18 treatments.8,12 The optimum number of sessions administered is determined by the ratio of clinical improvement to the severity of cognitive adverse effects.3

Electrode placement. Spatial targeting of stimulus is crucial to maximize therapeutic benefits and minimize side effects. Concerns about cognitive side effects have led to variations in electrode placement to minimize the amount of brain parenchyma affected by electrical discharge (Table).1,7,8 The most commonly used placements are:

  • bitemporal (BT)—electrodes are placed midline between the eye and ear on both sides of the head
  • right unilateral (RUL)—1 electrode is positioned just lateral to the vertex and the other at the right temple.7

When given in doses close to a patient’s seizure threshold, RUL ECT offers only modest effects, but at suprathreshold doses—eg, 6 times the seizure threshold—it is as effective as BT placement1 but avoids cognitive disruption.9 Patients who do not respond to several seizures with RUL placement often are switched to BT to enhance clinical response.8 In BT ECT, stimulus is administered at 1.5 times the patient’s threshold levels. Exceeding these values is unlikely to increase efficacy, but can contribute to adverse effects.1

Table

ECT electrodes: Bitemporal vs right unilateral placement

PlacementLocationComments
BTElectrodes are placed midline between the eye and ear on both sides of the headStimulus is administered at 1.5 times a patient’s seizure threshold. Often used for patients who do not respond to several seizures with RUL
RUL1 electrode positioned just lateral to the vertex and the other at the right templeWhen stimulus is administered in doses 6 times a patient’s seizure threshold, RUL is as effective as BT but avoids cognitive disruption. Offers only modest effects when stimulus is administered in doses close to a patient’s seizure threshold
BT: bitemporal; ECT: electroconvulsive therapy; RUL: right unilateral
Source: References 1,7,8
 

 

Addressing safety concerns

In addition to changes to waveforms, dosing, and electrode placement, using anesthesia, muscle relaxants, and other medications has dramatically reduced adverse effects of ECT.8,10,13 See the Box10,14,15 for the specific agents used and their purposes. Before these medications and electroencephalography and electrocardiography (ECG) monitoring were used during ECT, the mortality rate was approximately 0.1%.13 Today, ECT is considered a low-risk medical intervention, with a mortality rate of approximately 0.002%.1,16 Before beginning an acute course of ECT, patients undergo laboratory testing, including a complete blood count, basic metabolic panel, and ECG. Spinal radiography and neuroimaging studies can be obtained to rule out preexisting vertebral injuries or neurologic disorders.1,8

Hemodynamic changes in response to ECT-induced seizures can exacerbate preexisting cardiac conditions. Normal physiologic response to ECT consists of a brief parasympathetic outflow, inducing bradycardia for 10 to 15 seconds, followed by a prominent sympathetic response characterized by hypertension and tachycardia for approximately 5 minutes. Although these changes can induce myocardial ischemia or infarction,14 the most common cardiac disturbances caused by ECT are arrhythmias, primarily in patients with preexisting cardiac abnormalities.17

Memory impairment. The most prevalent adverse reaction to ECT is memory loss, although not all aspects of recall are impaired to the same degree.18 Memory impairment varies based on factors such as electrode placement,9 stimulus waveform,19 site of seizure initiation, and pattern of activation.20 The risk of experiencing memory loss or other cognitive side effects following ECT can be decreased by using RUL electrode placement, brief pulses, and lower stimulus charge relative to seizure threshold.21 Memory deficits incurred by ECT usually are transient. In a study of 21 patients who received BT ECT for severe MDD, Meeter et al22 found that memory was stable and possibly improved at 3-month follow-up.

Subsets of memory function are impaired to differing degrees after ECT. For example, after treatment, autobiographical memory generally is less impaired than impersonal data.12,23 Weiner et al9 found that autobiographical information was more significantly impaired in patients treated with bilateral sine wave ECT than in those who underwent RUL ECT.

Procedural memory—memories of learned motor skills or mechanical tasks—often are left intact compared with semantic memory, which is general, declarative information recalled without context.18 The subsets of memory collectively regarded as declarative memory—the recollection of facts and events—may be most severely affected because this type of memory relies upon median temporal lobe structures, which are affected by ECT.21

Anterograde amnesia—the inability to form new memories—often is limited to the immediate posttreatment period and has been shown to become less pronounced at follow-up visits.22 Many clinicians and patients consider retrograde amnesia—forgetting memories that were formed before ECT—to be the most serious adverse effect of ECT. However, Mini-Mental State Examination scores tend to improve for patients who undergo ECT.1,16 Retrograde amnesia usually improves within weeks to months after ECT.12 Evidence suggests that retrograde amnesia mostly lifts during the recovery period and typically is not evident after 3 months.22 The best indicators of possible retrograde amnesic effects are preexisting cognitive deficits12 and duration of disorientation after ECT.1 Therefore, retrograde amnesia is more common among older adults, in whom age-related changes predispose patients to ECT’s adverse effects.24

The conventionally accepted mechanism for memory deficits after ECT is excitotoxic damage in the pyramidal cell layer of neurons in the hippocampus that induces calcium influx, which damages cells and causes neuronal atrophy.12 However, in animal studies, Dwork et al25 found an absence of neuronal or glial loss in regions subserving memory or cognitive functions (ie, the hippocampus or frontal cortex). Even in regions exquisitely sensitive to neuronal damage—such as CA1 of the hippocampus—neither cell number or volume or density of neuronal or glial cells were detected at statistically significant levels.25 Therefore, it is unlikely that ECT causes cell damage or atrophy in hippocampal neurons.

Box

Medications used during electroconvulsive therapy

Anesthesia increases patients’ comfort during electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) by making them unaware of and unable to recall the procedure. The most commonly used anesthetic for ECT is methohexital, 0.5 to 1 mg/kg.14 Etomidate can be used in patients with contraindications to methohexital15; however, this medication can lengthen ictal duration.14 After the initial ECT treatment, clinicians can adjust the anesthetic dose based on the patient’s previous response.14

Using muscle relaxants during ECT has virtually eliminated bone fractures resulting from the procedure.10 The most common muscle relaxant is succinylcholine,15 which also reduces delirium in patients with post-ECT agitation.14 Mask ventilation and standard, noninvasive monitoring of cardiac parameters and oxygen saturation are necessary.14

Tachycardia and hypertension associated with ECT can be countered with beta blockers such as esmolol or labetalol as well as calcium channel blockers such as nicardipine.14 In addition, most patients are treated with the anticholinergic glycopyrrolate before the procedure to avoid bradycardia14 and reduce secretions, which may cause aspiration.15 Patients who experience headache or muscle pain after ECT can be treated with ibuprofen or acetaminophen before ECT sessions; patients with more severe complaints can be treated with IV ketorolac, 15 to 30 mg, before stimulus administration.15

 

 

Related Resources

  • Leiknes KA, Jarosh-von Schweder L, Høie B. Contemporary use and practice of electroconvulsive therapy worldwide. Brain Behav. 2012;2(3):283-344.
  • Manka MV, Beyer JL, Weiner RD, et al. Clinical manual of electroconvulsive therapy. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2010.
Drug Brand Names

  • Esmolol • Brevibloc
  • Etomidate • Amidate
  • Glycopyrrolate • Robinul
  • Ketorolac • Toradol
  • Labetalol • Normodyne, Trandate
  • Methohexital • Brevital
  • Nicardipine • Cardene
  • Succinylcholine • Anectine
Disclosures

Dr. Husain receives grant or research support from Brainsway, Cyberonics, MagStim, NARSAD, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, the National Institute on Aging, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, NeoSync, Neuronetics, St. Jude Medical, and the Stanley Foundation.

Drs. Raza, Tirmizi, and Trevino report no relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

References

1. Greenberg RM, Kellner CH. Electroconvulsive therapy: a selected review. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2005;13(4):268-281.

2. Janicak PG, Dowd SM, Rado JT, et al. The re-emerging role of therapeutic neuromodulation. Current Psychiatry. 2010;9(11):67-74.

3. Kellner CH, Knapp RG, Petrides G, et al. Continuation electroconvulsive therapy vs pharmacotherapy for relapse prevention in major depression: a multisite study from the consortium for research in electroconvulsive therapy (CORE). Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006;63(12):1337-1344.

4. Husain MM, Rush AJ, Fink M, et al. Speed of response and remission in major depressive disorder with acute electroconvulsive therapy (ECT): a consortium for research in ECT (CORE) report. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(4):485-491.

5. Petrides G, Fink M, Husain MM, et al. ECT remission rates in psychotic versus nonpsychotic depressed patients: a report from CORE. J ECT. 2001;17(4):244-253.

6. Semkovska M, Keane D, Babalola O, et al. Unilateral brief-pulse electroconvulsive therapy and cognition: effects of electrode placement, stimulus dosage and time. J Psychiatr Res. 2011;45(6):770-780.

7. Peterchev AV, Rosa MA, Deng ZD, et al. Electroconvulsive therapy stimulus parameters: rethinking dosage. J ECT. 2010;26(3):159-174.

8. Swartz CM. Electroconvulsive and neuromodulation therapies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2009.

9. Weiner RD, Rogers HJ, Davidson JR, et al. Effects of stimulus parameters on cognitive side effects. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1986;462:315-325.

10. Isenberg KE, Zorumski CF. Electroconvulsive therapy. In: Sadock BJ Sadock VA, eds. Kaplan & Sadock’s comprehensive textbook of psychiatry. Vol 2. 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000:2503–2515.

11. Trevino K, McClintock SM, Husain MM. A review of continuation electroconvulsive therapy: application safety, and efficacy. J ECT. 2010;26(3):186-195.

12. Merkl A, Heuser I, Bajbouj M. Antidepressant electroconvulsive therapy: mechanism of action recent advances and limitations. Exp Neurol. 2009;219(1):20-26.

13. McDonald WM, McCall WV, Epstein CM. Electroconvulsive therapy: sixty years of progress and a comparison with transcranial magnetic stimulation and vagal nerve stimulation. In: Davis KL Charney D, Coyle JT, et al, eds. Neuropsychopharmacology: the fifth generation of progress. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002:1097-1108.

14. Ding Z, White PF. Anesthesia for electroconvulsive therapy. Anesth Analg. 2002;94(5):1351-1364.

15. Kalinowsky LB. History of convulsive therapy. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1986;462:1-4.

16. Ghaziuddin N, Dumas S, Hodges E. Use of continuation or maintenance electroconvulsive therapy in adolescents with severe treatment-resistant depression. J ECT. 2011;27(2):168-174.

17. Nuttall GA, Bowersox MR, Douglass SB, et al. Morbidity and mortality in the use of electroconvulsive therapy. J ECT. 2004;20(4):237-241.

18. Hihn H, Baune BT, Michael N, et al. Memory performance in severely depressed patients treated by electroconvulsive therapy. J ECT. 2006;22(3):189-195.

19. Prudic J, Peyser S, Sackeim HA. Subjective memory complaints: a review of patient self-assessment of memory after electroconvulsive therapy. J ECT. 2000;16(2):121-132.

20. Cycowicz YM, Luber B, Spellman T, et al. Neuro-physiological characterization of high-dose magnetic seizure therapy: comparisons with electroconvulsive shock and cognitive outcomes. J ECT. 2009;25(3):157-164.

21. Rami-Gonzalez L, Bernardo M, Boget T, et al. Subtypes of memory dysfunction associated with ECT: characteristics and neurobiological bases. J ECT. 2001;17(2):129-135.

22. Meeter M, Murre JM, Janssen SM, et al. Retrograde amnesia after electroconvulsive therapy: a temporary effect? J Affect Disord. 2011;132(1-2):216-222.

23. Kayser S, Bewernick BH, Grubert C, et al. Antidepressant effects, of magnetic seizure therapy and electroconvulsive therapy, in treatment-resistant depression. J Psychiatr Res. 2011;45(5):569-576.

24. van Schaik AM, Comijs HC, Sonnenberg CM, et al. Efficacy and safety of continuation and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy in depressed elderly patients: a systematic review. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2012;20(1):5-17.

25. Dwork AJ, Christensen JR, Larsen KB, et al. Unaltered neuronal and glial counts in animal models of magnetic seizure therapy and electroconvulsive therapy. Neuroscience. 2009;164(4):1557-1564.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Owais Tirmizi, MD
Resident Physician in Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Austin, Austin, TX, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Ahmad Raza, MD
Professor of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Kenneth Trevino, PhD
Postdoctoral Fellow, Neurostimulation Research Lab, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Mustafa M. Husain, MD
Professor of Psychiatry, Neurology, and Internal Medicine, Head of ECT Services, Director, Neurostimulation Research Lab, Chief, Geriatric Psychiatry Division, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
24-46
Legacy Keywords
Electroconvulsive therapy; ECT; safety; depression; major depressive disorder; MDD
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Owais Tirmizi, MD
Resident Physician in Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Austin, Austin, TX, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Ahmad Raza, MD
Professor of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Kenneth Trevino, PhD
Postdoctoral Fellow, Neurostimulation Research Lab, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Mustafa M. Husain, MD
Professor of Psychiatry, Neurology, and Internal Medicine, Head of ECT Services, Director, Neurostimulation Research Lab, Chief, Geriatric Psychiatry Division, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX

Author and Disclosure Information

Owais Tirmizi, MD
Resident Physician in Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Austin, Austin, TX, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Ahmad Raza, MD
Professor of Psychiatry, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Kenneth Trevino, PhD
Postdoctoral Fellow, Neurostimulation Research Lab, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
Mustafa M. Husain, MD
Professor of Psychiatry, Neurology, and Internal Medicine, Head of ECT Services, Director, Neurostimulation Research Lab, Chief, Geriatric Psychiatry Division, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX

Article PDF
Article PDF

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) has remained one of the most effective treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD) since it was introduced >70 years ago.1 ECT’s primary indication is severe, treatment-resistant MDD but sometimes it is used to treat other disorders, including bipolar mania and schizophrenia. In ECT, electrical current is delivered to a patient’s brain via electrodes placed on the scalp to induce a seizure while the patient is under anesthesia and a muscle relaxant. ECT’s exact mechanism of action for MDD is unknown, but researchers believe it may relieve depressive symptoms by regulating functional disturbances in relevant neural circuits.2

Research has shown that 64% to 87% of patients with severe MDD respond to ECT, with response rates as high as 95% for patients with MDD with psychotic features.3-5 Although patients may respond more quickly, 6 to 12 sessions typically are required to resolve a severe depressive episode.2

Despite ECT’s proven effectiveness, several factors have limited its widespread use, including limited access and expertise, adverse cognitive effects such as memory impairment, and negative public perception based on how ECT was administered decades ago.2 This article describes current methods of administering ECT, and how these changes have helped minimize these concerns while retaining efficacy.

Modern ECT practices

Since ECT was first used in the 1930s, clinicians have made many modifications to improve its efficacy and safety. Refinements to how ECT is administered include changing waveform parameters, individualizing dosing to seizure threshold, and altering electrode placement.6,7

Pulse width. Most ECT devices used today feature a constant-current output stimulator8 that allows continuous current regulation.7 Total charge, in millicoulombs (mC), is the common metric.7 Pulse width is a commonly altered waveform parameter in ECT delivery. Most research supports administering repeated brief or ultra-brief pulses (0.5 to 2 milliseconds), which is associated with greater charge efficiency and fewer side effects than traditional sine wave ECT dosing.8,9 Using a brief or ultra-brief pulse width increases clinical efficiency and decreases side effects because it focuses the stimulus on brain regions that regulate mood while limiting stimulation of brain regions involved in cognitive functioning.7 With brief-pulse stimulus, a patient’s cognitive performance may return to baseline levels within 3 days of treatment.6 Increasing evidence demonstrates that using a larger number of pulses with a brief pulse width and amplitude enhances ECT’s antidepressant effects while reducing unwanted neurocognitive side effects.7

Dosing and duration. In terms of clinical efficacy, how much the electrical stimulus exceeds a patient’s seizure threshold— the minimum amount of electrical charge that induces a generalized CNS seizure10—is more important than the absolute intensity of the stimulus.1 The degree to which the stimulus should exceed the seizure threshold depends on electrode placement, which is described below.

Acute therapy patients typically receive 2 to 3 treatments each week,11,12 culminating in 12 to 18 treatments.8,12 The optimum number of sessions administered is determined by the ratio of clinical improvement to the severity of cognitive adverse effects.3

Electrode placement. Spatial targeting of stimulus is crucial to maximize therapeutic benefits and minimize side effects. Concerns about cognitive side effects have led to variations in electrode placement to minimize the amount of brain parenchyma affected by electrical discharge (Table).1,7,8 The most commonly used placements are:

  • bitemporal (BT)—electrodes are placed midline between the eye and ear on both sides of the head
  • right unilateral (RUL)—1 electrode is positioned just lateral to the vertex and the other at the right temple.7

When given in doses close to a patient’s seizure threshold, RUL ECT offers only modest effects, but at suprathreshold doses—eg, 6 times the seizure threshold—it is as effective as BT placement1 but avoids cognitive disruption.9 Patients who do not respond to several seizures with RUL placement often are switched to BT to enhance clinical response.8 In BT ECT, stimulus is administered at 1.5 times the patient’s threshold levels. Exceeding these values is unlikely to increase efficacy, but can contribute to adverse effects.1

Table

ECT electrodes: Bitemporal vs right unilateral placement

PlacementLocationComments
BTElectrodes are placed midline between the eye and ear on both sides of the headStimulus is administered at 1.5 times a patient’s seizure threshold. Often used for patients who do not respond to several seizures with RUL
RUL1 electrode positioned just lateral to the vertex and the other at the right templeWhen stimulus is administered in doses 6 times a patient’s seizure threshold, RUL is as effective as BT but avoids cognitive disruption. Offers only modest effects when stimulus is administered in doses close to a patient’s seizure threshold
BT: bitemporal; ECT: electroconvulsive therapy; RUL: right unilateral
Source: References 1,7,8
 

 

Addressing safety concerns

In addition to changes to waveforms, dosing, and electrode placement, using anesthesia, muscle relaxants, and other medications has dramatically reduced adverse effects of ECT.8,10,13 See the Box10,14,15 for the specific agents used and their purposes. Before these medications and electroencephalography and electrocardiography (ECG) monitoring were used during ECT, the mortality rate was approximately 0.1%.13 Today, ECT is considered a low-risk medical intervention, with a mortality rate of approximately 0.002%.1,16 Before beginning an acute course of ECT, patients undergo laboratory testing, including a complete blood count, basic metabolic panel, and ECG. Spinal radiography and neuroimaging studies can be obtained to rule out preexisting vertebral injuries or neurologic disorders.1,8

Hemodynamic changes in response to ECT-induced seizures can exacerbate preexisting cardiac conditions. Normal physiologic response to ECT consists of a brief parasympathetic outflow, inducing bradycardia for 10 to 15 seconds, followed by a prominent sympathetic response characterized by hypertension and tachycardia for approximately 5 minutes. Although these changes can induce myocardial ischemia or infarction,14 the most common cardiac disturbances caused by ECT are arrhythmias, primarily in patients with preexisting cardiac abnormalities.17

Memory impairment. The most prevalent adverse reaction to ECT is memory loss, although not all aspects of recall are impaired to the same degree.18 Memory impairment varies based on factors such as electrode placement,9 stimulus waveform,19 site of seizure initiation, and pattern of activation.20 The risk of experiencing memory loss or other cognitive side effects following ECT can be decreased by using RUL electrode placement, brief pulses, and lower stimulus charge relative to seizure threshold.21 Memory deficits incurred by ECT usually are transient. In a study of 21 patients who received BT ECT for severe MDD, Meeter et al22 found that memory was stable and possibly improved at 3-month follow-up.

Subsets of memory function are impaired to differing degrees after ECT. For example, after treatment, autobiographical memory generally is less impaired than impersonal data.12,23 Weiner et al9 found that autobiographical information was more significantly impaired in patients treated with bilateral sine wave ECT than in those who underwent RUL ECT.

Procedural memory—memories of learned motor skills or mechanical tasks—often are left intact compared with semantic memory, which is general, declarative information recalled without context.18 The subsets of memory collectively regarded as declarative memory—the recollection of facts and events—may be most severely affected because this type of memory relies upon median temporal lobe structures, which are affected by ECT.21

Anterograde amnesia—the inability to form new memories—often is limited to the immediate posttreatment period and has been shown to become less pronounced at follow-up visits.22 Many clinicians and patients consider retrograde amnesia—forgetting memories that were formed before ECT—to be the most serious adverse effect of ECT. However, Mini-Mental State Examination scores tend to improve for patients who undergo ECT.1,16 Retrograde amnesia usually improves within weeks to months after ECT.12 Evidence suggests that retrograde amnesia mostly lifts during the recovery period and typically is not evident after 3 months.22 The best indicators of possible retrograde amnesic effects are preexisting cognitive deficits12 and duration of disorientation after ECT.1 Therefore, retrograde amnesia is more common among older adults, in whom age-related changes predispose patients to ECT’s adverse effects.24

The conventionally accepted mechanism for memory deficits after ECT is excitotoxic damage in the pyramidal cell layer of neurons in the hippocampus that induces calcium influx, which damages cells and causes neuronal atrophy.12 However, in animal studies, Dwork et al25 found an absence of neuronal or glial loss in regions subserving memory or cognitive functions (ie, the hippocampus or frontal cortex). Even in regions exquisitely sensitive to neuronal damage—such as CA1 of the hippocampus—neither cell number or volume or density of neuronal or glial cells were detected at statistically significant levels.25 Therefore, it is unlikely that ECT causes cell damage or atrophy in hippocampal neurons.

Box

Medications used during electroconvulsive therapy

Anesthesia increases patients’ comfort during electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) by making them unaware of and unable to recall the procedure. The most commonly used anesthetic for ECT is methohexital, 0.5 to 1 mg/kg.14 Etomidate can be used in patients with contraindications to methohexital15; however, this medication can lengthen ictal duration.14 After the initial ECT treatment, clinicians can adjust the anesthetic dose based on the patient’s previous response.14

Using muscle relaxants during ECT has virtually eliminated bone fractures resulting from the procedure.10 The most common muscle relaxant is succinylcholine,15 which also reduces delirium in patients with post-ECT agitation.14 Mask ventilation and standard, noninvasive monitoring of cardiac parameters and oxygen saturation are necessary.14

Tachycardia and hypertension associated with ECT can be countered with beta blockers such as esmolol or labetalol as well as calcium channel blockers such as nicardipine.14 In addition, most patients are treated with the anticholinergic glycopyrrolate before the procedure to avoid bradycardia14 and reduce secretions, which may cause aspiration.15 Patients who experience headache or muscle pain after ECT can be treated with ibuprofen or acetaminophen before ECT sessions; patients with more severe complaints can be treated with IV ketorolac, 15 to 30 mg, before stimulus administration.15

 

 

Related Resources

  • Leiknes KA, Jarosh-von Schweder L, Høie B. Contemporary use and practice of electroconvulsive therapy worldwide. Brain Behav. 2012;2(3):283-344.
  • Manka MV, Beyer JL, Weiner RD, et al. Clinical manual of electroconvulsive therapy. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2010.
Drug Brand Names

  • Esmolol • Brevibloc
  • Etomidate • Amidate
  • Glycopyrrolate • Robinul
  • Ketorolac • Toradol
  • Labetalol • Normodyne, Trandate
  • Methohexital • Brevital
  • Nicardipine • Cardene
  • Succinylcholine • Anectine
Disclosures

Dr. Husain receives grant or research support from Brainsway, Cyberonics, MagStim, NARSAD, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, the National Institute on Aging, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, NeoSync, Neuronetics, St. Jude Medical, and the Stanley Foundation.

Drs. Raza, Tirmizi, and Trevino report no relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) has remained one of the most effective treatments for major depressive disorder (MDD) since it was introduced >70 years ago.1 ECT’s primary indication is severe, treatment-resistant MDD but sometimes it is used to treat other disorders, including bipolar mania and schizophrenia. In ECT, electrical current is delivered to a patient’s brain via electrodes placed on the scalp to induce a seizure while the patient is under anesthesia and a muscle relaxant. ECT’s exact mechanism of action for MDD is unknown, but researchers believe it may relieve depressive symptoms by regulating functional disturbances in relevant neural circuits.2

Research has shown that 64% to 87% of patients with severe MDD respond to ECT, with response rates as high as 95% for patients with MDD with psychotic features.3-5 Although patients may respond more quickly, 6 to 12 sessions typically are required to resolve a severe depressive episode.2

Despite ECT’s proven effectiveness, several factors have limited its widespread use, including limited access and expertise, adverse cognitive effects such as memory impairment, and negative public perception based on how ECT was administered decades ago.2 This article describes current methods of administering ECT, and how these changes have helped minimize these concerns while retaining efficacy.

Modern ECT practices

Since ECT was first used in the 1930s, clinicians have made many modifications to improve its efficacy and safety. Refinements to how ECT is administered include changing waveform parameters, individualizing dosing to seizure threshold, and altering electrode placement.6,7

Pulse width. Most ECT devices used today feature a constant-current output stimulator8 that allows continuous current regulation.7 Total charge, in millicoulombs (mC), is the common metric.7 Pulse width is a commonly altered waveform parameter in ECT delivery. Most research supports administering repeated brief or ultra-brief pulses (0.5 to 2 milliseconds), which is associated with greater charge efficiency and fewer side effects than traditional sine wave ECT dosing.8,9 Using a brief or ultra-brief pulse width increases clinical efficiency and decreases side effects because it focuses the stimulus on brain regions that regulate mood while limiting stimulation of brain regions involved in cognitive functioning.7 With brief-pulse stimulus, a patient’s cognitive performance may return to baseline levels within 3 days of treatment.6 Increasing evidence demonstrates that using a larger number of pulses with a brief pulse width and amplitude enhances ECT’s antidepressant effects while reducing unwanted neurocognitive side effects.7

Dosing and duration. In terms of clinical efficacy, how much the electrical stimulus exceeds a patient’s seizure threshold— the minimum amount of electrical charge that induces a generalized CNS seizure10—is more important than the absolute intensity of the stimulus.1 The degree to which the stimulus should exceed the seizure threshold depends on electrode placement, which is described below.

Acute therapy patients typically receive 2 to 3 treatments each week,11,12 culminating in 12 to 18 treatments.8,12 The optimum number of sessions administered is determined by the ratio of clinical improvement to the severity of cognitive adverse effects.3

Electrode placement. Spatial targeting of stimulus is crucial to maximize therapeutic benefits and minimize side effects. Concerns about cognitive side effects have led to variations in electrode placement to minimize the amount of brain parenchyma affected by electrical discharge (Table).1,7,8 The most commonly used placements are:

  • bitemporal (BT)—electrodes are placed midline between the eye and ear on both sides of the head
  • right unilateral (RUL)—1 electrode is positioned just lateral to the vertex and the other at the right temple.7

When given in doses close to a patient’s seizure threshold, RUL ECT offers only modest effects, but at suprathreshold doses—eg, 6 times the seizure threshold—it is as effective as BT placement1 but avoids cognitive disruption.9 Patients who do not respond to several seizures with RUL placement often are switched to BT to enhance clinical response.8 In BT ECT, stimulus is administered at 1.5 times the patient’s threshold levels. Exceeding these values is unlikely to increase efficacy, but can contribute to adverse effects.1

Table

ECT electrodes: Bitemporal vs right unilateral placement

PlacementLocationComments
BTElectrodes are placed midline between the eye and ear on both sides of the headStimulus is administered at 1.5 times a patient’s seizure threshold. Often used for patients who do not respond to several seizures with RUL
RUL1 electrode positioned just lateral to the vertex and the other at the right templeWhen stimulus is administered in doses 6 times a patient’s seizure threshold, RUL is as effective as BT but avoids cognitive disruption. Offers only modest effects when stimulus is administered in doses close to a patient’s seizure threshold
BT: bitemporal; ECT: electroconvulsive therapy; RUL: right unilateral
Source: References 1,7,8
 

 

Addressing safety concerns

In addition to changes to waveforms, dosing, and electrode placement, using anesthesia, muscle relaxants, and other medications has dramatically reduced adverse effects of ECT.8,10,13 See the Box10,14,15 for the specific agents used and their purposes. Before these medications and electroencephalography and electrocardiography (ECG) monitoring were used during ECT, the mortality rate was approximately 0.1%.13 Today, ECT is considered a low-risk medical intervention, with a mortality rate of approximately 0.002%.1,16 Before beginning an acute course of ECT, patients undergo laboratory testing, including a complete blood count, basic metabolic panel, and ECG. Spinal radiography and neuroimaging studies can be obtained to rule out preexisting vertebral injuries or neurologic disorders.1,8

Hemodynamic changes in response to ECT-induced seizures can exacerbate preexisting cardiac conditions. Normal physiologic response to ECT consists of a brief parasympathetic outflow, inducing bradycardia for 10 to 15 seconds, followed by a prominent sympathetic response characterized by hypertension and tachycardia for approximately 5 minutes. Although these changes can induce myocardial ischemia or infarction,14 the most common cardiac disturbances caused by ECT are arrhythmias, primarily in patients with preexisting cardiac abnormalities.17

Memory impairment. The most prevalent adverse reaction to ECT is memory loss, although not all aspects of recall are impaired to the same degree.18 Memory impairment varies based on factors such as electrode placement,9 stimulus waveform,19 site of seizure initiation, and pattern of activation.20 The risk of experiencing memory loss or other cognitive side effects following ECT can be decreased by using RUL electrode placement, brief pulses, and lower stimulus charge relative to seizure threshold.21 Memory deficits incurred by ECT usually are transient. In a study of 21 patients who received BT ECT for severe MDD, Meeter et al22 found that memory was stable and possibly improved at 3-month follow-up.

Subsets of memory function are impaired to differing degrees after ECT. For example, after treatment, autobiographical memory generally is less impaired than impersonal data.12,23 Weiner et al9 found that autobiographical information was more significantly impaired in patients treated with bilateral sine wave ECT than in those who underwent RUL ECT.

Procedural memory—memories of learned motor skills or mechanical tasks—often are left intact compared with semantic memory, which is general, declarative information recalled without context.18 The subsets of memory collectively regarded as declarative memory—the recollection of facts and events—may be most severely affected because this type of memory relies upon median temporal lobe structures, which are affected by ECT.21

Anterograde amnesia—the inability to form new memories—often is limited to the immediate posttreatment period and has been shown to become less pronounced at follow-up visits.22 Many clinicians and patients consider retrograde amnesia—forgetting memories that were formed before ECT—to be the most serious adverse effect of ECT. However, Mini-Mental State Examination scores tend to improve for patients who undergo ECT.1,16 Retrograde amnesia usually improves within weeks to months after ECT.12 Evidence suggests that retrograde amnesia mostly lifts during the recovery period and typically is not evident after 3 months.22 The best indicators of possible retrograde amnesic effects are preexisting cognitive deficits12 and duration of disorientation after ECT.1 Therefore, retrograde amnesia is more common among older adults, in whom age-related changes predispose patients to ECT’s adverse effects.24

The conventionally accepted mechanism for memory deficits after ECT is excitotoxic damage in the pyramidal cell layer of neurons in the hippocampus that induces calcium influx, which damages cells and causes neuronal atrophy.12 However, in animal studies, Dwork et al25 found an absence of neuronal or glial loss in regions subserving memory or cognitive functions (ie, the hippocampus or frontal cortex). Even in regions exquisitely sensitive to neuronal damage—such as CA1 of the hippocampus—neither cell number or volume or density of neuronal or glial cells were detected at statistically significant levels.25 Therefore, it is unlikely that ECT causes cell damage or atrophy in hippocampal neurons.

Box

Medications used during electroconvulsive therapy

Anesthesia increases patients’ comfort during electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) by making them unaware of and unable to recall the procedure. The most commonly used anesthetic for ECT is methohexital, 0.5 to 1 mg/kg.14 Etomidate can be used in patients with contraindications to methohexital15; however, this medication can lengthen ictal duration.14 After the initial ECT treatment, clinicians can adjust the anesthetic dose based on the patient’s previous response.14

Using muscle relaxants during ECT has virtually eliminated bone fractures resulting from the procedure.10 The most common muscle relaxant is succinylcholine,15 which also reduces delirium in patients with post-ECT agitation.14 Mask ventilation and standard, noninvasive monitoring of cardiac parameters and oxygen saturation are necessary.14

Tachycardia and hypertension associated with ECT can be countered with beta blockers such as esmolol or labetalol as well as calcium channel blockers such as nicardipine.14 In addition, most patients are treated with the anticholinergic glycopyrrolate before the procedure to avoid bradycardia14 and reduce secretions, which may cause aspiration.15 Patients who experience headache or muscle pain after ECT can be treated with ibuprofen or acetaminophen before ECT sessions; patients with more severe complaints can be treated with IV ketorolac, 15 to 30 mg, before stimulus administration.15

 

 

Related Resources

  • Leiknes KA, Jarosh-von Schweder L, Høie B. Contemporary use and practice of electroconvulsive therapy worldwide. Brain Behav. 2012;2(3):283-344.
  • Manka MV, Beyer JL, Weiner RD, et al. Clinical manual of electroconvulsive therapy. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2010.
Drug Brand Names

  • Esmolol • Brevibloc
  • Etomidate • Amidate
  • Glycopyrrolate • Robinul
  • Ketorolac • Toradol
  • Labetalol • Normodyne, Trandate
  • Methohexital • Brevital
  • Nicardipine • Cardene
  • Succinylcholine • Anectine
Disclosures

Dr. Husain receives grant or research support from Brainsway, Cyberonics, MagStim, NARSAD, the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, the National Institute on Aging, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, NeoSync, Neuronetics, St. Jude Medical, and the Stanley Foundation.

Drs. Raza, Tirmizi, and Trevino report no relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

References

1. Greenberg RM, Kellner CH. Electroconvulsive therapy: a selected review. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2005;13(4):268-281.

2. Janicak PG, Dowd SM, Rado JT, et al. The re-emerging role of therapeutic neuromodulation. Current Psychiatry. 2010;9(11):67-74.

3. Kellner CH, Knapp RG, Petrides G, et al. Continuation electroconvulsive therapy vs pharmacotherapy for relapse prevention in major depression: a multisite study from the consortium for research in electroconvulsive therapy (CORE). Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006;63(12):1337-1344.

4. Husain MM, Rush AJ, Fink M, et al. Speed of response and remission in major depressive disorder with acute electroconvulsive therapy (ECT): a consortium for research in ECT (CORE) report. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(4):485-491.

5. Petrides G, Fink M, Husain MM, et al. ECT remission rates in psychotic versus nonpsychotic depressed patients: a report from CORE. J ECT. 2001;17(4):244-253.

6. Semkovska M, Keane D, Babalola O, et al. Unilateral brief-pulse electroconvulsive therapy and cognition: effects of electrode placement, stimulus dosage and time. J Psychiatr Res. 2011;45(6):770-780.

7. Peterchev AV, Rosa MA, Deng ZD, et al. Electroconvulsive therapy stimulus parameters: rethinking dosage. J ECT. 2010;26(3):159-174.

8. Swartz CM. Electroconvulsive and neuromodulation therapies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2009.

9. Weiner RD, Rogers HJ, Davidson JR, et al. Effects of stimulus parameters on cognitive side effects. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1986;462:315-325.

10. Isenberg KE, Zorumski CF. Electroconvulsive therapy. In: Sadock BJ Sadock VA, eds. Kaplan & Sadock’s comprehensive textbook of psychiatry. Vol 2. 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000:2503–2515.

11. Trevino K, McClintock SM, Husain MM. A review of continuation electroconvulsive therapy: application safety, and efficacy. J ECT. 2010;26(3):186-195.

12. Merkl A, Heuser I, Bajbouj M. Antidepressant electroconvulsive therapy: mechanism of action recent advances and limitations. Exp Neurol. 2009;219(1):20-26.

13. McDonald WM, McCall WV, Epstein CM. Electroconvulsive therapy: sixty years of progress and a comparison with transcranial magnetic stimulation and vagal nerve stimulation. In: Davis KL Charney D, Coyle JT, et al, eds. Neuropsychopharmacology: the fifth generation of progress. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002:1097-1108.

14. Ding Z, White PF. Anesthesia for electroconvulsive therapy. Anesth Analg. 2002;94(5):1351-1364.

15. Kalinowsky LB. History of convulsive therapy. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1986;462:1-4.

16. Ghaziuddin N, Dumas S, Hodges E. Use of continuation or maintenance electroconvulsive therapy in adolescents with severe treatment-resistant depression. J ECT. 2011;27(2):168-174.

17. Nuttall GA, Bowersox MR, Douglass SB, et al. Morbidity and mortality in the use of electroconvulsive therapy. J ECT. 2004;20(4):237-241.

18. Hihn H, Baune BT, Michael N, et al. Memory performance in severely depressed patients treated by electroconvulsive therapy. J ECT. 2006;22(3):189-195.

19. Prudic J, Peyser S, Sackeim HA. Subjective memory complaints: a review of patient self-assessment of memory after electroconvulsive therapy. J ECT. 2000;16(2):121-132.

20. Cycowicz YM, Luber B, Spellman T, et al. Neuro-physiological characterization of high-dose magnetic seizure therapy: comparisons with electroconvulsive shock and cognitive outcomes. J ECT. 2009;25(3):157-164.

21. Rami-Gonzalez L, Bernardo M, Boget T, et al. Subtypes of memory dysfunction associated with ECT: characteristics and neurobiological bases. J ECT. 2001;17(2):129-135.

22. Meeter M, Murre JM, Janssen SM, et al. Retrograde amnesia after electroconvulsive therapy: a temporary effect? J Affect Disord. 2011;132(1-2):216-222.

23. Kayser S, Bewernick BH, Grubert C, et al. Antidepressant effects, of magnetic seizure therapy and electroconvulsive therapy, in treatment-resistant depression. J Psychiatr Res. 2011;45(5):569-576.

24. van Schaik AM, Comijs HC, Sonnenberg CM, et al. Efficacy and safety of continuation and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy in depressed elderly patients: a systematic review. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2012;20(1):5-17.

25. Dwork AJ, Christensen JR, Larsen KB, et al. Unaltered neuronal and glial counts in animal models of magnetic seizure therapy and electroconvulsive therapy. Neuroscience. 2009;164(4):1557-1564.

References

1. Greenberg RM, Kellner CH. Electroconvulsive therapy: a selected review. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2005;13(4):268-281.

2. Janicak PG, Dowd SM, Rado JT, et al. The re-emerging role of therapeutic neuromodulation. Current Psychiatry. 2010;9(11):67-74.

3. Kellner CH, Knapp RG, Petrides G, et al. Continuation electroconvulsive therapy vs pharmacotherapy for relapse prevention in major depression: a multisite study from the consortium for research in electroconvulsive therapy (CORE). Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006;63(12):1337-1344.

4. Husain MM, Rush AJ, Fink M, et al. Speed of response and remission in major depressive disorder with acute electroconvulsive therapy (ECT): a consortium for research in ECT (CORE) report. J Clin Psychiatry. 2004;65(4):485-491.

5. Petrides G, Fink M, Husain MM, et al. ECT remission rates in psychotic versus nonpsychotic depressed patients: a report from CORE. J ECT. 2001;17(4):244-253.

6. Semkovska M, Keane D, Babalola O, et al. Unilateral brief-pulse electroconvulsive therapy and cognition: effects of electrode placement, stimulus dosage and time. J Psychiatr Res. 2011;45(6):770-780.

7. Peterchev AV, Rosa MA, Deng ZD, et al. Electroconvulsive therapy stimulus parameters: rethinking dosage. J ECT. 2010;26(3):159-174.

8. Swartz CM. Electroconvulsive and neuromodulation therapies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2009.

9. Weiner RD, Rogers HJ, Davidson JR, et al. Effects of stimulus parameters on cognitive side effects. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1986;462:315-325.

10. Isenberg KE, Zorumski CF. Electroconvulsive therapy. In: Sadock BJ Sadock VA, eds. Kaplan & Sadock’s comprehensive textbook of psychiatry. Vol 2. 7th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000:2503–2515.

11. Trevino K, McClintock SM, Husain MM. A review of continuation electroconvulsive therapy: application safety, and efficacy. J ECT. 2010;26(3):186-195.

12. Merkl A, Heuser I, Bajbouj M. Antidepressant electroconvulsive therapy: mechanism of action recent advances and limitations. Exp Neurol. 2009;219(1):20-26.

13. McDonald WM, McCall WV, Epstein CM. Electroconvulsive therapy: sixty years of progress and a comparison with transcranial magnetic stimulation and vagal nerve stimulation. In: Davis KL Charney D, Coyle JT, et al, eds. Neuropsychopharmacology: the fifth generation of progress. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2002:1097-1108.

14. Ding Z, White PF. Anesthesia for electroconvulsive therapy. Anesth Analg. 2002;94(5):1351-1364.

15. Kalinowsky LB. History of convulsive therapy. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1986;462:1-4.

16. Ghaziuddin N, Dumas S, Hodges E. Use of continuation or maintenance electroconvulsive therapy in adolescents with severe treatment-resistant depression. J ECT. 2011;27(2):168-174.

17. Nuttall GA, Bowersox MR, Douglass SB, et al. Morbidity and mortality in the use of electroconvulsive therapy. J ECT. 2004;20(4):237-241.

18. Hihn H, Baune BT, Michael N, et al. Memory performance in severely depressed patients treated by electroconvulsive therapy. J ECT. 2006;22(3):189-195.

19. Prudic J, Peyser S, Sackeim HA. Subjective memory complaints: a review of patient self-assessment of memory after electroconvulsive therapy. J ECT. 2000;16(2):121-132.

20. Cycowicz YM, Luber B, Spellman T, et al. Neuro-physiological characterization of high-dose magnetic seizure therapy: comparisons with electroconvulsive shock and cognitive outcomes. J ECT. 2009;25(3):157-164.

21. Rami-Gonzalez L, Bernardo M, Boget T, et al. Subtypes of memory dysfunction associated with ECT: characteristics and neurobiological bases. J ECT. 2001;17(2):129-135.

22. Meeter M, Murre JM, Janssen SM, et al. Retrograde amnesia after electroconvulsive therapy: a temporary effect? J Affect Disord. 2011;132(1-2):216-222.

23. Kayser S, Bewernick BH, Grubert C, et al. Antidepressant effects, of magnetic seizure therapy and electroconvulsive therapy, in treatment-resistant depression. J Psychiatr Res. 2011;45(5):569-576.

24. van Schaik AM, Comijs HC, Sonnenberg CM, et al. Efficacy and safety of continuation and maintenance electroconvulsive therapy in depressed elderly patients: a systematic review. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2012;20(1):5-17.

25. Dwork AJ, Christensen JR, Larsen KB, et al. Unaltered neuronal and glial counts in animal models of magnetic seizure therapy and electroconvulsive therapy. Neuroscience. 2009;164(4):1557-1564.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Page Number
24-46
Page Number
24-46
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Electroconvulsive therapy: How modern techniques improve patient outcomes
Display Headline
Electroconvulsive therapy: How modern techniques improve patient outcomes
Legacy Keywords
Electroconvulsive therapy; ECT; safety; depression; major depressive disorder; MDD
Legacy Keywords
Electroconvulsive therapy; ECT; safety; depression; major depressive disorder; MDD
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

Can combining triptans with SSRIs or SNRIs cause serotonin syndrome?

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
Can combining triptans with SSRIs or SNRIs cause serotonin syndrome?

In 2006, the FDA issued a warning of the risk of potentially fatal serotonin syndrome when 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonist antimigraine medications (triptans) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) are coprescribed.1 As a result, most drug interaction programs trigger a serotonin syndrome warning when triptans are prescribed with an SSRI or SNRI.2 However, many patients with depression or anxiety also suffer from migraines and require treatment with both triptans and an SSRI or SNRI.3,4 Kalaydjian et al4 found the incidence of major depression and generalized anxiety disorder were approximately 3 times greater in patients with migraines than in those without migraines. Should we avoid coprescribing triptans and SSRIs or SNRIs?

What is serotonin syndrome?

Serotonin syndrome is an adverse drug reaction that results from excessive serotonin stimulation. There are 2 sets of validated diagnostic criteria: the Sternbach Criteria and the Hunter Serotonin Toxicity Criteria; the latter is considered more stringent.3,5-7 Symptoms of serotonin syndrome include mental status changes, autonomic hyperactivity, and neuromuscular changes such as muscle rigidity.5-7 Typical manifestations of serotonin syndrome on physical exam include spontaneous and/or inducible clonus, agitation, diaphoresis, tremor, hyperreflexia, hypertonia, and temperature >38°C.6 In severe cases, serotonin syndrome can lead to seizures, coma, and death. Management includes supportive treatment, discontinuing the offending agents, controlling agitation with medications such as benzodiazepines, and possibly administering cyproheptadine, a 5HT2A antagonist.8 Most cases resolve within 24 hours of discontinuing the offending agents or appropriate treatment.5

What did the FDA say?

The 2006 FDA warning initially was based on 27 reports of serotonin syndrome in patients receiving triptans and SSRIs or SNRIs; this was later expanded to include 29 patients.1,9 No patients died but 13 required hospitalization and 2 had life-threatening symptoms. However, most cases lacked data necessary to diagnose serotonin syndrome.9 Further, reviews of the available clinical information have suggested that in some cases, clinicians did not rule out other disorders as required by diagnostic criteria, while others were viral in nature or resolved despite ongoing treatment with the presumed offending agents.9-11

Some clinicians met the FDA’s assessment with skepticism. Only 10 of the 29 cases met the Sternbach criteria of serotonin syndrome and none met the more rigorous Hunter criteria. Additionally, the theoretical basis has been questioned.9-11 Available evidence indicates that serotonin syndrome requires activation of 5HT2A receptors and a possible limited role of 5HT1A.9-12 However, triptans are agonists at the 5HT1B/1D/1F receptor subtypes, with weak affinity for 5HT1A receptors and no activity at the 5HT2 receptors.13,14 Additionally, triptan medications are used as needed, not as standing treatments, with parameters limiting the maximum dose, dosing interval, and frequency of use. In clinical practice, it appears that these dosing guidelines are being followed: Tepper et al15 found the typical female patient experiences 1 to 2 migraines per month; on average, patients use 1.2 to 1.8 triptan tablets per month.

Our opinion

We believe it is reasonable to coprescribe SSRIs or SNRIs with triptans because:

  • data indicate that many patients are treated with a combination of triptans and SSRIs or SNRIs but the number of reported cases of serotonin syndrome is extremely limited
  • the nature of serotonin syndrome cases reported in the literature is questionable
  • the interaction is biologically implausible
  • triptans remain in the body for a limited time
  • triptans are used infrequently.5-11

This view is supported by the most recent American Headache Society position paper,11 which states that inadequate data are available to assess the risk but current evidence does not support limiting use of triptans with SSRIs and SNRIs.

How we deal with the warning in clinical practice. In practice we are alerted to this interaction by notification in our e-prescribing systems, by pharmacists calling with concerns about dispensing an SSRI or SNRI for a patient already receiving a triptan, and during patient visits that involve prescribing an SSRI or SNRI.

Although it is relatively easy to override a drug interaction warning in our e-prescribing system, we discuss the issue with pharmacists and patients. We provide information about the signs and symptoms of serotonin syndrome and its potential dangerousness. We note that serotonin syndrome is a theoretical concern, but highly unlikely with this combination of medications because of their pharmacologic properties. We explain the parameters of triptan use, recommend that our patients use triptans for migraines when needed, and reassure patients we are available to answer questions. When a patient uses triptans more than twice monthly, we consider discussing this usage with the patient and the treating physician.

 

 

Related Resource

Drug Brand Name

  • Cyproheptadine • Perinctin

Disclosure

The authors report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

References

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.  Public health advisory—combined use of 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonists (triptans), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or selective serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) may result in life-threatening serotonin syndrome. http://1.usa.gov/U0A0V4. Published July 19, 2006. Accessed September 18, 2012.

2. Kogut SJ. Do triptan antimigraine medications interact with SSRI/SNRI antidepressants? What does your decision support system say? J Manag Care Pharm. 2011;17(7):547-551.

3. Tepper SJ. Serotonin syndrome: SSRIs SNRIs, triptans, and current clinical practice. Headache. 2012;52(2):195-197.

4. Kalaydjian A, Merikangas K. Physical and mental comorbidity of headache in a nationally representative sample of US adults. Psychosom Med. 2008;70(7):773-780.

5. Boyer EW, Shannon M. The serotonin syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(11):1112-1120.

6. Sternbach H. The serotonin syndrome. Am J Psychiatry. 1991;148(6):705-713.

7. Dunkley EJ, Isbister GK, Sibbritt D, et al. The Hunter Serotonin Toxicity Criteria: simple and accurate diagnostic decision rules for serotonin toxicity. QJM. 2003;96(9):635-642.

8. Ables AZ, Nagubilli R. Prevention recognition, and management of serotonin syndrome. Am Fam Physician. 2010;81(9):1139-1142.

9. Evans RW. The FDA alert on serotonin syndrome with combined use of SSRIs or SNRIs and triptans: an analysis of the 29 case reports. MedGenMed. 2007;9(3):48.-

10. Gillman PK. Triptans serotonin agonists, and serotonin syndrome (serotonin toxicity): a review. Headache. 2010;50(2):264-272.

11. Evans RW, Tepper SJ, Shapiro RE, et al. The FDA alert on serotonin syndrome with use of triptans combined with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors: American Headache Society position paper. Headache. 2010;50(6):1089-1099.

12. Ahn AH, Basbaum AI. Where do triptans act in the treatment of migraine? Pain. 2005;115(1-2):1-4.

13. Pediatric & Neonatal Lexi-Drugs. Hudson, OH: Lexi-Comp, Inc.; 2011.

14. Sclar DA, Robison LM, Castillo LV, et al. Concomitant use of triptan, and SSRI or SNRI after the US Food and Drug Administration alert on serotonin syndrome. Headache. 2012;52(2):198-203.

15. Tepper S, Allen C, Sanders D, et al. Coprescription of triptans with potentially interacting medications: a cohort study involving 240,268 patients. Headache. 2003;43(1):44-48.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Jessica L. Gören, PharmD, BCPP
Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI; Senior Clinical Pharmacist Specialist, Department of Pharmacy, Cambridge Health Alliance; and Instructor in Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
Courtney Nemeth Wiseman, MD, MPH
Instructor, Clinical, Contributing Services Faculty, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
E1-E2
Legacy Keywords
triptans; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; SSRIs; serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors; SNRIs; serotonin syndrome
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Jessica L. Gören, PharmD, BCPP
Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI; Senior Clinical Pharmacist Specialist, Department of Pharmacy, Cambridge Health Alliance; and Instructor in Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
Courtney Nemeth Wiseman, MD, MPH
Instructor, Clinical, Contributing Services Faculty, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL

Author and Disclosure Information

Jessica L. Gören, PharmD, BCPP
Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacy Practice, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI; Senior Clinical Pharmacist Specialist, Department of Pharmacy, Cambridge Health Alliance; and Instructor in Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
Courtney Nemeth Wiseman, MD, MPH
Instructor, Clinical, Contributing Services Faculty, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL

Article PDF
Article PDF

In 2006, the FDA issued a warning of the risk of potentially fatal serotonin syndrome when 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonist antimigraine medications (triptans) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) are coprescribed.1 As a result, most drug interaction programs trigger a serotonin syndrome warning when triptans are prescribed with an SSRI or SNRI.2 However, many patients with depression or anxiety also suffer from migraines and require treatment with both triptans and an SSRI or SNRI.3,4 Kalaydjian et al4 found the incidence of major depression and generalized anxiety disorder were approximately 3 times greater in patients with migraines than in those without migraines. Should we avoid coprescribing triptans and SSRIs or SNRIs?

What is serotonin syndrome?

Serotonin syndrome is an adverse drug reaction that results from excessive serotonin stimulation. There are 2 sets of validated diagnostic criteria: the Sternbach Criteria and the Hunter Serotonin Toxicity Criteria; the latter is considered more stringent.3,5-7 Symptoms of serotonin syndrome include mental status changes, autonomic hyperactivity, and neuromuscular changes such as muscle rigidity.5-7 Typical manifestations of serotonin syndrome on physical exam include spontaneous and/or inducible clonus, agitation, diaphoresis, tremor, hyperreflexia, hypertonia, and temperature >38°C.6 In severe cases, serotonin syndrome can lead to seizures, coma, and death. Management includes supportive treatment, discontinuing the offending agents, controlling agitation with medications such as benzodiazepines, and possibly administering cyproheptadine, a 5HT2A antagonist.8 Most cases resolve within 24 hours of discontinuing the offending agents or appropriate treatment.5

What did the FDA say?

The 2006 FDA warning initially was based on 27 reports of serotonin syndrome in patients receiving triptans and SSRIs or SNRIs; this was later expanded to include 29 patients.1,9 No patients died but 13 required hospitalization and 2 had life-threatening symptoms. However, most cases lacked data necessary to diagnose serotonin syndrome.9 Further, reviews of the available clinical information have suggested that in some cases, clinicians did not rule out other disorders as required by diagnostic criteria, while others were viral in nature or resolved despite ongoing treatment with the presumed offending agents.9-11

Some clinicians met the FDA’s assessment with skepticism. Only 10 of the 29 cases met the Sternbach criteria of serotonin syndrome and none met the more rigorous Hunter criteria. Additionally, the theoretical basis has been questioned.9-11 Available evidence indicates that serotonin syndrome requires activation of 5HT2A receptors and a possible limited role of 5HT1A.9-12 However, triptans are agonists at the 5HT1B/1D/1F receptor subtypes, with weak affinity for 5HT1A receptors and no activity at the 5HT2 receptors.13,14 Additionally, triptan medications are used as needed, not as standing treatments, with parameters limiting the maximum dose, dosing interval, and frequency of use. In clinical practice, it appears that these dosing guidelines are being followed: Tepper et al15 found the typical female patient experiences 1 to 2 migraines per month; on average, patients use 1.2 to 1.8 triptan tablets per month.

Our opinion

We believe it is reasonable to coprescribe SSRIs or SNRIs with triptans because:

  • data indicate that many patients are treated with a combination of triptans and SSRIs or SNRIs but the number of reported cases of serotonin syndrome is extremely limited
  • the nature of serotonin syndrome cases reported in the literature is questionable
  • the interaction is biologically implausible
  • triptans remain in the body for a limited time
  • triptans are used infrequently.5-11

This view is supported by the most recent American Headache Society position paper,11 which states that inadequate data are available to assess the risk but current evidence does not support limiting use of triptans with SSRIs and SNRIs.

How we deal with the warning in clinical practice. In practice we are alerted to this interaction by notification in our e-prescribing systems, by pharmacists calling with concerns about dispensing an SSRI or SNRI for a patient already receiving a triptan, and during patient visits that involve prescribing an SSRI or SNRI.

Although it is relatively easy to override a drug interaction warning in our e-prescribing system, we discuss the issue with pharmacists and patients. We provide information about the signs and symptoms of serotonin syndrome and its potential dangerousness. We note that serotonin syndrome is a theoretical concern, but highly unlikely with this combination of medications because of their pharmacologic properties. We explain the parameters of triptan use, recommend that our patients use triptans for migraines when needed, and reassure patients we are available to answer questions. When a patient uses triptans more than twice monthly, we consider discussing this usage with the patient and the treating physician.

 

 

Related Resource

Drug Brand Name

  • Cyproheptadine • Perinctin

Disclosure

The authors report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

In 2006, the FDA issued a warning of the risk of potentially fatal serotonin syndrome when 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonist antimigraine medications (triptans) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRI) are coprescribed.1 As a result, most drug interaction programs trigger a serotonin syndrome warning when triptans are prescribed with an SSRI or SNRI.2 However, many patients with depression or anxiety also suffer from migraines and require treatment with both triptans and an SSRI or SNRI.3,4 Kalaydjian et al4 found the incidence of major depression and generalized anxiety disorder were approximately 3 times greater in patients with migraines than in those without migraines. Should we avoid coprescribing triptans and SSRIs or SNRIs?

What is serotonin syndrome?

Serotonin syndrome is an adverse drug reaction that results from excessive serotonin stimulation. There are 2 sets of validated diagnostic criteria: the Sternbach Criteria and the Hunter Serotonin Toxicity Criteria; the latter is considered more stringent.3,5-7 Symptoms of serotonin syndrome include mental status changes, autonomic hyperactivity, and neuromuscular changes such as muscle rigidity.5-7 Typical manifestations of serotonin syndrome on physical exam include spontaneous and/or inducible clonus, agitation, diaphoresis, tremor, hyperreflexia, hypertonia, and temperature >38°C.6 In severe cases, serotonin syndrome can lead to seizures, coma, and death. Management includes supportive treatment, discontinuing the offending agents, controlling agitation with medications such as benzodiazepines, and possibly administering cyproheptadine, a 5HT2A antagonist.8 Most cases resolve within 24 hours of discontinuing the offending agents or appropriate treatment.5

What did the FDA say?

The 2006 FDA warning initially was based on 27 reports of serotonin syndrome in patients receiving triptans and SSRIs or SNRIs; this was later expanded to include 29 patients.1,9 No patients died but 13 required hospitalization and 2 had life-threatening symptoms. However, most cases lacked data necessary to diagnose serotonin syndrome.9 Further, reviews of the available clinical information have suggested that in some cases, clinicians did not rule out other disorders as required by diagnostic criteria, while others were viral in nature or resolved despite ongoing treatment with the presumed offending agents.9-11

Some clinicians met the FDA’s assessment with skepticism. Only 10 of the 29 cases met the Sternbach criteria of serotonin syndrome and none met the more rigorous Hunter criteria. Additionally, the theoretical basis has been questioned.9-11 Available evidence indicates that serotonin syndrome requires activation of 5HT2A receptors and a possible limited role of 5HT1A.9-12 However, triptans are agonists at the 5HT1B/1D/1F receptor subtypes, with weak affinity for 5HT1A receptors and no activity at the 5HT2 receptors.13,14 Additionally, triptan medications are used as needed, not as standing treatments, with parameters limiting the maximum dose, dosing interval, and frequency of use. In clinical practice, it appears that these dosing guidelines are being followed: Tepper et al15 found the typical female patient experiences 1 to 2 migraines per month; on average, patients use 1.2 to 1.8 triptan tablets per month.

Our opinion

We believe it is reasonable to coprescribe SSRIs or SNRIs with triptans because:

  • data indicate that many patients are treated with a combination of triptans and SSRIs or SNRIs but the number of reported cases of serotonin syndrome is extremely limited
  • the nature of serotonin syndrome cases reported in the literature is questionable
  • the interaction is biologically implausible
  • triptans remain in the body for a limited time
  • triptans are used infrequently.5-11

This view is supported by the most recent American Headache Society position paper,11 which states that inadequate data are available to assess the risk but current evidence does not support limiting use of triptans with SSRIs and SNRIs.

How we deal with the warning in clinical practice. In practice we are alerted to this interaction by notification in our e-prescribing systems, by pharmacists calling with concerns about dispensing an SSRI or SNRI for a patient already receiving a triptan, and during patient visits that involve prescribing an SSRI or SNRI.

Although it is relatively easy to override a drug interaction warning in our e-prescribing system, we discuss the issue with pharmacists and patients. We provide information about the signs and symptoms of serotonin syndrome and its potential dangerousness. We note that serotonin syndrome is a theoretical concern, but highly unlikely with this combination of medications because of their pharmacologic properties. We explain the parameters of triptan use, recommend that our patients use triptans for migraines when needed, and reassure patients we are available to answer questions. When a patient uses triptans more than twice monthly, we consider discussing this usage with the patient and the treating physician.

 

 

Related Resource

Drug Brand Name

  • Cyproheptadine • Perinctin

Disclosure

The authors report no financial relationship with any company whose products are mentioned in this article or with manufacturers of competing products.

References

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.  Public health advisory—combined use of 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonists (triptans), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or selective serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) may result in life-threatening serotonin syndrome. http://1.usa.gov/U0A0V4. Published July 19, 2006. Accessed September 18, 2012.

2. Kogut SJ. Do triptan antimigraine medications interact with SSRI/SNRI antidepressants? What does your decision support system say? J Manag Care Pharm. 2011;17(7):547-551.

3. Tepper SJ. Serotonin syndrome: SSRIs SNRIs, triptans, and current clinical practice. Headache. 2012;52(2):195-197.

4. Kalaydjian A, Merikangas K. Physical and mental comorbidity of headache in a nationally representative sample of US adults. Psychosom Med. 2008;70(7):773-780.

5. Boyer EW, Shannon M. The serotonin syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(11):1112-1120.

6. Sternbach H. The serotonin syndrome. Am J Psychiatry. 1991;148(6):705-713.

7. Dunkley EJ, Isbister GK, Sibbritt D, et al. The Hunter Serotonin Toxicity Criteria: simple and accurate diagnostic decision rules for serotonin toxicity. QJM. 2003;96(9):635-642.

8. Ables AZ, Nagubilli R. Prevention recognition, and management of serotonin syndrome. Am Fam Physician. 2010;81(9):1139-1142.

9. Evans RW. The FDA alert on serotonin syndrome with combined use of SSRIs or SNRIs and triptans: an analysis of the 29 case reports. MedGenMed. 2007;9(3):48.-

10. Gillman PK. Triptans serotonin agonists, and serotonin syndrome (serotonin toxicity): a review. Headache. 2010;50(2):264-272.

11. Evans RW, Tepper SJ, Shapiro RE, et al. The FDA alert on serotonin syndrome with use of triptans combined with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors: American Headache Society position paper. Headache. 2010;50(6):1089-1099.

12. Ahn AH, Basbaum AI. Where do triptans act in the treatment of migraine? Pain. 2005;115(1-2):1-4.

13. Pediatric & Neonatal Lexi-Drugs. Hudson, OH: Lexi-Comp, Inc.; 2011.

14. Sclar DA, Robison LM, Castillo LV, et al. Concomitant use of triptan, and SSRI or SNRI after the US Food and Drug Administration alert on serotonin syndrome. Headache. 2012;52(2):198-203.

15. Tepper S, Allen C, Sanders D, et al. Coprescription of triptans with potentially interacting medications: a cohort study involving 240,268 patients. Headache. 2003;43(1):44-48.

References

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.  Public health advisory—combined use of 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonists (triptans), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) or selective serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) may result in life-threatening serotonin syndrome. http://1.usa.gov/U0A0V4. Published July 19, 2006. Accessed September 18, 2012.

2. Kogut SJ. Do triptan antimigraine medications interact with SSRI/SNRI antidepressants? What does your decision support system say? J Manag Care Pharm. 2011;17(7):547-551.

3. Tepper SJ. Serotonin syndrome: SSRIs SNRIs, triptans, and current clinical practice. Headache. 2012;52(2):195-197.

4. Kalaydjian A, Merikangas K. Physical and mental comorbidity of headache in a nationally representative sample of US adults. Psychosom Med. 2008;70(7):773-780.

5. Boyer EW, Shannon M. The serotonin syndrome. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(11):1112-1120.

6. Sternbach H. The serotonin syndrome. Am J Psychiatry. 1991;148(6):705-713.

7. Dunkley EJ, Isbister GK, Sibbritt D, et al. The Hunter Serotonin Toxicity Criteria: simple and accurate diagnostic decision rules for serotonin toxicity. QJM. 2003;96(9):635-642.

8. Ables AZ, Nagubilli R. Prevention recognition, and management of serotonin syndrome. Am Fam Physician. 2010;81(9):1139-1142.

9. Evans RW. The FDA alert on serotonin syndrome with combined use of SSRIs or SNRIs and triptans: an analysis of the 29 case reports. MedGenMed. 2007;9(3):48.-

10. Gillman PK. Triptans serotonin agonists, and serotonin syndrome (serotonin toxicity): a review. Headache. 2010;50(2):264-272.

11. Evans RW, Tepper SJ, Shapiro RE, et al. The FDA alert on serotonin syndrome with use of triptans combined with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors: American Headache Society position paper. Headache. 2010;50(6):1089-1099.

12. Ahn AH, Basbaum AI. Where do triptans act in the treatment of migraine? Pain. 2005;115(1-2):1-4.

13. Pediatric & Neonatal Lexi-Drugs. Hudson, OH: Lexi-Comp, Inc.; 2011.

14. Sclar DA, Robison LM, Castillo LV, et al. Concomitant use of triptan, and SSRI or SNRI after the US Food and Drug Administration alert on serotonin syndrome. Headache. 2012;52(2):198-203.

15. Tepper S, Allen C, Sanders D, et al. Coprescription of triptans with potentially interacting medications: a cohort study involving 240,268 patients. Headache. 2003;43(1):44-48.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Page Number
E1-E2
Page Number
E1-E2
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Can combining triptans with SSRIs or SNRIs cause serotonin syndrome?
Display Headline
Can combining triptans with SSRIs or SNRIs cause serotonin syndrome?
Legacy Keywords
triptans; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; SSRIs; serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors; SNRIs; serotonin syndrome
Legacy Keywords
triptans; selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors; SSRIs; serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors; SNRIs; serotonin syndrome
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

The link between schizophrenia and diabetes

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
The link between schizophrenia and diabetes

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Although diabetes and schizophrenia are common companions, it is unclear how this association should influence our practice. What do we need to know about diabetes, and what are the key intervention points for psychiatrists?

This article is informed by my experience monitoring >1,000 patients with schizophrenia in a large urban mental health facility using an electronic metabolic monitoring system and consulting on hundreds of individuals with comorbid schizophrenia and diabetes in a mental health metabolic clinic.

A significant link

The association between schizophrenia and diabetes has been recognized for more than a century.1 The prevalence of diabetes is increased 2- to 3-fold in patients with schizophrenia.2,3 This relationship is specific to type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM); type 1 diabetes mellitus, an autoimmune disease, is less common in patients with schizophrenia.4 Factors that contribute to comorbidity between schizophrenia and T2DM include:

  • illness susceptibility: the mechanisms remain unclear but include the thrifty phenotype hypothesis,5 autonomic hyperactivity,6 and potential cellular and genetic links7,8
  • lifestyle: diet, physical inactivity, and cigarette smoking9-12
  • antipsychotic use13
  • social health determinants, such as income, housing, and food insecurity.14
The relative contribution of factors underlying this association is unknown; it is likely that they all contribute. Nevertheless, based on information from our facility’s metabolic monitoring database, depending on demographic variables, such as ethnicity and cigarette smoking, 20% to 30% of patients with schizophrenia will develop diabetes or prediabetes during the course of psychiatric treatment.

When evaluating a patient’s risk for a cardiac event, we consider having a diabetes diagnosis equivalent to having had a myocardial infarction.15 Likely, the high prevalence of T2DM among schizophrenia patients and challenges in managing diabetes and prediabetes underlies these patients’ reduced life expectancy.16 Self-care, a cornerstone of diabetes management, is challenging for patients with schizophrenia because of deficits in executive functioning, working memory, and motivation, coupled with negative symptoms and social and economic disadvantages that often accompany schizophrenia.

How diabetes impacts practice

What psychiatrists need to know. Insulin resistance—reduced biologic effectiveness of insulin—is the precursor of T2DM. Insulin is required to move glucose from the blood into cells. Weight gain, particularly abdominal adiposity, is the principal driver of insulin resistance. The body responds by producing more insulin (hyperinsulinemia) to maintain glucose homeostasis. Hyperinsulinemia underlies metabolic syndrome, an important risk marker for developing T2DM. Diabetes usually develops after many years when the pancreas fails to compensate for insulin resistance.

In most cases the development of diabetes in patients with schizophrenia follows this course. Weight gain, a consequence of lifestyle factors as well as antipsychotics and other psychotropics that promote obesity, leads to progressive insulin resistance. Consequently, metabolic syndrome is twice as prevalent among patients with schizophrenia compared with matched controls.17,18

Occasionally patients develop T2DM within a few weeks or months of starting antipsychotic treatment—usually with clozapine or olanzapine—before they gain weight, which suggests a second mechanism may be involved. Animal studies have documented rapid development of insulin resistance after a single subcutaneous injection of antipsychotics that have high metabolic liability, possibly through a direct effect on insulin signaling.19 This phenomenon has been difficult to demonstrate in humans.20

Psychiatrists need to know how to diagnose diabetes (Table 1)21-23 and the signs and symptoms of diabetes and diabetic ketoacidosis (Table 2).24,25 Hemoglobin A1C diagnostic testing often is the preferred test because it does not require fasting.

Managing diabetes is complex and ideally involves a range of health practitioners who work with patients to provide education, promote self-care behaviors, and direct complex health care. These services are outside the scope of psychiatric practice, but given the functional deficits in seriously mentally ill patients, it is important to have an overview of diabetes care (Table 3).

In addition to diagnosing diabetes, psychiatrists should be able to identify patients at risk for developing diabetes and initiate prevention strategies. Interventions are focused on lifestyle—weight reduction, increased physical activity, diet, and smoking cessation—as well as pharmacologic strategies such as metformin.

Diagnostic criteria and strategies to manage prediabetes and metabolic syndrome are outlined in Table 4.21,26,27 Prediabetes and metabolic syndrome predict development of T2DM. Additional risk factors include ethnicity (Hispanic, black, Native American, and South Asian), family history, gestational diabetes, and cigarette smoking.28

What patients need to know. Similar to schizophrenia, a diabetes diagnosis may be difficult for patients to accept. Initially, a patient may have no manifestations or symptoms. However, untreated diabetes has serious long-term health consequences—including blindness, amputations, kidney disease, and early death from heart attacks.

 

 

Patients should actively participate in treatment that involves learning about the illness, making lifestyle changes, working on self-care, and keeping regular medical appointments. Three components of lifestyle change must be addressed:

  • Diet: counseling with a dietician or other health professional to reduce or stabilize body weight and make changes in diet quality, portion size, and meal frequency to improve glucose control and reduce long-term diabetes complications
  • Physical activity: increasing physical activity, initially by walking daily, to benefit glucose control and weight maintenance
  • Smoking: reducing or stopping cigarette smoking to improve glucose control and reduce diabetes complications.
Table 1

American Diabetes Association diagnostic criteria for diabetes

TestaThresholdQualifier
A1C, or≥6.5%Lab NGSP certified, standardized DCCT assay
Fasting glucose, or≥126 mg/dLNo caloric intake for at least 8 hours
2-hour glucose, or≥200 mg/dLAfter 75 g of anhydrous glucose
Random glucose≥200 mg/dLPlus classic hyperglycemic symptoms or crisis
aResults should be confirmed by repeat testing
DCCT: Diabetes Control and Complications Trial; NGSP: National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program
Source: References 21-23
Table 2

Signs and symptoms of diabetes and diabetic ketoacidosis

Diabetes
  Frequent urination
  Excessive thirst
  Extreme hunger
  Unusual weight loss
  Increased fatigue
  Irritability
  Blurry vision
Diabetic ketoacidosisa
  Thirst or very dry mouth
  Constantly feeling tired
  Dry or flushed skin
  Nausea, vomiting, or abdominal pain
  Difficulty breathing (short, deep breaths)
  Fruity odor on breath
  Difficulty paying attention or confusion
aVomiting is a sign of escalation
Source: References 24,25
Table 3

Components of diabetes care

Self-care tasksTests/annual assessments
Self-monitoring of glucoseA1C (2 to 4 times/year)
Medication managementUrinary microalbumin
Meal planningFasting lipids
ExerciseBlood pressure
Smoking cessationDilated eye exam
Foot self-examination and foot careFoot exam
Stress managementGeneral health and cardiovascular exam
Table 4

Managing patients at risk for diabetes

Prediabetes21Management
Impaired fasting glucose (100 to 125 mg/dL)Weight reduction (7%)
Activity (150 minutes/week)
At least yearly glucose monitoring
Impaired glucose tolerance (2-hour plasma glucose: 140 to 199 mg/dL)
Prediabetic A1C (5.7% to 6.4%)
Metabolic syndrome (any 3)26Management
Waist circumferencea (men >40 inches; women >35 inches)Weight reduction
Reduce consumption of refined carbohydrates
Exercise
Focused interventions for individual criteria
Fasting triglycerides (≥150 mg/dL)
Fasting high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (men
Fasting glucose (≥100 mg/dL or taking medication)
Blood pressure (≥130/85 mm Hg or taking medication)
aWaist circumference guidelines are ethnicity specific. The International Diabetes Federation27 has published specific cutoffs for those of Asian background (men: ≥90 cm [35 inches] and women: ≥80 cm [31 inches])

Metabolic monitoring

Metabolic monitoring is the key to keeping patients with schizophrenia well. Treating metabolic conditions falls outside of psychiatric practice; however, many argue that mental health clinicians should monitor basic metabolic parameters during antipsychotic treatment and advocate medical interventions when indicated because:

  • most antipsychotics are associated with weight gain and metabolic side effects
  • patients with schizophrenia have cognitive deficits that impact health maintenance
  • mental health providers often are the primary health care contacts for patients with serious mental illness.
The goals of metabolic monitoring are to29:

  • identify treatable medical conditions such as diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension when treatment delay or no treatment has consequences
  • identify individuals with prediabetes and metabolic syndrome for targeted prevention
  • determine the association between antipsychotic treatment and metabolic disturbance to evaluate the risk of treatment vs antipsychotic switching.
Although most psychiatrists support published monitoring guidelines such as those of the American Diabetes Association and American Psychiatric Association,30 audits show that monitoring is limited or absent unless an institution has a coordinated structure for collecting data as well as oversight to ensure adherence.31 My team has developed a computer-coordinated monitoring system that is integrated within an electronic health record.32 Patients are monitored at least annually throughout antipsychotic treatment with basic measurements—weight, waist circumference, and blood pressure—A1C, fasting glucose, and fasting lipid profile. Early psychosis patients and those switched to antipsychotics with high metabolic liability require more frequent monitoring.

How to intervene

To switch or not to switch? For many psychiatrists, deciding whether or when to switch from a high or intermediate metabolic liability antipsychotic to one with low metabolic liability is difficult. Clinicians must balance potential metabolic benefits against the risk of psychotic decompensation and side effects. Ultimately, patients and their families make the decision, taking into account information provided to them. For medical-legal purposes, document the discussion of potential risks and benefits. These are difficult decisions and there are no clear guidelines. In my clinical experience, the following issues need to be considered:

  • The antipsychotics that many clinicians consider to be the most effective—clozapine and olanzapine—also have the greatest metabolic liability and risk for emergent T2DM.
  • Patients who are stable and in psychotic remission may risk a relapse of their illness if switched.
  • The clearest indication for switching is when a patient who does not have diabetes develops the condition shortly after starting an antipsychotic. This scenario is rare, but evidence suggests that diabetes may resolve or reverse with an antipsychotic switch.33
  • In patients who gain weight while taking a high- or intermediate-liability antipsychotic and are able to tolerate a switch to a low-liability antipsychotic, the effect size of weight reduction can be large and may result in a patient returning to their pretreatment weight.
  • To reduce relapse risk, patients switching antipsychotics should be closely monitored at least weekly for ≥1 month. A plateau cross-taper—building the new antipsychotic up to therapeutic levels before gradually reducing the first antipsychotic—may be safer than abrupt discontinuation or standard cross-titration.
  • Switching from one high or intermediate liability antipsychotic to another (eg, olanzapine to quetiapine or risperidone) often provides little if any metabolic benefit on body weight or diabetes control.
  • Established diabetes (type 1 or type 2) should not be a contraindication to antipsychotic treatment, including clozapine, if clinically warranted. Monitor metabolic parameters more closely for 6 to 12 months after the switch. In most cases, patients experience limited, if any, metabolic consequences. If so, diabetes medication can be adjusted.
  • Patients who have experienced significant weight gain on an atypical antipsychotic often do not gain more weight when switched to clozapine. A patient may reach a “ceiling” in terms of weight gain and medication-related metabolic effects.
 

 

Data from metabolic monitoring informs the decision to switch and metabolic consequences of switching. Conducting monitoring at baseline, when starting an antipsychotic, when switching to a high-liability agent, 3 months after the switch, and then annually provides data needed to consider switching or initiating medical and behavioral or lifestyle interventions.

Facilitate early diabetes treatment. Clinicians who are most closely involved in caring for patients with schizophrenia often are best situated to screen for diabetes. I have found that without a close working relationship with my patients’ primary care practitioners, patients may experience a long delay in receiving care. After your patient is diagnosed with diabetes, establish a relationship with diabetes treatment providers and work with your patient to ensure they engage in diabetes care.

Contribute to diabetes chronic disease management. Mental health practitioners can complement diabetes care in patients with serious mental illness by:

  • navigating the health system and negotiating for service on patients’ behalf
  • promoting positive relationships among diabetes and mental health treatment teams
  • evaluating and treating depression that may be comorbid with diabetes
  • assessing treatment capacity, self-care deficits, cognitive functioning, psychotic symptoms, negative symptoms, etc., that impact diabetes self-care and collaborating with diabetes care providers to support patients.

Start with a low-liability agent

Patients who are early in the course of psychotic illness are most susceptible to the metabolic effects of antipsychotics.13 The average weight gain observed with olanzapine was 34 lbs at 2 years in first episode psychosis patients (mean age 24 ± 4.9).34 Metabolic consequences with medium-liability second-generation antipsychotics—such as quetiapine and risperidone—are extreme, particularly in children, adolescents, and young adults (age 35,36 Although frank diabetes is uncommon in early psychosis because patients are, to a certain extent, protected by insulin compensation—increased insulin secretion maintains glucose levels within a therapeutic range—diabetes risk is increased, and hyperinsulinemia and hypertriglyceridemia are early markers of metabolic strain. Also, response to initial antipsychotic treatment—possibly independent of the agent selected—is robust in early psychosis.37

For these reasons, it is important to initiate schizophrenia treatment with low metabolic liability agents and reserve more potent agents with high metabolic liability for patients who do not respond adequately.

Related Resources

Drug Brand Names

  • Clozapine • Clozaril
  • Metformin • Glucophage
  • Olanzapine • Zyprexa
  • Quetiapine • Seroquel
  • Risperidone • Risperdal
Disclosure

Dr. Cohn is a speaker for Pfizer Canada.

References

1. Kohen D. Diabetes mellitus and schizophrenia: historical perspective. Br J Psychiatry Suppl. 2004;47:S64-S66.

2. Dixon L, Weiden P, Delahanty J, et al. Prevalence and correlates of diabetes in national schizophrenia samples. Schizophr Bull. 2000;26(4):903-912.

3. De Hert M, van Winkel R, Van Eyck D, et al. Prevalence of diabetes, metabolic syndrome and metabolic abnormalities in schizophrenia over the course of the illness: a cross-sectional study. Clin Pract Epidemol Ment Health. 2006;2:14.-

4. Juvonen H, Reunanen A, Haukka J, et al. Incidence of schizophrenia in a nationwide cohort of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(8):894-899.

5. Hales CN, Barker DJ. The thrifty phenotype hypothesis. Br Med Bull. 2001;60:5-20.

6. Ryan MC, Sharifi N, Condren R, et al. Evidence of basal pituitary-adrenal overactivity in first episode, drug naive patients with schizophrenia. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2004;29(8):1065-1070.

7. Odawara M, Isaka M, Tada K, et al. Diabetes mellitus associated with mitochondrial myopathy and schizophrenia: a possible link between diabetes mellitus and schizophrenia. Diabet Med. 1997;14(6):503.-

8. Siuta MA, Robertson SD, Kocalis H, et al. Dysregulation of the norepinephrine transporter sustains cortical hypodopaminergia and schizophrenia-like behaviors in neuronal rictor null mice. PLoS Biol. 2010;8(6):e1000393.-

9. Strassnig M, Brar JS, Ganguli R. Nutritional assessment of patients with schizophrenia: a preliminary study. Schizophr Bull. 2003;29(2):393-397.

10. Daumit GL, Goldberg RW, Anthony C, et al. Physical activity patterns in adults with severe mental illness. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2005;193(10):641-646.

11. Ussher M, Stanbury L, Cheeseman V, et al. Physical activity p and perceived barriers to activity among persons with severe mental illness in the United Kingdom. Psychiatr Serv. 2007;58(3):405-408.

12. Cho NH, Chan JC, Jang HC, et al. Cigarette smoking is an independent risk factor for type 2 diabetes: a four-year community-based prospective study. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2009;71(5):679-685.

13. Newcomer JW. Second-generation (atypical) antipsychotics and metabolic effects: a comprehensive literature review. CNS Drugs. 2005;19(suppl 1):1-93.

14. Yu VL, Raphael D. Identifying and addressing the social determinants of the incidence and successful management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Canada. Can J Public Health. 2004;95(5):366-368.

15. Barr EL, Zimmet PZ, Welborn TA, et al. Risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in individuals with diabetes mellitus, impaired fasting glucose, and impaired glucose tolerance: the Australian Diabetes, Obesity, and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab). Circulation. 2007;116(2):151-157.

16. Colton CW, Manderscheid RW. Congruencies in increased mortality rates years of potential life lost, and causes of death among public mental health clients in eight states. Prev Chronic Dis. 2006;3(2):A42.-

17. Cohn T, Prud’homme D, Streiner D, et al. Characterizing coronary heart disease risk in chronic schizophrenia: high prevalence of the metabolic syndrome. Can J Psychiatry. 2004;49(11):753-760.

18. Meyer JM, Stahl SM. The metabolic syndrome and schizophrenia. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2009;119(1):4-14.

19. Chintoh AF, Mann SW, Lam L, et al. Insulin resistance and decreased glucose-stimulated insulin secretion after acute olanzapine administration. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;28(5):494-499.

20. Hahn MK, Arenovich T, Wolever T, et al. Single dose administration of olanzapine: effects on glucose metabolism, endocrine and inflammatory markers in healthy volunteers. Poster presented at: Schizophrenia International Research Society 3rd Biennial Conference; April 14-18, 2012; Florence, Italy.

21. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes—2012. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(suppl 1):S11-S63.

22. Little RR. Glycated hemoglobin standardization—National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP) perspective. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2003;41(9):1191-1198.

23. Keen H. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT). Health Trends. 1994;26(2):41-43.

24. American Diabetes Association. Symptoms. http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/symptoms. Accessed August 27 2012.

25. American Diabetes Association. Ketoacidosis (DKA). http://www.diabetes.org/living-with-diabetes/complications/ketoacidosis-dka.html. Accessed August 27 2012.

26. Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Daniels SR, et al. American Heart Association; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome: an American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Scientific Statement. Circulation. 2005;112(17):2735-2752.

27. Alberti KG, Zimmet P, Shaw J. Metabolic syndrome—a new world-wide definition. A consensus statement from the International Diabetes Federation. Diabet Med. 2006;23(5):469-480.

28. Rodbard HW, Blonde L, Braithwaite SS, et al. AACE Diabetes Mellitus Clinical Practice Guidelines Task Force. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists medical guidelines for clinical practice for the management of diabetes mellitus. Endocr Pract. 2007;13(suppl 1):1-68.

29. Cohn TA, Sernyak MJ. Metabolic monitoring for patients treated with antipsychotic medications. Can J Psychiatry. 2006;51(8):492-501.

30. American Diabetes Association; American Psychiatric Association; American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; North American Association for the Study of Obesity. Consensus development conference on antipsychotic drugs and obesity and diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(2):596-601.

31. Newcomer JW, Nasrallah HA, Loebel AD. The Atypical Antipsychotic Therapy and Metabolic Issues National Survey: practice patterns and knowledge of psychiatrists. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2004;24(5 suppl 1):S1-S6.

32. Khoury A, Sproule BA, Cohn TA. Development and implementation of the Metabolic Health Monitor at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. Poster presented at: BC Psychopharmacology Conference; February 15-16 2008; Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

33. Koller EA, Doraiswamy PM. Olanzapine-associated diabetes mellitus. Pharmacotherapy. 2002;22(7):841-852.

34. Zipursky RB, Gu H, Green AI, et al. Course and predictors of weight gain in people with first-episode psychosis treated with olanzapine or haloperidol. Br J Psychiatry. 2005;187:537-543.

35. Correll CU, Carlson HE. Endocrine and metabolic adverse effects of psychotropic medications in children and adolescents. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2006;45(7):771-791.

36. Correll CU, Manu P, Olshanskiy V, et al. Cardiometabolic risk of second-generation antipsychotic medications during first-time use in children and adolescents. JAMA. 2009;302(16):1765-1773.

37. Nicol G, Newcomer J. Review: children and adolescents with schizophrenia spectrum disorders respond to antipsychotics but are susceptible to adverse events. Evid Based Ment Health. 2008;11(3):81.-

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Tony Cohn, MB, ChB, MSc, FRCPC
Lead Physician, Mental Health and Metabolism Clinic, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Assistant Professor, Departments of Psychiatry and Nutritional Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
28-46
Legacy Keywords
schizophrenia; diabetes; link between; metabolic monitoring;
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Tony Cohn, MB, ChB, MSc, FRCPC
Lead Physician, Mental Health and Metabolism Clinic, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Assistant Professor, Departments of Psychiatry and Nutritional Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario

Author and Disclosure Information

Tony Cohn, MB, ChB, MSc, FRCPC
Lead Physician, Mental Health and Metabolism Clinic, Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Assistant Professor, Departments of Psychiatry and Nutritional Science, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario

Article PDF
Article PDF

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Although diabetes and schizophrenia are common companions, it is unclear how this association should influence our practice. What do we need to know about diabetes, and what are the key intervention points for psychiatrists?

This article is informed by my experience monitoring >1,000 patients with schizophrenia in a large urban mental health facility using an electronic metabolic monitoring system and consulting on hundreds of individuals with comorbid schizophrenia and diabetes in a mental health metabolic clinic.

A significant link

The association between schizophrenia and diabetes has been recognized for more than a century.1 The prevalence of diabetes is increased 2- to 3-fold in patients with schizophrenia.2,3 This relationship is specific to type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM); type 1 diabetes mellitus, an autoimmune disease, is less common in patients with schizophrenia.4 Factors that contribute to comorbidity between schizophrenia and T2DM include:

  • illness susceptibility: the mechanisms remain unclear but include the thrifty phenotype hypothesis,5 autonomic hyperactivity,6 and potential cellular and genetic links7,8
  • lifestyle: diet, physical inactivity, and cigarette smoking9-12
  • antipsychotic use13
  • social health determinants, such as income, housing, and food insecurity.14
The relative contribution of factors underlying this association is unknown; it is likely that they all contribute. Nevertheless, based on information from our facility’s metabolic monitoring database, depending on demographic variables, such as ethnicity and cigarette smoking, 20% to 30% of patients with schizophrenia will develop diabetes or prediabetes during the course of psychiatric treatment.

When evaluating a patient’s risk for a cardiac event, we consider having a diabetes diagnosis equivalent to having had a myocardial infarction.15 Likely, the high prevalence of T2DM among schizophrenia patients and challenges in managing diabetes and prediabetes underlies these patients’ reduced life expectancy.16 Self-care, a cornerstone of diabetes management, is challenging for patients with schizophrenia because of deficits in executive functioning, working memory, and motivation, coupled with negative symptoms and social and economic disadvantages that often accompany schizophrenia.

How diabetes impacts practice

What psychiatrists need to know. Insulin resistance—reduced biologic effectiveness of insulin—is the precursor of T2DM. Insulin is required to move glucose from the blood into cells. Weight gain, particularly abdominal adiposity, is the principal driver of insulin resistance. The body responds by producing more insulin (hyperinsulinemia) to maintain glucose homeostasis. Hyperinsulinemia underlies metabolic syndrome, an important risk marker for developing T2DM. Diabetes usually develops after many years when the pancreas fails to compensate for insulin resistance.

In most cases the development of diabetes in patients with schizophrenia follows this course. Weight gain, a consequence of lifestyle factors as well as antipsychotics and other psychotropics that promote obesity, leads to progressive insulin resistance. Consequently, metabolic syndrome is twice as prevalent among patients with schizophrenia compared with matched controls.17,18

Occasionally patients develop T2DM within a few weeks or months of starting antipsychotic treatment—usually with clozapine or olanzapine—before they gain weight, which suggests a second mechanism may be involved. Animal studies have documented rapid development of insulin resistance after a single subcutaneous injection of antipsychotics that have high metabolic liability, possibly through a direct effect on insulin signaling.19 This phenomenon has been difficult to demonstrate in humans.20

Psychiatrists need to know how to diagnose diabetes (Table 1)21-23 and the signs and symptoms of diabetes and diabetic ketoacidosis (Table 2).24,25 Hemoglobin A1C diagnostic testing often is the preferred test because it does not require fasting.

Managing diabetes is complex and ideally involves a range of health practitioners who work with patients to provide education, promote self-care behaviors, and direct complex health care. These services are outside the scope of psychiatric practice, but given the functional deficits in seriously mentally ill patients, it is important to have an overview of diabetes care (Table 3).

In addition to diagnosing diabetes, psychiatrists should be able to identify patients at risk for developing diabetes and initiate prevention strategies. Interventions are focused on lifestyle—weight reduction, increased physical activity, diet, and smoking cessation—as well as pharmacologic strategies such as metformin.

Diagnostic criteria and strategies to manage prediabetes and metabolic syndrome are outlined in Table 4.21,26,27 Prediabetes and metabolic syndrome predict development of T2DM. Additional risk factors include ethnicity (Hispanic, black, Native American, and South Asian), family history, gestational diabetes, and cigarette smoking.28

What patients need to know. Similar to schizophrenia, a diabetes diagnosis may be difficult for patients to accept. Initially, a patient may have no manifestations or symptoms. However, untreated diabetes has serious long-term health consequences—including blindness, amputations, kidney disease, and early death from heart attacks.

 

 

Patients should actively participate in treatment that involves learning about the illness, making lifestyle changes, working on self-care, and keeping regular medical appointments. Three components of lifestyle change must be addressed:

  • Diet: counseling with a dietician or other health professional to reduce or stabilize body weight and make changes in diet quality, portion size, and meal frequency to improve glucose control and reduce long-term diabetes complications
  • Physical activity: increasing physical activity, initially by walking daily, to benefit glucose control and weight maintenance
  • Smoking: reducing or stopping cigarette smoking to improve glucose control and reduce diabetes complications.
Table 1

American Diabetes Association diagnostic criteria for diabetes

TestaThresholdQualifier
A1C, or≥6.5%Lab NGSP certified, standardized DCCT assay
Fasting glucose, or≥126 mg/dLNo caloric intake for at least 8 hours
2-hour glucose, or≥200 mg/dLAfter 75 g of anhydrous glucose
Random glucose≥200 mg/dLPlus classic hyperglycemic symptoms or crisis
aResults should be confirmed by repeat testing
DCCT: Diabetes Control and Complications Trial; NGSP: National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program
Source: References 21-23
Table 2

Signs and symptoms of diabetes and diabetic ketoacidosis

Diabetes
  Frequent urination
  Excessive thirst
  Extreme hunger
  Unusual weight loss
  Increased fatigue
  Irritability
  Blurry vision
Diabetic ketoacidosisa
  Thirst or very dry mouth
  Constantly feeling tired
  Dry or flushed skin
  Nausea, vomiting, or abdominal pain
  Difficulty breathing (short, deep breaths)
  Fruity odor on breath
  Difficulty paying attention or confusion
aVomiting is a sign of escalation
Source: References 24,25
Table 3

Components of diabetes care

Self-care tasksTests/annual assessments
Self-monitoring of glucoseA1C (2 to 4 times/year)
Medication managementUrinary microalbumin
Meal planningFasting lipids
ExerciseBlood pressure
Smoking cessationDilated eye exam
Foot self-examination and foot careFoot exam
Stress managementGeneral health and cardiovascular exam
Table 4

Managing patients at risk for diabetes

Prediabetes21Management
Impaired fasting glucose (100 to 125 mg/dL)Weight reduction (7%)
Activity (150 minutes/week)
At least yearly glucose monitoring
Impaired glucose tolerance (2-hour plasma glucose: 140 to 199 mg/dL)
Prediabetic A1C (5.7% to 6.4%)
Metabolic syndrome (any 3)26Management
Waist circumferencea (men >40 inches; women >35 inches)Weight reduction
Reduce consumption of refined carbohydrates
Exercise
Focused interventions for individual criteria
Fasting triglycerides (≥150 mg/dL)
Fasting high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (men
Fasting glucose (≥100 mg/dL or taking medication)
Blood pressure (≥130/85 mm Hg or taking medication)
aWaist circumference guidelines are ethnicity specific. The International Diabetes Federation27 has published specific cutoffs for those of Asian background (men: ≥90 cm [35 inches] and women: ≥80 cm [31 inches])

Metabolic monitoring

Metabolic monitoring is the key to keeping patients with schizophrenia well. Treating metabolic conditions falls outside of psychiatric practice; however, many argue that mental health clinicians should monitor basic metabolic parameters during antipsychotic treatment and advocate medical interventions when indicated because:

  • most antipsychotics are associated with weight gain and metabolic side effects
  • patients with schizophrenia have cognitive deficits that impact health maintenance
  • mental health providers often are the primary health care contacts for patients with serious mental illness.
The goals of metabolic monitoring are to29:

  • identify treatable medical conditions such as diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension when treatment delay or no treatment has consequences
  • identify individuals with prediabetes and metabolic syndrome for targeted prevention
  • determine the association between antipsychotic treatment and metabolic disturbance to evaluate the risk of treatment vs antipsychotic switching.
Although most psychiatrists support published monitoring guidelines such as those of the American Diabetes Association and American Psychiatric Association,30 audits show that monitoring is limited or absent unless an institution has a coordinated structure for collecting data as well as oversight to ensure adherence.31 My team has developed a computer-coordinated monitoring system that is integrated within an electronic health record.32 Patients are monitored at least annually throughout antipsychotic treatment with basic measurements—weight, waist circumference, and blood pressure—A1C, fasting glucose, and fasting lipid profile. Early psychosis patients and those switched to antipsychotics with high metabolic liability require more frequent monitoring.

How to intervene

To switch or not to switch? For many psychiatrists, deciding whether or when to switch from a high or intermediate metabolic liability antipsychotic to one with low metabolic liability is difficult. Clinicians must balance potential metabolic benefits against the risk of psychotic decompensation and side effects. Ultimately, patients and their families make the decision, taking into account information provided to them. For medical-legal purposes, document the discussion of potential risks and benefits. These are difficult decisions and there are no clear guidelines. In my clinical experience, the following issues need to be considered:

  • The antipsychotics that many clinicians consider to be the most effective—clozapine and olanzapine—also have the greatest metabolic liability and risk for emergent T2DM.
  • Patients who are stable and in psychotic remission may risk a relapse of their illness if switched.
  • The clearest indication for switching is when a patient who does not have diabetes develops the condition shortly after starting an antipsychotic. This scenario is rare, but evidence suggests that diabetes may resolve or reverse with an antipsychotic switch.33
  • In patients who gain weight while taking a high- or intermediate-liability antipsychotic and are able to tolerate a switch to a low-liability antipsychotic, the effect size of weight reduction can be large and may result in a patient returning to their pretreatment weight.
  • To reduce relapse risk, patients switching antipsychotics should be closely monitored at least weekly for ≥1 month. A plateau cross-taper—building the new antipsychotic up to therapeutic levels before gradually reducing the first antipsychotic—may be safer than abrupt discontinuation or standard cross-titration.
  • Switching from one high or intermediate liability antipsychotic to another (eg, olanzapine to quetiapine or risperidone) often provides little if any metabolic benefit on body weight or diabetes control.
  • Established diabetes (type 1 or type 2) should not be a contraindication to antipsychotic treatment, including clozapine, if clinically warranted. Monitor metabolic parameters more closely for 6 to 12 months after the switch. In most cases, patients experience limited, if any, metabolic consequences. If so, diabetes medication can be adjusted.
  • Patients who have experienced significant weight gain on an atypical antipsychotic often do not gain more weight when switched to clozapine. A patient may reach a “ceiling” in terms of weight gain and medication-related metabolic effects.
 

 

Data from metabolic monitoring informs the decision to switch and metabolic consequences of switching. Conducting monitoring at baseline, when starting an antipsychotic, when switching to a high-liability agent, 3 months after the switch, and then annually provides data needed to consider switching or initiating medical and behavioral or lifestyle interventions.

Facilitate early diabetes treatment. Clinicians who are most closely involved in caring for patients with schizophrenia often are best situated to screen for diabetes. I have found that without a close working relationship with my patients’ primary care practitioners, patients may experience a long delay in receiving care. After your patient is diagnosed with diabetes, establish a relationship with diabetes treatment providers and work with your patient to ensure they engage in diabetes care.

Contribute to diabetes chronic disease management. Mental health practitioners can complement diabetes care in patients with serious mental illness by:

  • navigating the health system and negotiating for service on patients’ behalf
  • promoting positive relationships among diabetes and mental health treatment teams
  • evaluating and treating depression that may be comorbid with diabetes
  • assessing treatment capacity, self-care deficits, cognitive functioning, psychotic symptoms, negative symptoms, etc., that impact diabetes self-care and collaborating with diabetes care providers to support patients.

Start with a low-liability agent

Patients who are early in the course of psychotic illness are most susceptible to the metabolic effects of antipsychotics.13 The average weight gain observed with olanzapine was 34 lbs at 2 years in first episode psychosis patients (mean age 24 ± 4.9).34 Metabolic consequences with medium-liability second-generation antipsychotics—such as quetiapine and risperidone—are extreme, particularly in children, adolescents, and young adults (age 35,36 Although frank diabetes is uncommon in early psychosis because patients are, to a certain extent, protected by insulin compensation—increased insulin secretion maintains glucose levels within a therapeutic range—diabetes risk is increased, and hyperinsulinemia and hypertriglyceridemia are early markers of metabolic strain. Also, response to initial antipsychotic treatment—possibly independent of the agent selected—is robust in early psychosis.37

For these reasons, it is important to initiate schizophrenia treatment with low metabolic liability agents and reserve more potent agents with high metabolic liability for patients who do not respond adequately.

Related Resources

Drug Brand Names

  • Clozapine • Clozaril
  • Metformin • Glucophage
  • Olanzapine • Zyprexa
  • Quetiapine • Seroquel
  • Risperidone • Risperdal
Disclosure

Dr. Cohn is a speaker for Pfizer Canada.

Discuss this article at www.facebook.com/CurrentPsychiatry

Although diabetes and schizophrenia are common companions, it is unclear how this association should influence our practice. What do we need to know about diabetes, and what are the key intervention points for psychiatrists?

This article is informed by my experience monitoring >1,000 patients with schizophrenia in a large urban mental health facility using an electronic metabolic monitoring system and consulting on hundreds of individuals with comorbid schizophrenia and diabetes in a mental health metabolic clinic.

A significant link

The association between schizophrenia and diabetes has been recognized for more than a century.1 The prevalence of diabetes is increased 2- to 3-fold in patients with schizophrenia.2,3 This relationship is specific to type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM); type 1 diabetes mellitus, an autoimmune disease, is less common in patients with schizophrenia.4 Factors that contribute to comorbidity between schizophrenia and T2DM include:

  • illness susceptibility: the mechanisms remain unclear but include the thrifty phenotype hypothesis,5 autonomic hyperactivity,6 and potential cellular and genetic links7,8
  • lifestyle: diet, physical inactivity, and cigarette smoking9-12
  • antipsychotic use13
  • social health determinants, such as income, housing, and food insecurity.14
The relative contribution of factors underlying this association is unknown; it is likely that they all contribute. Nevertheless, based on information from our facility’s metabolic monitoring database, depending on demographic variables, such as ethnicity and cigarette smoking, 20% to 30% of patients with schizophrenia will develop diabetes or prediabetes during the course of psychiatric treatment.

When evaluating a patient’s risk for a cardiac event, we consider having a diabetes diagnosis equivalent to having had a myocardial infarction.15 Likely, the high prevalence of T2DM among schizophrenia patients and challenges in managing diabetes and prediabetes underlies these patients’ reduced life expectancy.16 Self-care, a cornerstone of diabetes management, is challenging for patients with schizophrenia because of deficits in executive functioning, working memory, and motivation, coupled with negative symptoms and social and economic disadvantages that often accompany schizophrenia.

How diabetes impacts practice

What psychiatrists need to know. Insulin resistance—reduced biologic effectiveness of insulin—is the precursor of T2DM. Insulin is required to move glucose from the blood into cells. Weight gain, particularly abdominal adiposity, is the principal driver of insulin resistance. The body responds by producing more insulin (hyperinsulinemia) to maintain glucose homeostasis. Hyperinsulinemia underlies metabolic syndrome, an important risk marker for developing T2DM. Diabetes usually develops after many years when the pancreas fails to compensate for insulin resistance.

In most cases the development of diabetes in patients with schizophrenia follows this course. Weight gain, a consequence of lifestyle factors as well as antipsychotics and other psychotropics that promote obesity, leads to progressive insulin resistance. Consequently, metabolic syndrome is twice as prevalent among patients with schizophrenia compared with matched controls.17,18

Occasionally patients develop T2DM within a few weeks or months of starting antipsychotic treatment—usually with clozapine or olanzapine—before they gain weight, which suggests a second mechanism may be involved. Animal studies have documented rapid development of insulin resistance after a single subcutaneous injection of antipsychotics that have high metabolic liability, possibly through a direct effect on insulin signaling.19 This phenomenon has been difficult to demonstrate in humans.20

Psychiatrists need to know how to diagnose diabetes (Table 1)21-23 and the signs and symptoms of diabetes and diabetic ketoacidosis (Table 2).24,25 Hemoglobin A1C diagnostic testing often is the preferred test because it does not require fasting.

Managing diabetes is complex and ideally involves a range of health practitioners who work with patients to provide education, promote self-care behaviors, and direct complex health care. These services are outside the scope of psychiatric practice, but given the functional deficits in seriously mentally ill patients, it is important to have an overview of diabetes care (Table 3).

In addition to diagnosing diabetes, psychiatrists should be able to identify patients at risk for developing diabetes and initiate prevention strategies. Interventions are focused on lifestyle—weight reduction, increased physical activity, diet, and smoking cessation—as well as pharmacologic strategies such as metformin.

Diagnostic criteria and strategies to manage prediabetes and metabolic syndrome are outlined in Table 4.21,26,27 Prediabetes and metabolic syndrome predict development of T2DM. Additional risk factors include ethnicity (Hispanic, black, Native American, and South Asian), family history, gestational diabetes, and cigarette smoking.28

What patients need to know. Similar to schizophrenia, a diabetes diagnosis may be difficult for patients to accept. Initially, a patient may have no manifestations or symptoms. However, untreated diabetes has serious long-term health consequences—including blindness, amputations, kidney disease, and early death from heart attacks.

 

 

Patients should actively participate in treatment that involves learning about the illness, making lifestyle changes, working on self-care, and keeping regular medical appointments. Three components of lifestyle change must be addressed:

  • Diet: counseling with a dietician or other health professional to reduce or stabilize body weight and make changes in diet quality, portion size, and meal frequency to improve glucose control and reduce long-term diabetes complications
  • Physical activity: increasing physical activity, initially by walking daily, to benefit glucose control and weight maintenance
  • Smoking: reducing or stopping cigarette smoking to improve glucose control and reduce diabetes complications.
Table 1

American Diabetes Association diagnostic criteria for diabetes

TestaThresholdQualifier
A1C, or≥6.5%Lab NGSP certified, standardized DCCT assay
Fasting glucose, or≥126 mg/dLNo caloric intake for at least 8 hours
2-hour glucose, or≥200 mg/dLAfter 75 g of anhydrous glucose
Random glucose≥200 mg/dLPlus classic hyperglycemic symptoms or crisis
aResults should be confirmed by repeat testing
DCCT: Diabetes Control and Complications Trial; NGSP: National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program
Source: References 21-23
Table 2

Signs and symptoms of diabetes and diabetic ketoacidosis

Diabetes
  Frequent urination
  Excessive thirst
  Extreme hunger
  Unusual weight loss
  Increased fatigue
  Irritability
  Blurry vision
Diabetic ketoacidosisa
  Thirst or very dry mouth
  Constantly feeling tired
  Dry or flushed skin
  Nausea, vomiting, or abdominal pain
  Difficulty breathing (short, deep breaths)
  Fruity odor on breath
  Difficulty paying attention or confusion
aVomiting is a sign of escalation
Source: References 24,25
Table 3

Components of diabetes care

Self-care tasksTests/annual assessments
Self-monitoring of glucoseA1C (2 to 4 times/year)
Medication managementUrinary microalbumin
Meal planningFasting lipids
ExerciseBlood pressure
Smoking cessationDilated eye exam
Foot self-examination and foot careFoot exam
Stress managementGeneral health and cardiovascular exam
Table 4

Managing patients at risk for diabetes

Prediabetes21Management
Impaired fasting glucose (100 to 125 mg/dL)Weight reduction (7%)
Activity (150 minutes/week)
At least yearly glucose monitoring
Impaired glucose tolerance (2-hour plasma glucose: 140 to 199 mg/dL)
Prediabetic A1C (5.7% to 6.4%)
Metabolic syndrome (any 3)26Management
Waist circumferencea (men >40 inches; women >35 inches)Weight reduction
Reduce consumption of refined carbohydrates
Exercise
Focused interventions for individual criteria
Fasting triglycerides (≥150 mg/dL)
Fasting high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (men
Fasting glucose (≥100 mg/dL or taking medication)
Blood pressure (≥130/85 mm Hg or taking medication)
aWaist circumference guidelines are ethnicity specific. The International Diabetes Federation27 has published specific cutoffs for those of Asian background (men: ≥90 cm [35 inches] and women: ≥80 cm [31 inches])

Metabolic monitoring

Metabolic monitoring is the key to keeping patients with schizophrenia well. Treating metabolic conditions falls outside of psychiatric practice; however, many argue that mental health clinicians should monitor basic metabolic parameters during antipsychotic treatment and advocate medical interventions when indicated because:

  • most antipsychotics are associated with weight gain and metabolic side effects
  • patients with schizophrenia have cognitive deficits that impact health maintenance
  • mental health providers often are the primary health care contacts for patients with serious mental illness.
The goals of metabolic monitoring are to29:

  • identify treatable medical conditions such as diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension when treatment delay or no treatment has consequences
  • identify individuals with prediabetes and metabolic syndrome for targeted prevention
  • determine the association between antipsychotic treatment and metabolic disturbance to evaluate the risk of treatment vs antipsychotic switching.
Although most psychiatrists support published monitoring guidelines such as those of the American Diabetes Association and American Psychiatric Association,30 audits show that monitoring is limited or absent unless an institution has a coordinated structure for collecting data as well as oversight to ensure adherence.31 My team has developed a computer-coordinated monitoring system that is integrated within an electronic health record.32 Patients are monitored at least annually throughout antipsychotic treatment with basic measurements—weight, waist circumference, and blood pressure—A1C, fasting glucose, and fasting lipid profile. Early psychosis patients and those switched to antipsychotics with high metabolic liability require more frequent monitoring.

How to intervene

To switch or not to switch? For many psychiatrists, deciding whether or when to switch from a high or intermediate metabolic liability antipsychotic to one with low metabolic liability is difficult. Clinicians must balance potential metabolic benefits against the risk of psychotic decompensation and side effects. Ultimately, patients and their families make the decision, taking into account information provided to them. For medical-legal purposes, document the discussion of potential risks and benefits. These are difficult decisions and there are no clear guidelines. In my clinical experience, the following issues need to be considered:

  • The antipsychotics that many clinicians consider to be the most effective—clozapine and olanzapine—also have the greatest metabolic liability and risk for emergent T2DM.
  • Patients who are stable and in psychotic remission may risk a relapse of their illness if switched.
  • The clearest indication for switching is when a patient who does not have diabetes develops the condition shortly after starting an antipsychotic. This scenario is rare, but evidence suggests that diabetes may resolve or reverse with an antipsychotic switch.33
  • In patients who gain weight while taking a high- or intermediate-liability antipsychotic and are able to tolerate a switch to a low-liability antipsychotic, the effect size of weight reduction can be large and may result in a patient returning to their pretreatment weight.
  • To reduce relapse risk, patients switching antipsychotics should be closely monitored at least weekly for ≥1 month. A plateau cross-taper—building the new antipsychotic up to therapeutic levels before gradually reducing the first antipsychotic—may be safer than abrupt discontinuation or standard cross-titration.
  • Switching from one high or intermediate liability antipsychotic to another (eg, olanzapine to quetiapine or risperidone) often provides little if any metabolic benefit on body weight or diabetes control.
  • Established diabetes (type 1 or type 2) should not be a contraindication to antipsychotic treatment, including clozapine, if clinically warranted. Monitor metabolic parameters more closely for 6 to 12 months after the switch. In most cases, patients experience limited, if any, metabolic consequences. If so, diabetes medication can be adjusted.
  • Patients who have experienced significant weight gain on an atypical antipsychotic often do not gain more weight when switched to clozapine. A patient may reach a “ceiling” in terms of weight gain and medication-related metabolic effects.
 

 

Data from metabolic monitoring informs the decision to switch and metabolic consequences of switching. Conducting monitoring at baseline, when starting an antipsychotic, when switching to a high-liability agent, 3 months after the switch, and then annually provides data needed to consider switching or initiating medical and behavioral or lifestyle interventions.

Facilitate early diabetes treatment. Clinicians who are most closely involved in caring for patients with schizophrenia often are best situated to screen for diabetes. I have found that without a close working relationship with my patients’ primary care practitioners, patients may experience a long delay in receiving care. After your patient is diagnosed with diabetes, establish a relationship with diabetes treatment providers and work with your patient to ensure they engage in diabetes care.

Contribute to diabetes chronic disease management. Mental health practitioners can complement diabetes care in patients with serious mental illness by:

  • navigating the health system and negotiating for service on patients’ behalf
  • promoting positive relationships among diabetes and mental health treatment teams
  • evaluating and treating depression that may be comorbid with diabetes
  • assessing treatment capacity, self-care deficits, cognitive functioning, psychotic symptoms, negative symptoms, etc., that impact diabetes self-care and collaborating with diabetes care providers to support patients.

Start with a low-liability agent

Patients who are early in the course of psychotic illness are most susceptible to the metabolic effects of antipsychotics.13 The average weight gain observed with olanzapine was 34 lbs at 2 years in first episode psychosis patients (mean age 24 ± 4.9).34 Metabolic consequences with medium-liability second-generation antipsychotics—such as quetiapine and risperidone—are extreme, particularly in children, adolescents, and young adults (age 35,36 Although frank diabetes is uncommon in early psychosis because patients are, to a certain extent, protected by insulin compensation—increased insulin secretion maintains glucose levels within a therapeutic range—diabetes risk is increased, and hyperinsulinemia and hypertriglyceridemia are early markers of metabolic strain. Also, response to initial antipsychotic treatment—possibly independent of the agent selected—is robust in early psychosis.37

For these reasons, it is important to initiate schizophrenia treatment with low metabolic liability agents and reserve more potent agents with high metabolic liability for patients who do not respond adequately.

Related Resources

Drug Brand Names

  • Clozapine • Clozaril
  • Metformin • Glucophage
  • Olanzapine • Zyprexa
  • Quetiapine • Seroquel
  • Risperidone • Risperdal
Disclosure

Dr. Cohn is a speaker for Pfizer Canada.

References

1. Kohen D. Diabetes mellitus and schizophrenia: historical perspective. Br J Psychiatry Suppl. 2004;47:S64-S66.

2. Dixon L, Weiden P, Delahanty J, et al. Prevalence and correlates of diabetes in national schizophrenia samples. Schizophr Bull. 2000;26(4):903-912.

3. De Hert M, van Winkel R, Van Eyck D, et al. Prevalence of diabetes, metabolic syndrome and metabolic abnormalities in schizophrenia over the course of the illness: a cross-sectional study. Clin Pract Epidemol Ment Health. 2006;2:14.-

4. Juvonen H, Reunanen A, Haukka J, et al. Incidence of schizophrenia in a nationwide cohort of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(8):894-899.

5. Hales CN, Barker DJ. The thrifty phenotype hypothesis. Br Med Bull. 2001;60:5-20.

6. Ryan MC, Sharifi N, Condren R, et al. Evidence of basal pituitary-adrenal overactivity in first episode, drug naive patients with schizophrenia. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2004;29(8):1065-1070.

7. Odawara M, Isaka M, Tada K, et al. Diabetes mellitus associated with mitochondrial myopathy and schizophrenia: a possible link between diabetes mellitus and schizophrenia. Diabet Med. 1997;14(6):503.-

8. Siuta MA, Robertson SD, Kocalis H, et al. Dysregulation of the norepinephrine transporter sustains cortical hypodopaminergia and schizophrenia-like behaviors in neuronal rictor null mice. PLoS Biol. 2010;8(6):e1000393.-

9. Strassnig M, Brar JS, Ganguli R. Nutritional assessment of patients with schizophrenia: a preliminary study. Schizophr Bull. 2003;29(2):393-397.

10. Daumit GL, Goldberg RW, Anthony C, et al. Physical activity patterns in adults with severe mental illness. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2005;193(10):641-646.

11. Ussher M, Stanbury L, Cheeseman V, et al. Physical activity p and perceived barriers to activity among persons with severe mental illness in the United Kingdom. Psychiatr Serv. 2007;58(3):405-408.

12. Cho NH, Chan JC, Jang HC, et al. Cigarette smoking is an independent risk factor for type 2 diabetes: a four-year community-based prospective study. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2009;71(5):679-685.

13. Newcomer JW. Second-generation (atypical) antipsychotics and metabolic effects: a comprehensive literature review. CNS Drugs. 2005;19(suppl 1):1-93.

14. Yu VL, Raphael D. Identifying and addressing the social determinants of the incidence and successful management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Canada. Can J Public Health. 2004;95(5):366-368.

15. Barr EL, Zimmet PZ, Welborn TA, et al. Risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in individuals with diabetes mellitus, impaired fasting glucose, and impaired glucose tolerance: the Australian Diabetes, Obesity, and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab). Circulation. 2007;116(2):151-157.

16. Colton CW, Manderscheid RW. Congruencies in increased mortality rates years of potential life lost, and causes of death among public mental health clients in eight states. Prev Chronic Dis. 2006;3(2):A42.-

17. Cohn T, Prud’homme D, Streiner D, et al. Characterizing coronary heart disease risk in chronic schizophrenia: high prevalence of the metabolic syndrome. Can J Psychiatry. 2004;49(11):753-760.

18. Meyer JM, Stahl SM. The metabolic syndrome and schizophrenia. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2009;119(1):4-14.

19. Chintoh AF, Mann SW, Lam L, et al. Insulin resistance and decreased glucose-stimulated insulin secretion after acute olanzapine administration. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;28(5):494-499.

20. Hahn MK, Arenovich T, Wolever T, et al. Single dose administration of olanzapine: effects on glucose metabolism, endocrine and inflammatory markers in healthy volunteers. Poster presented at: Schizophrenia International Research Society 3rd Biennial Conference; April 14-18, 2012; Florence, Italy.

21. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes—2012. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(suppl 1):S11-S63.

22. Little RR. Glycated hemoglobin standardization—National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP) perspective. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2003;41(9):1191-1198.

23. Keen H. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT). Health Trends. 1994;26(2):41-43.

24. American Diabetes Association. Symptoms. http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/symptoms. Accessed August 27 2012.

25. American Diabetes Association. Ketoacidosis (DKA). http://www.diabetes.org/living-with-diabetes/complications/ketoacidosis-dka.html. Accessed August 27 2012.

26. Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Daniels SR, et al. American Heart Association; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome: an American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Scientific Statement. Circulation. 2005;112(17):2735-2752.

27. Alberti KG, Zimmet P, Shaw J. Metabolic syndrome—a new world-wide definition. A consensus statement from the International Diabetes Federation. Diabet Med. 2006;23(5):469-480.

28. Rodbard HW, Blonde L, Braithwaite SS, et al. AACE Diabetes Mellitus Clinical Practice Guidelines Task Force. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists medical guidelines for clinical practice for the management of diabetes mellitus. Endocr Pract. 2007;13(suppl 1):1-68.

29. Cohn TA, Sernyak MJ. Metabolic monitoring for patients treated with antipsychotic medications. Can J Psychiatry. 2006;51(8):492-501.

30. American Diabetes Association; American Psychiatric Association; American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; North American Association for the Study of Obesity. Consensus development conference on antipsychotic drugs and obesity and diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(2):596-601.

31. Newcomer JW, Nasrallah HA, Loebel AD. The Atypical Antipsychotic Therapy and Metabolic Issues National Survey: practice patterns and knowledge of psychiatrists. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2004;24(5 suppl 1):S1-S6.

32. Khoury A, Sproule BA, Cohn TA. Development and implementation of the Metabolic Health Monitor at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. Poster presented at: BC Psychopharmacology Conference; February 15-16 2008; Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

33. Koller EA, Doraiswamy PM. Olanzapine-associated diabetes mellitus. Pharmacotherapy. 2002;22(7):841-852.

34. Zipursky RB, Gu H, Green AI, et al. Course and predictors of weight gain in people with first-episode psychosis treated with olanzapine or haloperidol. Br J Psychiatry. 2005;187:537-543.

35. Correll CU, Carlson HE. Endocrine and metabolic adverse effects of psychotropic medications in children and adolescents. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2006;45(7):771-791.

36. Correll CU, Manu P, Olshanskiy V, et al. Cardiometabolic risk of second-generation antipsychotic medications during first-time use in children and adolescents. JAMA. 2009;302(16):1765-1773.

37. Nicol G, Newcomer J. Review: children and adolescents with schizophrenia spectrum disorders respond to antipsychotics but are susceptible to adverse events. Evid Based Ment Health. 2008;11(3):81.-

References

1. Kohen D. Diabetes mellitus and schizophrenia: historical perspective. Br J Psychiatry Suppl. 2004;47:S64-S66.

2. Dixon L, Weiden P, Delahanty J, et al. Prevalence and correlates of diabetes in national schizophrenia samples. Schizophr Bull. 2000;26(4):903-912.

3. De Hert M, van Winkel R, Van Eyck D, et al. Prevalence of diabetes, metabolic syndrome and metabolic abnormalities in schizophrenia over the course of the illness: a cross-sectional study. Clin Pract Epidemol Ment Health. 2006;2:14.-

4. Juvonen H, Reunanen A, Haukka J, et al. Incidence of schizophrenia in a nationwide cohort of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(8):894-899.

5. Hales CN, Barker DJ. The thrifty phenotype hypothesis. Br Med Bull. 2001;60:5-20.

6. Ryan MC, Sharifi N, Condren R, et al. Evidence of basal pituitary-adrenal overactivity in first episode, drug naive patients with schizophrenia. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2004;29(8):1065-1070.

7. Odawara M, Isaka M, Tada K, et al. Diabetes mellitus associated with mitochondrial myopathy and schizophrenia: a possible link between diabetes mellitus and schizophrenia. Diabet Med. 1997;14(6):503.-

8. Siuta MA, Robertson SD, Kocalis H, et al. Dysregulation of the norepinephrine transporter sustains cortical hypodopaminergia and schizophrenia-like behaviors in neuronal rictor null mice. PLoS Biol. 2010;8(6):e1000393.-

9. Strassnig M, Brar JS, Ganguli R. Nutritional assessment of patients with schizophrenia: a preliminary study. Schizophr Bull. 2003;29(2):393-397.

10. Daumit GL, Goldberg RW, Anthony C, et al. Physical activity patterns in adults with severe mental illness. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2005;193(10):641-646.

11. Ussher M, Stanbury L, Cheeseman V, et al. Physical activity p and perceived barriers to activity among persons with severe mental illness in the United Kingdom. Psychiatr Serv. 2007;58(3):405-408.

12. Cho NH, Chan JC, Jang HC, et al. Cigarette smoking is an independent risk factor for type 2 diabetes: a four-year community-based prospective study. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf). 2009;71(5):679-685.

13. Newcomer JW. Second-generation (atypical) antipsychotics and metabolic effects: a comprehensive literature review. CNS Drugs. 2005;19(suppl 1):1-93.

14. Yu VL, Raphael D. Identifying and addressing the social determinants of the incidence and successful management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Canada. Can J Public Health. 2004;95(5):366-368.

15. Barr EL, Zimmet PZ, Welborn TA, et al. Risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in individuals with diabetes mellitus, impaired fasting glucose, and impaired glucose tolerance: the Australian Diabetes, Obesity, and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab). Circulation. 2007;116(2):151-157.

16. Colton CW, Manderscheid RW. Congruencies in increased mortality rates years of potential life lost, and causes of death among public mental health clients in eight states. Prev Chronic Dis. 2006;3(2):A42.-

17. Cohn T, Prud’homme D, Streiner D, et al. Characterizing coronary heart disease risk in chronic schizophrenia: high prevalence of the metabolic syndrome. Can J Psychiatry. 2004;49(11):753-760.

18. Meyer JM, Stahl SM. The metabolic syndrome and schizophrenia. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2009;119(1):4-14.

19. Chintoh AF, Mann SW, Lam L, et al. Insulin resistance and decreased glucose-stimulated insulin secretion after acute olanzapine administration. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2008;28(5):494-499.

20. Hahn MK, Arenovich T, Wolever T, et al. Single dose administration of olanzapine: effects on glucose metabolism, endocrine and inflammatory markers in healthy volunteers. Poster presented at: Schizophrenia International Research Society 3rd Biennial Conference; April 14-18, 2012; Florence, Italy.

21. American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes—2012. Diabetes Care. 2012;35(suppl 1):S11-S63.

22. Little RR. Glycated hemoglobin standardization—National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP) perspective. Clin Chem Lab Med. 2003;41(9):1191-1198.

23. Keen H. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT). Health Trends. 1994;26(2):41-43.

24. American Diabetes Association. Symptoms. http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/symptoms. Accessed August 27 2012.

25. American Diabetes Association. Ketoacidosis (DKA). http://www.diabetes.org/living-with-diabetes/complications/ketoacidosis-dka.html. Accessed August 27 2012.

26. Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Daniels SR, et al. American Heart Association; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome: an American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Scientific Statement. Circulation. 2005;112(17):2735-2752.

27. Alberti KG, Zimmet P, Shaw J. Metabolic syndrome—a new world-wide definition. A consensus statement from the International Diabetes Federation. Diabet Med. 2006;23(5):469-480.

28. Rodbard HW, Blonde L, Braithwaite SS, et al. AACE Diabetes Mellitus Clinical Practice Guidelines Task Force. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists medical guidelines for clinical practice for the management of diabetes mellitus. Endocr Pract. 2007;13(suppl 1):1-68.

29. Cohn TA, Sernyak MJ. Metabolic monitoring for patients treated with antipsychotic medications. Can J Psychiatry. 2006;51(8):492-501.

30. American Diabetes Association; American Psychiatric Association; American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; North American Association for the Study of Obesity. Consensus development conference on antipsychotic drugs and obesity and diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(2):596-601.

31. Newcomer JW, Nasrallah HA, Loebel AD. The Atypical Antipsychotic Therapy and Metabolic Issues National Survey: practice patterns and knowledge of psychiatrists. J Clin Psychopharmacol. 2004;24(5 suppl 1):S1-S6.

32. Khoury A, Sproule BA, Cohn TA. Development and implementation of the Metabolic Health Monitor at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. Poster presented at: BC Psychopharmacology Conference; February 15-16 2008; Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

33. Koller EA, Doraiswamy PM. Olanzapine-associated diabetes mellitus. Pharmacotherapy. 2002;22(7):841-852.

34. Zipursky RB, Gu H, Green AI, et al. Course and predictors of weight gain in people with first-episode psychosis treated with olanzapine or haloperidol. Br J Psychiatry. 2005;187:537-543.

35. Correll CU, Carlson HE. Endocrine and metabolic adverse effects of psychotropic medications in children and adolescents. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2006;45(7):771-791.

36. Correll CU, Manu P, Olshanskiy V, et al. Cardiometabolic risk of second-generation antipsychotic medications during first-time use in children and adolescents. JAMA. 2009;302(16):1765-1773.

37. Nicol G, Newcomer J. Review: children and adolescents with schizophrenia spectrum disorders respond to antipsychotics but are susceptible to adverse events. Evid Based Ment Health. 2008;11(3):81.-

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(10)
Page Number
28-46
Page Number
28-46
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
The link between schizophrenia and diabetes
Display Headline
The link between schizophrenia and diabetes
Legacy Keywords
schizophrenia; diabetes; link between; metabolic monitoring;
Legacy Keywords
schizophrenia; diabetes; link between; metabolic monitoring;
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media

An evidence-based approach to treating pediatric anxiety disorders

Article Type
Changed
Display Headline
An evidence-based approach to treating pediatric anxiety disorders

Anxiety disorders are remarkably common among pediatric patients1,2 and are associated with significant morbidity3 and increased risk of suicidality in adolescents.4,5 Effective diagnosis and treatment of pediatric anxiety disorders are critical for reducing psychosocial morbidity,3,6 suicidality, and the risk of secondary mood disorders.7

This article summarizes open-label studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, atypical anxiolytics, and benzodiazepines in children and adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), social phobia, separation anxiety disorder, and panic disorder. Although we focus on psychopharmacologic treatments, the best outcomes generally are observed with multimodal treatments that combine psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy.

Generalized anxiety disorder

Researchers have evaluated SSRIs, benzodiazepines, and buspirone in pediatric patients with GAD. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 22 patients age 5 to 17, sertraline, 50 mg/d, was associated with improvement in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scores over 9 weeks.8 The Child-Adolescent Anxiety Multimodal Study compared cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) to sertraline or sertraline plus CBT in 488 patients age 7 to 17, 78% of whom had GAD.9 Sertraline monotherapy was superior to placebo and not statistically different from CBT, while combination treatment was superior to both monotherapy conditions in improving CGI score. In both trials, sertraline was well tolerated.

One study evaluated fluoxetine, 5 to 40 mg/d, or CBT in 14 youths with GAD; both treatments improved symptoms.10 In a study of 320 GAD patients age 6 to 17, venlafaxine extended-release (XR) initiated at 37.5 mg/d was associated with improved HAM-A scores.11 In general, venlafaxine was well tolerated; adverse effects included increased blood pressure, asthenia, pain, anorexia, somnolence, weight loss, and possibly treatment-emergent suicidal ideation.

Two RCTs of buspirone, 15 to 60 mg/d, that evaluated 559 children and adolescents age 6 to 17 with GAD did not observe significant differences between buspirone and placebo.12 By contrast, 2 open-label studies of youths with anxiety suggested improvement associated with buspirone.12 Treatment-emergent adverse events included nausea, stomachache, and headache.

Clinical trials of benzodiazepines in anxious children and adolescents have yielded mixed results. A 4-week, open-label trial of alprazolam, 0.5 mg to 1.5 mg/d, in 12 adolescents with overanxious disorder—the DSM-III forerunner of GAD—found improvements in anxiety, depression, psychomotor excitation, and hyperactivity, but patients experienced sedation, activation, headache, and nausea.13 However, a double-blind RCT in 30 youths age 8 to 16 found no statistically significant difference between alprazolam and placebo.14 Alprazolam generally was well tolerated; fatigue and dry mouth were reported, but no withdrawal symptoms. Additionally, benzodiazepine use may be associated with tolerance and—in young children—disinhibition.

Social phobia

Researchers have evaluated paroxetine, citalopram, fluoxetine, and venlafaxine for treating social phobia in pediatric patients. In an RCT, 78% of paroxetine-treated patients with social phobia responded compared with 38% for placebo over 16 weeks. Adverse events—including withdrawal symptoms—were twice as likely in patients who received paroxetine. Additionally, 4 paroxetine patients exhibited suicidal ideation vs 0 patients who received placebo.15

In an RCT of 293 children and adolescents age 8 to 17 with social phobia, venlafaxine XR was initiated at 37.5 mg/d and titrated to 112.5 mg/d, 150 mg/d, or 225 mg/d, depending on body weight.16 The venlafaxine group experienced significantly improved anxiety symptoms and the medication generally was well tolerated, although 3 venlafaxine-treated patients developed suicidal ideation compared with 0 in the placebo group.

An RCT compared Social Effectiveness Therapy for Children (SET-C) and fluoxetine, 10 to 40 mg/d, for 139 patients age 7 to 17 with social phobia.17 SET-C is a CBT for children and adolescents that focuses on increasing interpersonal skills and becoming more comfortable in social situations; it involves psychoeducation, social skills training, and exposure exercises. At endpoint, 53% of patients in the SET-C group no longer met diagnostic criteria for social phobia. Fluoxetine was well tolerated; no severe adverse events were reported.

In an open-label study of sertraline (mean dose = 123 mg/d) for 14 young persons with social phobia, 36% of patients responded and 29% partially responded at 8 weeks.18 Adverse events generally were mild and included nausea, diarrhea, and headache. In a 12-week study, 12 pediatric patients with social phobia received citalopram, 10 to 40 mg/d, and eight 15-minute counseling sessions. At endpoint, clinicians rated 83% of patients as much improved or very much improved. The medication generally was well tolerated.19

Separation anxiety disorder

In a 4-week, double-blind crossover pilot study, researchers randomly assigned 15 children age 7 to 13 with separation anxiety disorder to clonazepam, up to 2 mg/d, or placebo.20 There was no significant difference in CGI-I score between clonazepam and placebo. Side effects—including drowsiness, irritability and “oppositional behavior”—were more frequent in patients treated with clonazepam.

 

 

Panic disorder

Only 2 open-label studies of SSRIs have been conducted in pediatric patients with panic disorder. The first evaluated the effectiveness and tolerability of fluoxetine, sertraline, or paroxetine over 6 months in 12 patients; 67% no longer met criteria for panic disorder at endpoint.21 In this study, benzodiazepines—including clonazepam and lorazepam—were used in 67% of patients at the start of SSRI treatment. The authors suggested this strategy may be clinically useful for patients with panic disorder.

In the second study, Fairbanks et al22 examined the use of fluoxetine for 6 to 9 weeks in 16 outpatients with mixed anxiety disorders who did not respond to psychotherapy. Patients age ≤12 were given 5 to 40 mg/d and those age ≥13 received 5 to 80 mg/d. Fluoxetine was associated with clinically significant improvement in 3 of the 5 patients who had panic disorder. Although overall fluoxetine was well tolerated, drowsiness, dyssomnia, decreased appetite, nausea, and abdominal pain were the most common side effects. Fluoxetine was not associated with suicidal ideation.

Mixed anxiety disorders

Most trials of pediatric anxiety have evaluated patients with “mixed anxiety disorders” because GAD, social phobia, and separation anxiety disorder are highly comorbid and share diagnostic features (Figure 1).9 An RCT of fluvoxamine, up to 300 mg/d, in 128 pediatric patients with ≥1 anxiety disorders found significant differences in CGI-I and endpoint Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) scores.23 Fluvoxamine was well tolerated but associated with increased motor activity and abdominal discomfort compared with placebo.

Two open-label trials of pediatric patients with mixed anxiety disorders suggested fluoxetine may be beneficial. Fairbanks et al22 documented clinical improvement in 10 of 10 patients with separation anxiety disorder, 8 of 10 with social phobia, 4 of 6 with specific phobia, 3 of 5 with panic disorder, and 1 of 7 with GAD. Birmaher et al24 evaluated 21 pediatric patients with overanxious disorder, social phobia, or separation anxiety who had not responded to psychotherapy and were not depressed; all patients received flexibly-dosed fluoxetine for up to 10 months. Fluoxetine was well tolerated and 81% of patients improved.

Finally, in a 12-week RCT of 74 patients age 7 to 17 with GAD, separation anxiety disorder, and/or social phobia, fluoxetine, 10 to 20 mg/d, was associated with improved scores on the Screen for Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders, PARS, CGI-I, CGI-S, and Children’s Global Assessment Scale.25 A follow-up open-label trial suggested that maintenance treatment is associated with sustained improvement.26

Figure 1: The pediatric anxiety disorders triad: Comorbidity is common


In the Child-Adolescent Multimodal Treatment Study, GAD was the most common disorder; however, GAD, SAD, and SoP were highly comorbid
GAD: generalized anxiety disorder; SAD: separation anxiety disorder; SoP: social phobia
Source: Reference 9

Anxiety disorders with ADHD

Anxiety disorders often are comorbid with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). An RCT of patients age 8 to 17 with ADHD and comorbid anxiety found that atomoxetine was associated with improved PARS scores and ADHD symptoms.27 The target dose was 1.2 mg/kg/d. Atomoxetine was well-tolerated; decreased appetite was the only significant adverse event in the treatment group vs placebo.

Multimodal treatment

Although this article reviews evidence for psychopharmacologic treatments, psychotherapeutic treatment of young patients with anxiety disorders has seen significant advances.28 Most psychotherapy studies have evaluated the efficacy of CBT,29-31 although there is evidence for psychodynamic therapy and interpersonal therapy.32 The American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry recommends a multimodal treatment approach because combination treatment appears to be more effective than monotherapy.8,28,33 Also, clinicians who treat pediatric patients who have an anxiety disorder should evaluate the family’s role on anxiety symptoms and may consider family therapy.

Treatment considerations

Evidence supports the efficacy of sertraline, citalopram, paroxetine, fluvoxamine, fluoxetine, and venlafaxine for treating children and adolescents with anxiety disorders (Figure 2).8,9,11,15,16,23,25 Some practitioners suggest using differing dosing strategies for pediatric anxiety disorders compared with those used to treat adults (Table).34 When considering SSRIs for children and adolescents, keep in mind the “black-box” warning regarding suicidality in these patients. Carefully monitor patients for treatment-emergent suicidality and routinely reassess for the presence and severity of suicidal ideation and suicide risk.

Figure 2: Number needed to treat for SSRIs and SNRIs in pediatric anxiety disorders


 

 

GAD: generalized anxiety disorder; RUPP: Research Unit on Pediatric Psychopharmacology; SAD: separation anxiety disorder; SNRI: serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor; SoP: social phobia; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitorTable

Practical dosing of SSRIs and SNRIs in pediatric patients with anxietya

MedicationInitial child dose (age <12; mg/d)Initial adolescent dose (age 12 to 17; mg/d)Target dose (mg/d)
Citalopram5 to 101020 to 40
Escitalopram2.5 to 55 to 1010 to 20
Fluoxetineb102020 to 40 (children),
40 to 60 (adolescents)
Paroxetineb5 to 101020
Sertralinec10 to 12.525150
Venlafaxine37.537.5150
aGeneralized anxiety disorder, social phobia, and separation anxiety disorder
bMay consider cytochrome P450 genotyping for 2D6, which may suggest an alternate dosing strategy
cSertraline is available in a liquid formulation (20 mg/mL)
SNRI: serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor
Source: Adapted from reference 34

Related Resources

  • Connolly SD, Bernstein GA; Work Group on Quality Issues. Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(2):267-283.
  • Anxiety and Depression Association of America. www.adaa.org.
  • American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. www.aacap.org.

Drug Brand Names

  • Alprazolam • Xanax
  • Atomoxetine • Strattera
  • Buspirone • BuSpar
  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Clonazepam • Klonopin
  • Fluoxetine • Prozac
  • Fluvoxamine • Luvox, Luvox CR
  • Lorazepam • Ativan
  • Paroxetine • Paxil, Paxil CR
  • Sertraline • Zoloft
  • Venlafaxine • Effexor, Effexor XR

Disclosures

Dr. Strawn has received research support from the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, Eli Lilly and Company, and Shire, and is an employee of the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.

Dr. McReynolds was employed by Eli Lilly and Company from 1997 to 2005.

References

1. Beesdo K, Knappe S, Pine DS. Anxiety and anxiety disorders in children and adolescents: developmental issues and implications for DSM-V. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2009;32(3):483-524.

2. Beesdo K, Pine DS, Lieb R, et al. Incidence and risk patterns of anxiety and depressive disorders and categorization of generalized anxiety disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010;67(1):47-57.

3. Ialongo N, Edelsohn G, Werthamer-Larsson L, et al. The significance of self-reported anxious symptoms in first grade children: prediction to anxious symptoms and adaptive functioning in fifth grade. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1995;36(3):427-437.

4. Foley DL, Goldston DB, Costello EJ, et al. Proximal psychiatric risk factors for suicidality in youth: the Great Smoky Mountains Study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006;63(9):1017-1024.

5. Jacobson CM, Muehlenkamp JJ, Miller AL, et al. Psychiatric impairment among adolescents engaging in different types of deliberate self-harm. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2008;37(2):363-375.

6. Ialongo N, Edelsohn G, Werthamer-Larsson L, et al. The significance of self-reported anxious symptoms in first-grade children. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1994;22(4):441-455.

7. Pine DS, Cohen P, Gurley D, et al. The risk for early-adulthood anxiety and depressive disorders in adolescents with anxiety and depressive disorders. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998;55(1):56-64.

8. Rynn MA, Siqueland L, Rickels K. Placebo-controlled trial of sertraline in the treatment of children with generalized anxiety disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(12):2008-2014.

9. Walkup JT, Albano AM, Piacentini J, et al. Cognitive behavioral therapy, sertraline, or a combination in childhood anxiety. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(26):2753-2766.

10. Maslowsky J, Mogg K, Bradley BP, et al. A preliminary investigation of neural correlates of treatment in adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2010;20(2):105-111.

11. Rynn MA, Riddle MA, Yeung PP, et al. Efficacy and safety of extended-release venlafaxine in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder in children and adolescents: two placebo-controlled trials. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(2):290-300.

12. BuSpar [package insert] Princeton NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb; 2010.

13. Simeon JG, Ferguson HB. Alprazolam effects in children with anxiety disorders. Can J Psychiatry. 1987;32(7):570-574.

14. Simeon JG, Ferguson HB, Knott V, et al. Clinical, cognitive, and neurophysiological effects of alprazolam in children and adolescents with overanxious and avoidant disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1992;31(1):29-33.

15. Wagner KD, Berard R, Stein MB, et al. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of paroxetine in children and adolescents with social anxiety disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2004;61(11):1153-1162.

16. March JS, Entusah AR, Rynn M, et al. A randomized controlled trial of venlafaxine ER versus placebo in pediatric social anxiety disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 2007;62(10):1149-1154.

17. Beidel DC, Turner SM, Sallee FR, et al. SET-C versus fluoxetine in the treatment of childhood social phobia. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(12):1622-1632.

18. Compton SN, Grant PJ, Chrisman AK, et al. Sertraline in children and adolescents with social anxiety disorder: an open trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2001;40(5):564-571.

19. Chavira DA, Stein MB. Combined psychoeducation and treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for youth with generalized social anxiety disorder. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2002;12(1):47-54.

20. Graae F, Milner J, Rizzotto L, et al. Clonazepam in childhood anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1994;33(3):372-376.

21. Renaud J, Birmaher B, Wassick SC, et al. Use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for the treatment of childhood panic disorder: a pilot study. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 1999;9(2):73-83.

22. Fairbanks JM, Pine DS, Tancer NK, et al. Open fluoxetine treatment of mixed anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 1997;7(1):17-29.

23. The Research Unit on Pediatric Psychopharmacology Anxiety Study Group. Fluvoxamine for the treatment of anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(17):1279-1285.

24. Birmaher B, Waterman GS, Ryan N, et al. Fluoxetine for childhood anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1994;33(7):993-999.

25. Birmaher B, Axelson DA, Monk K, et al. Fluoxetine for the treatment of childhood anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2003;42(4):415-423.

26. Clark DB, Birmaher B, Axelson D, et al. Fluoxetine for the treatment of childhood anxiety disorders: open-label, long-term extension to a controlled trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2005;44(12):1263-1270.

27. Geller D, Donnelly C, Lopez F, et al. Atomoxetine treatment for pediatric patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with comorbid anxiety disorder. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(9):1119-1127.

28. Connolly SD, Bernstein GA. Work Group on Quality Issues. Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(2):267-283.

29. Kendall PC. Treating anxiety disorders in children: results of a randomized clinical trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1994;62(1):100-110.

30. Kendall PC, Flannery-Schroeder E, Panichelli-Mindel SM, et al. Therapy for youths with anxiety disorders: a second randomized clinical trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1997;65(3):366-380.

31. Reynolds S, Wilson C, Austin J, et al. Effects of psychotherapy for anxiety in children and adolescents: a meta-analytic review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2012;32(4):251-262.

32. Strawn JR, Wehry AM, DelBello MP, et al. Establishing the neurobiologic basis of treatment in children and adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder. Depress Anxiety. 2012;29(4):328-339.

33. Ginsburg GS, Kendall PC, Sakolsky D, et al. Remission after acute treatment in children and adolescents with anxiety disorders: findings from the CAMS. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2011;79(6):806-813.

34. Findling RL, Kowatch RA. How (not) to dose antidepressants and antipsychotics for children. Current Psychiatry. 2007;6(6):79-83.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Jeffrey R. Strawn, MD
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
Deana J. McReynolds, DO
Clinical Fellow, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH

Audio / Podcast
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(09)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
16-21
Legacy Keywords
pediatric anxiety disorder; SSRIs; SNRIs; children; adolescents; psychotherapy
Sections
Audio / Podcast
Audio / Podcast
Author and Disclosure Information

Jeffrey R. Strawn, MD
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
Deana J. McReynolds, DO
Clinical Fellow, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH

Author and Disclosure Information

Jeffrey R. Strawn, MD
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry and Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH
Deana J. McReynolds, DO
Clinical Fellow, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH

Article PDF
Article PDF

Anxiety disorders are remarkably common among pediatric patients1,2 and are associated with significant morbidity3 and increased risk of suicidality in adolescents.4,5 Effective diagnosis and treatment of pediatric anxiety disorders are critical for reducing psychosocial morbidity,3,6 suicidality, and the risk of secondary mood disorders.7

This article summarizes open-label studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, atypical anxiolytics, and benzodiazepines in children and adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), social phobia, separation anxiety disorder, and panic disorder. Although we focus on psychopharmacologic treatments, the best outcomes generally are observed with multimodal treatments that combine psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy.

Generalized anxiety disorder

Researchers have evaluated SSRIs, benzodiazepines, and buspirone in pediatric patients with GAD. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 22 patients age 5 to 17, sertraline, 50 mg/d, was associated with improvement in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scores over 9 weeks.8 The Child-Adolescent Anxiety Multimodal Study compared cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) to sertraline or sertraline plus CBT in 488 patients age 7 to 17, 78% of whom had GAD.9 Sertraline monotherapy was superior to placebo and not statistically different from CBT, while combination treatment was superior to both monotherapy conditions in improving CGI score. In both trials, sertraline was well tolerated.

One study evaluated fluoxetine, 5 to 40 mg/d, or CBT in 14 youths with GAD; both treatments improved symptoms.10 In a study of 320 GAD patients age 6 to 17, venlafaxine extended-release (XR) initiated at 37.5 mg/d was associated with improved HAM-A scores.11 In general, venlafaxine was well tolerated; adverse effects included increased blood pressure, asthenia, pain, anorexia, somnolence, weight loss, and possibly treatment-emergent suicidal ideation.

Two RCTs of buspirone, 15 to 60 mg/d, that evaluated 559 children and adolescents age 6 to 17 with GAD did not observe significant differences between buspirone and placebo.12 By contrast, 2 open-label studies of youths with anxiety suggested improvement associated with buspirone.12 Treatment-emergent adverse events included nausea, stomachache, and headache.

Clinical trials of benzodiazepines in anxious children and adolescents have yielded mixed results. A 4-week, open-label trial of alprazolam, 0.5 mg to 1.5 mg/d, in 12 adolescents with overanxious disorder—the DSM-III forerunner of GAD—found improvements in anxiety, depression, psychomotor excitation, and hyperactivity, but patients experienced sedation, activation, headache, and nausea.13 However, a double-blind RCT in 30 youths age 8 to 16 found no statistically significant difference between alprazolam and placebo.14 Alprazolam generally was well tolerated; fatigue and dry mouth were reported, but no withdrawal symptoms. Additionally, benzodiazepine use may be associated with tolerance and—in young children—disinhibition.

Social phobia

Researchers have evaluated paroxetine, citalopram, fluoxetine, and venlafaxine for treating social phobia in pediatric patients. In an RCT, 78% of paroxetine-treated patients with social phobia responded compared with 38% for placebo over 16 weeks. Adverse events—including withdrawal symptoms—were twice as likely in patients who received paroxetine. Additionally, 4 paroxetine patients exhibited suicidal ideation vs 0 patients who received placebo.15

In an RCT of 293 children and adolescents age 8 to 17 with social phobia, venlafaxine XR was initiated at 37.5 mg/d and titrated to 112.5 mg/d, 150 mg/d, or 225 mg/d, depending on body weight.16 The venlafaxine group experienced significantly improved anxiety symptoms and the medication generally was well tolerated, although 3 venlafaxine-treated patients developed suicidal ideation compared with 0 in the placebo group.

An RCT compared Social Effectiveness Therapy for Children (SET-C) and fluoxetine, 10 to 40 mg/d, for 139 patients age 7 to 17 with social phobia.17 SET-C is a CBT for children and adolescents that focuses on increasing interpersonal skills and becoming more comfortable in social situations; it involves psychoeducation, social skills training, and exposure exercises. At endpoint, 53% of patients in the SET-C group no longer met diagnostic criteria for social phobia. Fluoxetine was well tolerated; no severe adverse events were reported.

In an open-label study of sertraline (mean dose = 123 mg/d) for 14 young persons with social phobia, 36% of patients responded and 29% partially responded at 8 weeks.18 Adverse events generally were mild and included nausea, diarrhea, and headache. In a 12-week study, 12 pediatric patients with social phobia received citalopram, 10 to 40 mg/d, and eight 15-minute counseling sessions. At endpoint, clinicians rated 83% of patients as much improved or very much improved. The medication generally was well tolerated.19

Separation anxiety disorder

In a 4-week, double-blind crossover pilot study, researchers randomly assigned 15 children age 7 to 13 with separation anxiety disorder to clonazepam, up to 2 mg/d, or placebo.20 There was no significant difference in CGI-I score between clonazepam and placebo. Side effects—including drowsiness, irritability and “oppositional behavior”—were more frequent in patients treated with clonazepam.

 

 

Panic disorder

Only 2 open-label studies of SSRIs have been conducted in pediatric patients with panic disorder. The first evaluated the effectiveness and tolerability of fluoxetine, sertraline, or paroxetine over 6 months in 12 patients; 67% no longer met criteria for panic disorder at endpoint.21 In this study, benzodiazepines—including clonazepam and lorazepam—were used in 67% of patients at the start of SSRI treatment. The authors suggested this strategy may be clinically useful for patients with panic disorder.

In the second study, Fairbanks et al22 examined the use of fluoxetine for 6 to 9 weeks in 16 outpatients with mixed anxiety disorders who did not respond to psychotherapy. Patients age ≤12 were given 5 to 40 mg/d and those age ≥13 received 5 to 80 mg/d. Fluoxetine was associated with clinically significant improvement in 3 of the 5 patients who had panic disorder. Although overall fluoxetine was well tolerated, drowsiness, dyssomnia, decreased appetite, nausea, and abdominal pain were the most common side effects. Fluoxetine was not associated with suicidal ideation.

Mixed anxiety disorders

Most trials of pediatric anxiety have evaluated patients with “mixed anxiety disorders” because GAD, social phobia, and separation anxiety disorder are highly comorbid and share diagnostic features (Figure 1).9 An RCT of fluvoxamine, up to 300 mg/d, in 128 pediatric patients with ≥1 anxiety disorders found significant differences in CGI-I and endpoint Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) scores.23 Fluvoxamine was well tolerated but associated with increased motor activity and abdominal discomfort compared with placebo.

Two open-label trials of pediatric patients with mixed anxiety disorders suggested fluoxetine may be beneficial. Fairbanks et al22 documented clinical improvement in 10 of 10 patients with separation anxiety disorder, 8 of 10 with social phobia, 4 of 6 with specific phobia, 3 of 5 with panic disorder, and 1 of 7 with GAD. Birmaher et al24 evaluated 21 pediatric patients with overanxious disorder, social phobia, or separation anxiety who had not responded to psychotherapy and were not depressed; all patients received flexibly-dosed fluoxetine for up to 10 months. Fluoxetine was well tolerated and 81% of patients improved.

Finally, in a 12-week RCT of 74 patients age 7 to 17 with GAD, separation anxiety disorder, and/or social phobia, fluoxetine, 10 to 20 mg/d, was associated with improved scores on the Screen for Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders, PARS, CGI-I, CGI-S, and Children’s Global Assessment Scale.25 A follow-up open-label trial suggested that maintenance treatment is associated with sustained improvement.26

Figure 1: The pediatric anxiety disorders triad: Comorbidity is common


In the Child-Adolescent Multimodal Treatment Study, GAD was the most common disorder; however, GAD, SAD, and SoP were highly comorbid
GAD: generalized anxiety disorder; SAD: separation anxiety disorder; SoP: social phobia
Source: Reference 9

Anxiety disorders with ADHD

Anxiety disorders often are comorbid with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). An RCT of patients age 8 to 17 with ADHD and comorbid anxiety found that atomoxetine was associated with improved PARS scores and ADHD symptoms.27 The target dose was 1.2 mg/kg/d. Atomoxetine was well-tolerated; decreased appetite was the only significant adverse event in the treatment group vs placebo.

Multimodal treatment

Although this article reviews evidence for psychopharmacologic treatments, psychotherapeutic treatment of young patients with anxiety disorders has seen significant advances.28 Most psychotherapy studies have evaluated the efficacy of CBT,29-31 although there is evidence for psychodynamic therapy and interpersonal therapy.32 The American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry recommends a multimodal treatment approach because combination treatment appears to be more effective than monotherapy.8,28,33 Also, clinicians who treat pediatric patients who have an anxiety disorder should evaluate the family’s role on anxiety symptoms and may consider family therapy.

Treatment considerations

Evidence supports the efficacy of sertraline, citalopram, paroxetine, fluvoxamine, fluoxetine, and venlafaxine for treating children and adolescents with anxiety disorders (Figure 2).8,9,11,15,16,23,25 Some practitioners suggest using differing dosing strategies for pediatric anxiety disorders compared with those used to treat adults (Table).34 When considering SSRIs for children and adolescents, keep in mind the “black-box” warning regarding suicidality in these patients. Carefully monitor patients for treatment-emergent suicidality and routinely reassess for the presence and severity of suicidal ideation and suicide risk.

Figure 2: Number needed to treat for SSRIs and SNRIs in pediatric anxiety disorders


 

 

GAD: generalized anxiety disorder; RUPP: Research Unit on Pediatric Psychopharmacology; SAD: separation anxiety disorder; SNRI: serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor; SoP: social phobia; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitorTable

Practical dosing of SSRIs and SNRIs in pediatric patients with anxietya

MedicationInitial child dose (age <12; mg/d)Initial adolescent dose (age 12 to 17; mg/d)Target dose (mg/d)
Citalopram5 to 101020 to 40
Escitalopram2.5 to 55 to 1010 to 20
Fluoxetineb102020 to 40 (children),
40 to 60 (adolescents)
Paroxetineb5 to 101020
Sertralinec10 to 12.525150
Venlafaxine37.537.5150
aGeneralized anxiety disorder, social phobia, and separation anxiety disorder
bMay consider cytochrome P450 genotyping for 2D6, which may suggest an alternate dosing strategy
cSertraline is available in a liquid formulation (20 mg/mL)
SNRI: serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor
Source: Adapted from reference 34

Related Resources

  • Connolly SD, Bernstein GA; Work Group on Quality Issues. Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(2):267-283.
  • Anxiety and Depression Association of America. www.adaa.org.
  • American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. www.aacap.org.

Drug Brand Names

  • Alprazolam • Xanax
  • Atomoxetine • Strattera
  • Buspirone • BuSpar
  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Clonazepam • Klonopin
  • Fluoxetine • Prozac
  • Fluvoxamine • Luvox, Luvox CR
  • Lorazepam • Ativan
  • Paroxetine • Paxil, Paxil CR
  • Sertraline • Zoloft
  • Venlafaxine • Effexor, Effexor XR

Disclosures

Dr. Strawn has received research support from the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, Eli Lilly and Company, and Shire, and is an employee of the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.

Dr. McReynolds was employed by Eli Lilly and Company from 1997 to 2005.

Anxiety disorders are remarkably common among pediatric patients1,2 and are associated with significant morbidity3 and increased risk of suicidality in adolescents.4,5 Effective diagnosis and treatment of pediatric anxiety disorders are critical for reducing psychosocial morbidity,3,6 suicidality, and the risk of secondary mood disorders.7

This article summarizes open-label studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, atypical anxiolytics, and benzodiazepines in children and adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), social phobia, separation anxiety disorder, and panic disorder. Although we focus on psychopharmacologic treatments, the best outcomes generally are observed with multimodal treatments that combine psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy.

Generalized anxiety disorder

Researchers have evaluated SSRIs, benzodiazepines, and buspirone in pediatric patients with GAD. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 22 patients age 5 to 17, sertraline, 50 mg/d, was associated with improvement in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) scores over 9 weeks.8 The Child-Adolescent Anxiety Multimodal Study compared cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) to sertraline or sertraline plus CBT in 488 patients age 7 to 17, 78% of whom had GAD.9 Sertraline monotherapy was superior to placebo and not statistically different from CBT, while combination treatment was superior to both monotherapy conditions in improving CGI score. In both trials, sertraline was well tolerated.

One study evaluated fluoxetine, 5 to 40 mg/d, or CBT in 14 youths with GAD; both treatments improved symptoms.10 In a study of 320 GAD patients age 6 to 17, venlafaxine extended-release (XR) initiated at 37.5 mg/d was associated with improved HAM-A scores.11 In general, venlafaxine was well tolerated; adverse effects included increased blood pressure, asthenia, pain, anorexia, somnolence, weight loss, and possibly treatment-emergent suicidal ideation.

Two RCTs of buspirone, 15 to 60 mg/d, that evaluated 559 children and adolescents age 6 to 17 with GAD did not observe significant differences between buspirone and placebo.12 By contrast, 2 open-label studies of youths with anxiety suggested improvement associated with buspirone.12 Treatment-emergent adverse events included nausea, stomachache, and headache.

Clinical trials of benzodiazepines in anxious children and adolescents have yielded mixed results. A 4-week, open-label trial of alprazolam, 0.5 mg to 1.5 mg/d, in 12 adolescents with overanxious disorder—the DSM-III forerunner of GAD—found improvements in anxiety, depression, psychomotor excitation, and hyperactivity, but patients experienced sedation, activation, headache, and nausea.13 However, a double-blind RCT in 30 youths age 8 to 16 found no statistically significant difference between alprazolam and placebo.14 Alprazolam generally was well tolerated; fatigue and dry mouth were reported, but no withdrawal symptoms. Additionally, benzodiazepine use may be associated with tolerance and—in young children—disinhibition.

Social phobia

Researchers have evaluated paroxetine, citalopram, fluoxetine, and venlafaxine for treating social phobia in pediatric patients. In an RCT, 78% of paroxetine-treated patients with social phobia responded compared with 38% for placebo over 16 weeks. Adverse events—including withdrawal symptoms—were twice as likely in patients who received paroxetine. Additionally, 4 paroxetine patients exhibited suicidal ideation vs 0 patients who received placebo.15

In an RCT of 293 children and adolescents age 8 to 17 with social phobia, venlafaxine XR was initiated at 37.5 mg/d and titrated to 112.5 mg/d, 150 mg/d, or 225 mg/d, depending on body weight.16 The venlafaxine group experienced significantly improved anxiety symptoms and the medication generally was well tolerated, although 3 venlafaxine-treated patients developed suicidal ideation compared with 0 in the placebo group.

An RCT compared Social Effectiveness Therapy for Children (SET-C) and fluoxetine, 10 to 40 mg/d, for 139 patients age 7 to 17 with social phobia.17 SET-C is a CBT for children and adolescents that focuses on increasing interpersonal skills and becoming more comfortable in social situations; it involves psychoeducation, social skills training, and exposure exercises. At endpoint, 53% of patients in the SET-C group no longer met diagnostic criteria for social phobia. Fluoxetine was well tolerated; no severe adverse events were reported.

In an open-label study of sertraline (mean dose = 123 mg/d) for 14 young persons with social phobia, 36% of patients responded and 29% partially responded at 8 weeks.18 Adverse events generally were mild and included nausea, diarrhea, and headache. In a 12-week study, 12 pediatric patients with social phobia received citalopram, 10 to 40 mg/d, and eight 15-minute counseling sessions. At endpoint, clinicians rated 83% of patients as much improved or very much improved. The medication generally was well tolerated.19

Separation anxiety disorder

In a 4-week, double-blind crossover pilot study, researchers randomly assigned 15 children age 7 to 13 with separation anxiety disorder to clonazepam, up to 2 mg/d, or placebo.20 There was no significant difference in CGI-I score between clonazepam and placebo. Side effects—including drowsiness, irritability and “oppositional behavior”—were more frequent in patients treated with clonazepam.

 

 

Panic disorder

Only 2 open-label studies of SSRIs have been conducted in pediatric patients with panic disorder. The first evaluated the effectiveness and tolerability of fluoxetine, sertraline, or paroxetine over 6 months in 12 patients; 67% no longer met criteria for panic disorder at endpoint.21 In this study, benzodiazepines—including clonazepam and lorazepam—were used in 67% of patients at the start of SSRI treatment. The authors suggested this strategy may be clinically useful for patients with panic disorder.

In the second study, Fairbanks et al22 examined the use of fluoxetine for 6 to 9 weeks in 16 outpatients with mixed anxiety disorders who did not respond to psychotherapy. Patients age ≤12 were given 5 to 40 mg/d and those age ≥13 received 5 to 80 mg/d. Fluoxetine was associated with clinically significant improvement in 3 of the 5 patients who had panic disorder. Although overall fluoxetine was well tolerated, drowsiness, dyssomnia, decreased appetite, nausea, and abdominal pain were the most common side effects. Fluoxetine was not associated with suicidal ideation.

Mixed anxiety disorders

Most trials of pediatric anxiety have evaluated patients with “mixed anxiety disorders” because GAD, social phobia, and separation anxiety disorder are highly comorbid and share diagnostic features (Figure 1).9 An RCT of fluvoxamine, up to 300 mg/d, in 128 pediatric patients with ≥1 anxiety disorders found significant differences in CGI-I and endpoint Pediatric Anxiety Rating Scale (PARS) scores.23 Fluvoxamine was well tolerated but associated with increased motor activity and abdominal discomfort compared with placebo.

Two open-label trials of pediatric patients with mixed anxiety disorders suggested fluoxetine may be beneficial. Fairbanks et al22 documented clinical improvement in 10 of 10 patients with separation anxiety disorder, 8 of 10 with social phobia, 4 of 6 with specific phobia, 3 of 5 with panic disorder, and 1 of 7 with GAD. Birmaher et al24 evaluated 21 pediatric patients with overanxious disorder, social phobia, or separation anxiety who had not responded to psychotherapy and were not depressed; all patients received flexibly-dosed fluoxetine for up to 10 months. Fluoxetine was well tolerated and 81% of patients improved.

Finally, in a 12-week RCT of 74 patients age 7 to 17 with GAD, separation anxiety disorder, and/or social phobia, fluoxetine, 10 to 20 mg/d, was associated with improved scores on the Screen for Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders, PARS, CGI-I, CGI-S, and Children’s Global Assessment Scale.25 A follow-up open-label trial suggested that maintenance treatment is associated with sustained improvement.26

Figure 1: The pediatric anxiety disorders triad: Comorbidity is common


In the Child-Adolescent Multimodal Treatment Study, GAD was the most common disorder; however, GAD, SAD, and SoP were highly comorbid
GAD: generalized anxiety disorder; SAD: separation anxiety disorder; SoP: social phobia
Source: Reference 9

Anxiety disorders with ADHD

Anxiety disorders often are comorbid with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). An RCT of patients age 8 to 17 with ADHD and comorbid anxiety found that atomoxetine was associated with improved PARS scores and ADHD symptoms.27 The target dose was 1.2 mg/kg/d. Atomoxetine was well-tolerated; decreased appetite was the only significant adverse event in the treatment group vs placebo.

Multimodal treatment

Although this article reviews evidence for psychopharmacologic treatments, psychotherapeutic treatment of young patients with anxiety disorders has seen significant advances.28 Most psychotherapy studies have evaluated the efficacy of CBT,29-31 although there is evidence for psychodynamic therapy and interpersonal therapy.32 The American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry recommends a multimodal treatment approach because combination treatment appears to be more effective than monotherapy.8,28,33 Also, clinicians who treat pediatric patients who have an anxiety disorder should evaluate the family’s role on anxiety symptoms and may consider family therapy.

Treatment considerations

Evidence supports the efficacy of sertraline, citalopram, paroxetine, fluvoxamine, fluoxetine, and venlafaxine for treating children and adolescents with anxiety disorders (Figure 2).8,9,11,15,16,23,25 Some practitioners suggest using differing dosing strategies for pediatric anxiety disorders compared with those used to treat adults (Table).34 When considering SSRIs for children and adolescents, keep in mind the “black-box” warning regarding suicidality in these patients. Carefully monitor patients for treatment-emergent suicidality and routinely reassess for the presence and severity of suicidal ideation and suicide risk.

Figure 2: Number needed to treat for SSRIs and SNRIs in pediatric anxiety disorders


 

 

GAD: generalized anxiety disorder; RUPP: Research Unit on Pediatric Psychopharmacology; SAD: separation anxiety disorder; SNRI: serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor; SoP: social phobia; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitorTable

Practical dosing of SSRIs and SNRIs in pediatric patients with anxietya

MedicationInitial child dose (age <12; mg/d)Initial adolescent dose (age 12 to 17; mg/d)Target dose (mg/d)
Citalopram5 to 101020 to 40
Escitalopram2.5 to 55 to 1010 to 20
Fluoxetineb102020 to 40 (children),
40 to 60 (adolescents)
Paroxetineb5 to 101020
Sertralinec10 to 12.525150
Venlafaxine37.537.5150
aGeneralized anxiety disorder, social phobia, and separation anxiety disorder
bMay consider cytochrome P450 genotyping for 2D6, which may suggest an alternate dosing strategy
cSertraline is available in a liquid formulation (20 mg/mL)
SNRI: serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor; SSRI: selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor
Source: Adapted from reference 34

Related Resources

  • Connolly SD, Bernstein GA; Work Group on Quality Issues. Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(2):267-283.
  • Anxiety and Depression Association of America. www.adaa.org.
  • American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. www.aacap.org.

Drug Brand Names

  • Alprazolam • Xanax
  • Atomoxetine • Strattera
  • Buspirone • BuSpar
  • Citalopram • Celexa
  • Clonazepam • Klonopin
  • Fluoxetine • Prozac
  • Fluvoxamine • Luvox, Luvox CR
  • Lorazepam • Ativan
  • Paroxetine • Paxil, Paxil CR
  • Sertraline • Zoloft
  • Venlafaxine • Effexor, Effexor XR

Disclosures

Dr. Strawn has received research support from the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, Eli Lilly and Company, and Shire, and is an employee of the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH.

Dr. McReynolds was employed by Eli Lilly and Company from 1997 to 2005.

References

1. Beesdo K, Knappe S, Pine DS. Anxiety and anxiety disorders in children and adolescents: developmental issues and implications for DSM-V. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2009;32(3):483-524.

2. Beesdo K, Pine DS, Lieb R, et al. Incidence and risk patterns of anxiety and depressive disorders and categorization of generalized anxiety disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010;67(1):47-57.

3. Ialongo N, Edelsohn G, Werthamer-Larsson L, et al. The significance of self-reported anxious symptoms in first grade children: prediction to anxious symptoms and adaptive functioning in fifth grade. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1995;36(3):427-437.

4. Foley DL, Goldston DB, Costello EJ, et al. Proximal psychiatric risk factors for suicidality in youth: the Great Smoky Mountains Study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006;63(9):1017-1024.

5. Jacobson CM, Muehlenkamp JJ, Miller AL, et al. Psychiatric impairment among adolescents engaging in different types of deliberate self-harm. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2008;37(2):363-375.

6. Ialongo N, Edelsohn G, Werthamer-Larsson L, et al. The significance of self-reported anxious symptoms in first-grade children. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1994;22(4):441-455.

7. Pine DS, Cohen P, Gurley D, et al. The risk for early-adulthood anxiety and depressive disorders in adolescents with anxiety and depressive disorders. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998;55(1):56-64.

8. Rynn MA, Siqueland L, Rickels K. Placebo-controlled trial of sertraline in the treatment of children with generalized anxiety disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(12):2008-2014.

9. Walkup JT, Albano AM, Piacentini J, et al. Cognitive behavioral therapy, sertraline, or a combination in childhood anxiety. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(26):2753-2766.

10. Maslowsky J, Mogg K, Bradley BP, et al. A preliminary investigation of neural correlates of treatment in adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2010;20(2):105-111.

11. Rynn MA, Riddle MA, Yeung PP, et al. Efficacy and safety of extended-release venlafaxine in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder in children and adolescents: two placebo-controlled trials. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(2):290-300.

12. BuSpar [package insert] Princeton NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb; 2010.

13. Simeon JG, Ferguson HB. Alprazolam effects in children with anxiety disorders. Can J Psychiatry. 1987;32(7):570-574.

14. Simeon JG, Ferguson HB, Knott V, et al. Clinical, cognitive, and neurophysiological effects of alprazolam in children and adolescents with overanxious and avoidant disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1992;31(1):29-33.

15. Wagner KD, Berard R, Stein MB, et al. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of paroxetine in children and adolescents with social anxiety disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2004;61(11):1153-1162.

16. March JS, Entusah AR, Rynn M, et al. A randomized controlled trial of venlafaxine ER versus placebo in pediatric social anxiety disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 2007;62(10):1149-1154.

17. Beidel DC, Turner SM, Sallee FR, et al. SET-C versus fluoxetine in the treatment of childhood social phobia. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(12):1622-1632.

18. Compton SN, Grant PJ, Chrisman AK, et al. Sertraline in children and adolescents with social anxiety disorder: an open trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2001;40(5):564-571.

19. Chavira DA, Stein MB. Combined psychoeducation and treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for youth with generalized social anxiety disorder. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2002;12(1):47-54.

20. Graae F, Milner J, Rizzotto L, et al. Clonazepam in childhood anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1994;33(3):372-376.

21. Renaud J, Birmaher B, Wassick SC, et al. Use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for the treatment of childhood panic disorder: a pilot study. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 1999;9(2):73-83.

22. Fairbanks JM, Pine DS, Tancer NK, et al. Open fluoxetine treatment of mixed anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 1997;7(1):17-29.

23. The Research Unit on Pediatric Psychopharmacology Anxiety Study Group. Fluvoxamine for the treatment of anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(17):1279-1285.

24. Birmaher B, Waterman GS, Ryan N, et al. Fluoxetine for childhood anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1994;33(7):993-999.

25. Birmaher B, Axelson DA, Monk K, et al. Fluoxetine for the treatment of childhood anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2003;42(4):415-423.

26. Clark DB, Birmaher B, Axelson D, et al. Fluoxetine for the treatment of childhood anxiety disorders: open-label, long-term extension to a controlled trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2005;44(12):1263-1270.

27. Geller D, Donnelly C, Lopez F, et al. Atomoxetine treatment for pediatric patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with comorbid anxiety disorder. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(9):1119-1127.

28. Connolly SD, Bernstein GA. Work Group on Quality Issues. Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(2):267-283.

29. Kendall PC. Treating anxiety disorders in children: results of a randomized clinical trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1994;62(1):100-110.

30. Kendall PC, Flannery-Schroeder E, Panichelli-Mindel SM, et al. Therapy for youths with anxiety disorders: a second randomized clinical trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1997;65(3):366-380.

31. Reynolds S, Wilson C, Austin J, et al. Effects of psychotherapy for anxiety in children and adolescents: a meta-analytic review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2012;32(4):251-262.

32. Strawn JR, Wehry AM, DelBello MP, et al. Establishing the neurobiologic basis of treatment in children and adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder. Depress Anxiety. 2012;29(4):328-339.

33. Ginsburg GS, Kendall PC, Sakolsky D, et al. Remission after acute treatment in children and adolescents with anxiety disorders: findings from the CAMS. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2011;79(6):806-813.

34. Findling RL, Kowatch RA. How (not) to dose antidepressants and antipsychotics for children. Current Psychiatry. 2007;6(6):79-83.

References

1. Beesdo K, Knappe S, Pine DS. Anxiety and anxiety disorders in children and adolescents: developmental issues and implications for DSM-V. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 2009;32(3):483-524.

2. Beesdo K, Pine DS, Lieb R, et al. Incidence and risk patterns of anxiety and depressive disorders and categorization of generalized anxiety disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2010;67(1):47-57.

3. Ialongo N, Edelsohn G, Werthamer-Larsson L, et al. The significance of self-reported anxious symptoms in first grade children: prediction to anxious symptoms and adaptive functioning in fifth grade. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 1995;36(3):427-437.

4. Foley DL, Goldston DB, Costello EJ, et al. Proximal psychiatric risk factors for suicidality in youth: the Great Smoky Mountains Study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006;63(9):1017-1024.

5. Jacobson CM, Muehlenkamp JJ, Miller AL, et al. Psychiatric impairment among adolescents engaging in different types of deliberate self-harm. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2008;37(2):363-375.

6. Ialongo N, Edelsohn G, Werthamer-Larsson L, et al. The significance of self-reported anxious symptoms in first-grade children. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 1994;22(4):441-455.

7. Pine DS, Cohen P, Gurley D, et al. The risk for early-adulthood anxiety and depressive disorders in adolescents with anxiety and depressive disorders. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1998;55(1):56-64.

8. Rynn MA, Siqueland L, Rickels K. Placebo-controlled trial of sertraline in the treatment of children with generalized anxiety disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 2001;158(12):2008-2014.

9. Walkup JT, Albano AM, Piacentini J, et al. Cognitive behavioral therapy, sertraline, or a combination in childhood anxiety. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(26):2753-2766.

10. Maslowsky J, Mogg K, Bradley BP, et al. A preliminary investigation of neural correlates of treatment in adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2010;20(2):105-111.

11. Rynn MA, Riddle MA, Yeung PP, et al. Efficacy and safety of extended-release venlafaxine in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder in children and adolescents: two placebo-controlled trials. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(2):290-300.

12. BuSpar [package insert] Princeton NJ: Bristol-Myers Squibb; 2010.

13. Simeon JG, Ferguson HB. Alprazolam effects in children with anxiety disorders. Can J Psychiatry. 1987;32(7):570-574.

14. Simeon JG, Ferguson HB, Knott V, et al. Clinical, cognitive, and neurophysiological effects of alprazolam in children and adolescents with overanxious and avoidant disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1992;31(1):29-33.

15. Wagner KD, Berard R, Stein MB, et al. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of paroxetine in children and adolescents with social anxiety disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2004;61(11):1153-1162.

16. March JS, Entusah AR, Rynn M, et al. A randomized controlled trial of venlafaxine ER versus placebo in pediatric social anxiety disorder. Biol Psychiatry. 2007;62(10):1149-1154.

17. Beidel DC, Turner SM, Sallee FR, et al. SET-C versus fluoxetine in the treatment of childhood social phobia. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(12):1622-1632.

18. Compton SN, Grant PJ, Chrisman AK, et al. Sertraline in children and adolescents with social anxiety disorder: an open trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2001;40(5):564-571.

19. Chavira DA, Stein MB. Combined psychoeducation and treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for youth with generalized social anxiety disorder. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 2002;12(1):47-54.

20. Graae F, Milner J, Rizzotto L, et al. Clonazepam in childhood anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1994;33(3):372-376.

21. Renaud J, Birmaher B, Wassick SC, et al. Use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for the treatment of childhood panic disorder: a pilot study. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 1999;9(2):73-83.

22. Fairbanks JM, Pine DS, Tancer NK, et al. Open fluoxetine treatment of mixed anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol. 1997;7(1):17-29.

23. The Research Unit on Pediatric Psychopharmacology Anxiety Study Group. Fluvoxamine for the treatment of anxiety disorders in children and adolescents. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(17):1279-1285.

24. Birmaher B, Waterman GS, Ryan N, et al. Fluoxetine for childhood anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 1994;33(7):993-999.

25. Birmaher B, Axelson DA, Monk K, et al. Fluoxetine for the treatment of childhood anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2003;42(4):415-423.

26. Clark DB, Birmaher B, Axelson D, et al. Fluoxetine for the treatment of childhood anxiety disorders: open-label, long-term extension to a controlled trial. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2005;44(12):1263-1270.

27. Geller D, Donnelly C, Lopez F, et al. Atomoxetine treatment for pediatric patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with comorbid anxiety disorder. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(9):1119-1127.

28. Connolly SD, Bernstein GA. Work Group on Quality Issues. Practice parameter for the assessment and treatment of children and adolescents with anxiety disorders. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2007;46(2):267-283.

29. Kendall PC. Treating anxiety disorders in children: results of a randomized clinical trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1994;62(1):100-110.

30. Kendall PC, Flannery-Schroeder E, Panichelli-Mindel SM, et al. Therapy for youths with anxiety disorders: a second randomized clinical trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1997;65(3):366-380.

31. Reynolds S, Wilson C, Austin J, et al. Effects of psychotherapy for anxiety in children and adolescents: a meta-analytic review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2012;32(4):251-262.

32. Strawn JR, Wehry AM, DelBello MP, et al. Establishing the neurobiologic basis of treatment in children and adolescents with generalized anxiety disorder. Depress Anxiety. 2012;29(4):328-339.

33. Ginsburg GS, Kendall PC, Sakolsky D, et al. Remission after acute treatment in children and adolescents with anxiety disorders: findings from the CAMS. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2011;79(6):806-813.

34. Findling RL, Kowatch RA. How (not) to dose antidepressants and antipsychotics for children. Current Psychiatry. 2007;6(6):79-83.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(09)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 11(09)
Page Number
16-21
Page Number
16-21
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
An evidence-based approach to treating pediatric anxiety disorders
Display Headline
An evidence-based approach to treating pediatric anxiety disorders
Legacy Keywords
pediatric anxiety disorder; SSRIs; SNRIs; children; adolescents; psychotherapy
Legacy Keywords
pediatric anxiety disorder; SSRIs; SNRIs; children; adolescents; psychotherapy
Sections
Article Source

PURLs Copyright

Inside the Article

Article PDF Media