Search

To assess the association between mood state and the prevalence and the severity of lithium adverse drug reactions (ADRs).A 26-year follow-up study was conducted among patients >= 18 years treated at the outpatient lithium clinic of the University Medical Center Groningen, The Netherlands, between November 1973 and December 2000. At each monthly scheduled visit, patients were questioned by a research nurse in a standardized manner about the presence and the severity of nine specific ADRs that frequently occur as a consequence of lithium treatment and that can be identified by the patients themselves. In addition, lithium serum level was measured and mood state was rated at each visit.A total of 186 patients participated and the median duration of follow-up was 5.7 years (interquartile range 2.2-11.8 years). We observed an increased prevalence and severity of ADRs with increased lithium serum level (p Both physicians and researchers need to be aware that lithium serum level and mood state are independently associated with patient reporting and severity scoring of ADRs, which may complicate objective assessment of ADRs.

Item does not contain fulltext OBJECTIVE: Lithium is a drug with a narrow therapeutic window. Concomitantly used medication is a potentially influencing factor of lithium serum concentrations. We conducted a multicentre retrospective case-control study with the aim of investigating lithium-related drug interactions as determinants of elevated lithium serum levels in daily clinical practice. METHODS: Cases were patients with an increase of at least 50% in lithium serum concentrations resulting in an elevated lithium serum level of at least 1.3 mmol/L, and who were not suspected of a suicide attempt. Controls were patients who showed stable lithium serum levels within the therapeutic range. Use and start of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, diuretics, renin-angiotensin inhibitors, theophyllin and antibiotics were investigated as potential determinants of the elevated lithium serum levels. Irregularity in lithium dispensing pattern, change in lithium dosing regimen, age, gender, prescribing physician and laboratory parameters were investigated as potential confounders. RESULTS: We included 51 cases and 51 controls in our study. Five (9.8%) controls and 15 (29.4%) cases used potentially interacting co-medication [OR of 3.83 (95%CI 1.28-11.48)]. Start of potentially interacting co-medication was observed in eight (15.7%) cases and in zero (0%) controls resulting in an OR of 20.13 (95% CI 1.13-359). After adjustment for co-medication, irregularity in lithium dispensing pattern, change in lithium dosing regimen, and age, the statistically significant association was lost. We report an OR of 2.70 (95% CI 0.78-9.31) for use of concomitant medication, with a large contribution of antibiotic agents, and an OR of 3.14 (95% CI 1.15-8.61) for irregularity in lithium dispensing pattern. CONCLUSION: Use of co-medication, especially antibiotics, tends to be associated with elevated lithium serum levels.

Objectives: Safety monitoring is an important aspect of bipolar disorder treatment, as mood-stabilising medications have potentially serious side effects, some of which may also aggravate existing medical comorbidities. This paper sets out the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) guidelines for the safety monitoring of widely used agents in the treatment of bipolar disorder. These guidelines aim to provide recommendations that take into consideration the balance between safety and cost-effectiveness, to highlight iatrogenic and preventive clinical issues, and to facilitate the broad implementation of therapeutic safety monitoring as a standard component of treatment for bipolar disorder. Methods: These guidelines were developed by an ISBD workgroup, headed by the senior author (MB), through an iterative process of serial consensus-based revisions. After this, feedback from a multidisciplinary group of health professionals on the applicability of these guidelines was sought to develop the final recommendations. Results: General safety monitoring recommendations for all bipolar disorder patients receiving treatment and specific monitoring recommendations for individual agents are outlined. Conclusions: These guidelines are derived from evolving and often indirect data, with minimal empirical cost-effectiveness data available to provide guidance. These guidelines will therefore need to be modified to adapt to different clinical settings and health resources. Clinical acumen and vigilance remain critical ingredients for safe treatment practice.