Search

Aims: Norway and Sweden had different early pandemic responses that may have impacted mental health management. The aim was to assess the impact of the early COVID‐19 pandemic on mental health‐related care. Methods: We used national registries in Norway and Sweden (1 January 2018–31 December 2020) to define 2 cohorts: (i) general adult population; and (ii) mental health adult population. Interrupted times series regression analyses evaluated step and slope changes compared to prepandemic levels for monthly rates of medications (antidepressants, antipsychotics, anxiolytics, hypnotics/sedatives, lithium, opioid analgesics, psychostimulants), hospitalizations (for anxiety, bipolar, depressive/mood, eating and schizophrenia/delusional disorders) and specialist outpatient visits. Results: In Norway, immediate reductions occurred in the general population for medications (−12% antidepressants to −7% hypnotics/sedatives) except for antipsychotics; and hospitalizations (−33% anxiety disorders to −17% bipolar disorders). Increasing slope change occurred for all medications except psychostimulants (+1.1%/month hypnotics/sedatives to +1.7%/month antidepressants); and hospitalization for anxiety disorders (+5.5%/month), depressive/mood disorders (+1.7%/month) and schizophrenia/delusional disorders (+2%/month). In Sweden, immediate reductions occurred for antidepressants (−7%) and opioids (−10%) and depressive/mood disorder hospitalizations (−11%) only with increasing slope change in psychostimulant prescribing of (0.9%/month). In contrast to Norway, increasing slope changes occurred in specialist outpatient visits for depressive/mood disorders, eating disorders and schizophrenia/delusional disorders (+1.5, +1.9 and +2.3%/month, respectively). Similar changes occurred in the pre‐existing mental health cohorts. Conclusion: Differences in early COVID‐19 policy response may have contributed to differences in adult mental healthcare provision in Norway and Sweden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The extent of parathyroidectomy (PTX) recommendation in patients with lithium‐associated hyperparathyroidism (LAH) remains controversial. The primary objectives of this study were to analyze extent of surgery, complications, and long‐term outcomes. Methods: A population‐based study, including all primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) patients who underwent PTX in Sweden between 2008 and 2017. Data on exhibited lithium prescriptions, morbidity, surgical approach, and outcomes were collected from relevant national registers and the Scandinavian Quality Register of Thyroid, Parathyroid, and Adrenal Surgery. Patients with lithium exposure before PTX were defined as having LAH. Descriptive summary statistics and regression models were used to evaluate differences in comorbidities, surgical approach, and outcomes between LAH and PHPT not exposed to lithium (non‐LAH). Results: Lithium exposure was significantly more common among PHPT (n = 202, 2.3%) than in controls (n = 416, 0.5%); OR 5.0 (95% CI 4.2–5.9). The risk of LAH correlated to the length of lithium exposure. In the LAH‐group, the surgical procedures were more extensive and associated with a higher risk of postoperative bleeding, wound infections, persistent hypercalcemia, and hypocalcemia that remained after adjustment for the higher percentage of multiglandular disease. However, the cumulative risk of re‐admission for PHPT was similar the first years after PTX and primarily elevated for patients with >5 years duration of lithium exposure prior to surgery. Conclusions: The findings support the perception of LAH as a complex entity. We recommend a functionally oriented approach, aimed to obtain and maintain normocalcemia for as long as possible, minimizing the risk of permanent hypoparathyroidism, and accepting some risk of recurrence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Clinical guidelines recommend monitoring of creatinine and lithium throughout treatment with lithium. We here assessed the extent to which this occurs in healthcare in Sweden. Methods: This is an observational study of all adults with bipolar disorder starting lithium therapy in Stockholm, Sweden, during 2007–2018. The main outcome was monitoring of blood lithium and creatinine at therapy initiation and/or once annually. The secondary outcome was monitoring of calcium and thyroid‐stimulating hormone (TSH). Patients were followed up until therapy cessation, death, out‐migration, or to the end of 2018. Results: We identified 4428 adults with bipolar disorder who started lithium therapy and were followed up for up to 11 years. Their median age was 39 years, and 63% were women. The median duration on lithium therapy was 4.3 (IQR: 1.9–7.45) years, and the majority who discontinued therapy started another mood stabilizer soon after. Overall, 21% started lithium therapy without assessing the serum/plasma concentration of creatinine. The proportion of people who did not have both lithium and creatinine measured increased from 21% in the first year to 33% in the eleventh year. The proportion with annual testing for TSH or calcium was slightly lower. As few as 16% of patients had both lithium and creatinine tested once annually during their complete time on lithium. Conclusions: In a Swedish community sample, lithium and creatinine monitoring was inconsistent with guideline recommendations that call for measurement of annual biomarker levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lithium is the best documented maintenance treatment in bipolar disorder, but its use varies considerably across and within countries. It is not known whether regional differences in lithium prescription rates translate to differing regional outcomes. Aims: To estimate associations between county specific lithium prescription rates and county specific recurrence odds of bipolar disorder in Sweden. Method: Data from 14,616 patients with bipolar I disorder, bipolar II disorder, or bipolar disorder not otherwise specified were extracted from the Swedish national quality assurance register for bipolar disorders (BipoläR). Lithium prescription frequencies were calculated for 21 counties. Logistic regression analyses were run adjusted for confounders, with any type of recurrence as primary outcome, and incident elated and depressive episodes as secondary outcomes. Subsets of patients with bipolar I, II and not otherwise specified disorder were also analysed separately. Results: Lithium prescription rates for populations with all bipolar subtypes ranged across counties from 37.7 to 84.9% (mean 52.4%). Higher regional prescription rates were significantly associated with lower rate of any type of recurrence. The association was stronger when bipolar I disorder was analysed separately. Conclusions: The advantages for lithium use long acknowledged for bipolar I disorder are also seen for the rest of the bipolar spectrum. Results suggest that population level outcomes of bipolar disorder could be improved by increasing the number of patients using lithium. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]