Search

Objectives: Pharmacotherapy of bipolar depression (BPD) is confronted with major clinical challenges, like limited evidence-based treatment options, regular cases of treatment resistance, and risk of treatment-emergent affective switches. Medical guidelines can support practitioners to make decisions based on current scientific evidence. The objective of this study is to evaluate to what extent recommendations of the 2019 German S3 guidelines "Diagnosis and Treatment of Bipolar Disorders" are reflected in clinical practice in inpatient treatment. Methods: We conducted a descriptive analysis of prescription numbers in 2,627 patients with BPD in a naturalistic inpatient setting analyzing data from the ongoing Bavarian multicenter drug safety project Pharmaco-Epidemiology and Vigilance (Pharmako-EpiVig) from the years 2014-2022. Results: Of the patients, 38% were not administered any drug explicitly recommended for treatment of BPD, that is, quetiapine, lamotrigine, carbamazepine, or olanzapine. Only 6% of the patients received monotherapy with one of those drugs. Of the patients, 34% were administered =4 psychotropic drugs simultaneously. Patients received 912 different therapy regimens of mono or combination therapy with mood stabilizers (MS), atypical antipsychotics (AAP), and antidepressants. Of the patients, 72% received an antidepressant and 6% without concomitant prescription of an AAP or MS. Prescription rates of venlafaxine (21% to 14%) and tricyclic antidepressants (9% to 6%) decreased significantly from the first (2014-2016) to the last (2020-2022) observed time period. Of the patients, 60% received an MS. Prescription rate of valproate (22% to 14%) decreased significantly, while lithium prescription increased significantly (29% to 35%). Of the patients, 71% were administered an AAP. Quetiapine was the most prescribed drug overall (43%). Only two patients were administered a combination of olanzapine and fluoxetine. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate a substantial gap between guideline recommendations and current clinical practice. The remarkable heterogeneity in treatment regimens, with no discernible dominant treatment approach, is in part a reflection of the complexity of bipolar disorder but also substantiates the need of comprehensive recommendations regarding combination therapies. Increase in lithium prescription is an encouraging development due to its unique efficacy in maintenance treatment. To improve the quality of clinical practice guideline implementation, more randomized controlled trials should be conducted in the future to prospectively investigate different implementation strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emotion dysregulation has long been considered a key symptom in multiple psychiatric disorders. Difficulties in emotion regulation have been associated with neural dysregulation in fronto-limbic circuits. Real-time fMRI-based neurofeedback (rt-fMRI-NFB) has become increasingly popular as a potential treatment for emotional dysregulation in psychiatric disorders, as it is able to directly target the impaired neural circuits. However, the clinical impact of these rt-fMRI-NFB protocols in psychiatric populations is still largely unknown. Here we provide a comprehensive overview of primary studies from 2010 to 2023 that used rt-fMRI-NFB to target emotion regulation. We assessed 41 out of 4001 original studies for methodological quality and risk of bias and synthesised concerning the frequency of significant rt-fMRI-NFB-related effects on the neural and behaviour level. Successful modulation of brain activity was reported in between 25 and 50 percent of study samples, while neural effects in clinical samples were more diverse than in healthy samples. Interestingly, the frequency of rt-fMRI-NFB-related behavioural improvement was over 75 percent in clinical samples, while healthy samples showed behavioural improvements between 0 and 25 percent. Concerning clinical subsamples, rt-fMRI-NFB-related behavioural improvement was observed in up to 100 percent of major depressive disorder (MDD) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) samples. Substance use samples showed behavioural benefits ranging between 50 and 75 percent. Neural effects appeared to be less frequent than behavioural improvements: most neural outcomes ranged between 25 and 50 percent for MDD and substance use and between 0 and 25 percent for PTSD. Using multiple individualised regions of interest (ROIs) for rt-fMRI-NFB training resulted in more frequent behavioural benefits than rt-fMRI-NFB solely based on the amygdala or the prefrontal cortex. While a significant improvement in behavioural outcomes was reported in most clinical studies, the study protocols were heterogeneous, which limits the current evaluation of rt-fMRI-NFB as a putative treatment for emotional dysregulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Germany, most individuals with alcohol dependence are recognized by the health care system and about 16% per year receive addiction-specific care. This paper aimed to analyze the prevalence and treatment utilization rate of people with alcohol dependence by type of addiction-specific care in the federal state of Bremen using routine and survey data. Methods: The number of individuals with alcohol dependence was estimated using data from the 2018 Epidemiological Survey of Substance Abuse (ESA). Furthermore, linked routine data of two statutory health insurances (SHIs), the German pension insurance (GPI), and the communal hospital group Gesundheit Nord - Bremen Hospital Group (GeNo), from 2016/2017, were analyzed. Based on SHI data, the administrative prevalence of various alcohol-related diagnoses according to the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10), in various treatment settings, was extrapolated to the total population of Bremen. Based on all routine data sources, treatment and care services for individuals with alcohol dependence were also extrapolated to Bremen's total population. Care services included outpatient addiction care visits and addiction-specific treatments, [i.e., qualified withdrawal treatment (QWT), outpatient pharmacotherapy as relapse prevention, and rehabilitation treatment]. Results: Of the survey-estimated 15,792 individuals with alcohol dependence in Bremen, 72.6% (n = 11,467) had a diagnosis documented with an ICD-10 code for alcohol dependence (F10.2) or withdrawal symptoms (F10.3-F10.4). One in ten individuals with alcohol dependence (n = 1,689) used one or more addiction-specific care services during the observation period. Specifically, 4.3% (n = 675) received outpatient addiction care, 4.7% (n = 736) initiated QWT, 0.8% (n = 133) received pharmacotherapy, and 3.9% (n = 614) underwent rehabilitation treatment. The share of seeking addiction-specific treatment after diagnosis was highest among younger and male patients. Conclusion: Although more than half of the individuals with alcohol dependence are documented in the health system, utilization rates of addiction-specific treatments are low. These low utilization rates suggest that there are existing barriers to transferring patients with alcohol dependence into addiction-specific care. Strengthening primary medical care provision in dealing with alcohol-related disorders and improving networking within the addiction support system appear to be particularly appropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]