Mental Health

PARIS – Adults who are easily angered may have experienced trauma during childhood, according to new findings that investigators believe warrant routine trauma screening for patents with depression and/or anxiety.

Investigators examined data on more than 2,250 individuals who were asked about trauma during childhood and a subsequent tendency toward anger or angry outbursts 4 years later.

Results showed that emotional neglect during childhood was associated with approximately a 40% increased likelihood of subsequent anger, while psychological abuse was linked to a 30% increased likelihood.

Childhood physical abuse was also significantly associated with anger in adults, with an increased risk of approximately 40%. The researchers found no link between childhood sexual abuse and adult anger.

“We can’t definitively say that the trauma causes the anger, but the link is clear,” study investigator Nienke De Bles, PhD student, department of psychiatry, Leiden (the Netherlands) University Medical Center, said in a news release.

“Being easily angered can have several consequences,” she continued. “It can make personal interactions more difficult, and it can have consequences for your mental health and well-being, but people who get angry easily also have a greater tendency to discontinue psychiatric treatment, so this anger may mean that it reduces their chances of a better life,” she added.

Ms. De Bles believes that “it should be standard practice to ask depression and anxiety sufferers about anger and past trauma, even if the patient is not exhibiting current anger.”

The findings were presented at the European Psychiatric Association 2023 Congress.
 

A ‘red flag’ for abuse

“Psychiatric treatments for past trauma may differ from treatments for depression, so psychiatrists need to try to understand the cause so that they can offer the correct treatment to each patient,” said Ms. De Bles.

Ms. De Bles noted that childhood trauma has many negative consequences later in life and that it is associated with a higher prevalence of adult depression and anxiety.

“There are several potential mechanisms for psychopathology in the context of childhood trauma, and emotion regulation seems to be one of the key mechanisms,” she said.

The researchers previously found that anger was highly prevalent among patients with affective disorders. It was present in 30% of those with current anxiety or depressive disorder and in 40% of those with comorbid depression and anxiety with a tendency toward anger versus 5% of healthy control persons.

Other studies have shown that anger is associated with poor treatment outcomes and dropping out of treatment.

To further investigate the link between childhood trauma and anger in adulthood, the researchers examined data on 2,271 participants in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA).

Childhood trauma was assessed at baseline using the semistructured Childhood Trauma Interview. Anger was measured at a 4-year follow-up using the Spielberger Trait Anger Subscale, the Anger Attacks Questionnaire, and the borderline and antisocial subscales of the Personality Disorder Questionnaire 4 to identify cluster B personality traits.

Results showed that emotional neglect during childhood was significantly associated with trait anger in adulthood, at an adjusted odds ratio of 1.42 (P < .001), anger attacks (OR, 1.35; P = .004), and borderline (OR, 1.76; P < .001) and antisocial (OR, 1.88; P = .001) personality traits.

Childhood psychological abuse was also significantly associated with later trait anger (OR, 1.28; P = .002), anger attacks (OR, 1.31; P = .024), and borderline (OR, 1.77; P < .001) and antisocial (OR, 1.69; P = .011) traits.

There was also a significant association between childhood psychical abuse and trait anger in adulthood (OR, 1.37; P < .001), anger attacks (OR, 1.48; P = .004), and borderline (OR, 1.71; P < .001) and antisocial (OR, 1.98; P = .002) traits.

There was no significant association between sexual abuse experienced in childhood and later anger or personality traits.

Ms. De Bles said the findings suggest “there is indeed a relationship between childhood trauma and anger in adulthood, and this is something that might be interesting for clinicians, as anger could be a red flag for a history of childhood trauma.”

She said in an interview that anger is a “very normal human emotion” but that it has not been as widely studied as sadness and anxiety.

She suggested that future research could examine the use of trauma-based therapies for patients with a history of childhood trauma and anger.
 

Overlooked, neglected

Commenting on the findings, Nur Hani Zainal, PhD, department of healthcare policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, said the findings are “very consistent with the current biopsychosocial models in psychiatry and clinical psychology.”

Dr. Zainal, who was coauthor of a recent study that showed that anger appears to mediate the relationship between childhood trauma and adult psychopathology, said the current study offers a “good, incremental contribution” to the literature.

She noted there are “good uses” for the emotion of anger, as “sometimes we need anger to set healthy boundaries for ourselves.” However, she agreed that, as an aspect of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder, it is often “overlooked.”

Dr. Zainal said that the findings reinforce the importance of thoroughly evaluating adult patients’ experiences during childhood.

Julian Beezhold, MD, secretary general of the EPA and a consultant psychiatrist with the Norwich (England) Medical School, University of East Anglia, commented in the release that anger is a “somewhat neglected symptom.

“The findings are in line with what we see in day-to-day clinical practice and will hopefully help increase the awareness of the importance of both anger and associated childhood trauma.”

The infrastructure for the NESDA study is funded through the Geestkracht program of the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and financial contributions by participating universities and mental health care organizations. The authors disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

PARIS – Adults who are easily angered may have experienced trauma during childhood, according to new findings that investigators believe warrant routine trauma screening for patents with depression and/or anxiety.

Investigators examined data on more than 2,250 individuals who were asked about trauma during childhood and a subsequent tendency toward anger or angry outbursts 4 years later.

Results showed that emotional neglect during childhood was associated with approximately a 40% increased likelihood of subsequent anger, while psychological abuse was linked to a 30% increased likelihood.

Childhood physical abuse was also significantly associated with anger in adults, with an increased risk of approximately 40%. The researchers found no link between childhood sexual abuse and adult anger.

“We can’t definitively say that the trauma causes the anger, but the link is clear,” study investigator Nienke De Bles, PhD student, department of psychiatry, Leiden (the Netherlands) University Medical Center, said in a news release.

“Being easily angered can have several consequences,” she continued. “It can make personal interactions more difficult, and it can have consequences for your mental health and well-being, but people who get angry easily also have a greater tendency to discontinue psychiatric treatment, so this anger may mean that it reduces their chances of a better life,” she added.

Ms. De Bles believes that “it should be standard practice to ask depression and anxiety sufferers about anger and past trauma, even if the patient is not exhibiting current anger.”

The findings were presented at the European Psychiatric Association 2023 Congress.
 

A ‘red flag’ for abuse

“Psychiatric treatments for past trauma may differ from treatments for depression, so psychiatrists need to try to understand the cause so that they can offer the correct treatment to each patient,” said Ms. De Bles.

Ms. De Bles noted that childhood trauma has many negative consequences later in life and that it is associated with a higher prevalence of adult depression and anxiety.

“There are several potential mechanisms for psychopathology in the context of childhood trauma, and emotion regulation seems to be one of the key mechanisms,” she said.

The researchers previously found that anger was highly prevalent among patients with affective disorders. It was present in 30% of those with current anxiety or depressive disorder and in 40% of those with comorbid depression and anxiety with a tendency toward anger versus 5% of healthy control persons.

Other studies have shown that anger is associated with poor treatment outcomes and dropping out of treatment.

To further investigate the link between childhood trauma and anger in adulthood, the researchers examined data on 2,271 participants in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA).

Childhood trauma was assessed at baseline using the semistructured Childhood Trauma Interview. Anger was measured at a 4-year follow-up using the Spielberger Trait Anger Subscale, the Anger Attacks Questionnaire, and the borderline and antisocial subscales of the Personality Disorder Questionnaire 4 to identify cluster B personality traits.

Results showed that emotional neglect during childhood was significantly associated with trait anger in adulthood, at an adjusted odds ratio of 1.42 (P < .001), anger attacks (OR, 1.35; P = .004), and borderline (OR, 1.76; P < .001) and antisocial (OR, 1.88; P = .001) personality traits.

Childhood psychological abuse was also significantly associated with later trait anger (OR, 1.28; P = .002), anger attacks (OR, 1.31; P = .024), and borderline (OR, 1.77; P < .001) and antisocial (OR, 1.69; P = .011) traits.

There was also a significant association between childhood psychical abuse and trait anger in adulthood (OR, 1.37; P < .001), anger attacks (OR, 1.48; P = .004), and borderline (OR, 1.71; P < .001) and antisocial (OR, 1.98; P = .002) traits.

There was no significant association between sexual abuse experienced in childhood and later anger or personality traits.

Ms. De Bles said the findings suggest “there is indeed a relationship between childhood trauma and anger in adulthood, and this is something that might be interesting for clinicians, as anger could be a red flag for a history of childhood trauma.”

She said in an interview that anger is a “very normal human emotion” but that it has not been as widely studied as sadness and anxiety.

She suggested that future research could examine the use of trauma-based therapies for patients with a history of childhood trauma and anger.
 

Overlooked, neglected

Commenting on the findings, Nur Hani Zainal, PhD, department of healthcare policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, said the findings are “very consistent with the current biopsychosocial models in psychiatry and clinical psychology.”

Dr. Zainal, who was coauthor of a recent study that showed that anger appears to mediate the relationship between childhood trauma and adult psychopathology, said the current study offers a “good, incremental contribution” to the literature.

She noted there are “good uses” for the emotion of anger, as “sometimes we need anger to set healthy boundaries for ourselves.” However, she agreed that, as an aspect of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder, it is often “overlooked.”

Dr. Zainal said that the findings reinforce the importance of thoroughly evaluating adult patients’ experiences during childhood.

Julian Beezhold, MD, secretary general of the EPA and a consultant psychiatrist with the Norwich (England) Medical School, University of East Anglia, commented in the release that anger is a “somewhat neglected symptom.

“The findings are in line with what we see in day-to-day clinical practice and will hopefully help increase the awareness of the importance of both anger and associated childhood trauma.”

The infrastructure for the NESDA study is funded through the Geestkracht program of the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and financial contributions by participating universities and mental health care organizations. The authors disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

PARIS – Adults who are easily angered may have experienced trauma during childhood, according to new findings that investigators believe warrant routine trauma screening for patents with depression and/or anxiety.

Investigators examined data on more than 2,250 individuals who were asked about trauma during childhood and a subsequent tendency toward anger or angry outbursts 4 years later.

Results showed that emotional neglect during childhood was associated with approximately a 40% increased likelihood of subsequent anger, while psychological abuse was linked to a 30% increased likelihood.

Childhood physical abuse was also significantly associated with anger in adults, with an increased risk of approximately 40%. The researchers found no link between childhood sexual abuse and adult anger.

“We can’t definitively say that the trauma causes the anger, but the link is clear,” study investigator Nienke De Bles, PhD student, department of psychiatry, Leiden (the Netherlands) University Medical Center, said in a news release.

“Being easily angered can have several consequences,” she continued. “It can make personal interactions more difficult, and it can have consequences for your mental health and well-being, but people who get angry easily also have a greater tendency to discontinue psychiatric treatment, so this anger may mean that it reduces their chances of a better life,” she added.

Ms. De Bles believes that “it should be standard practice to ask depression and anxiety sufferers about anger and past trauma, even if the patient is not exhibiting current anger.”

The findings were presented at the European Psychiatric Association 2023 Congress.
 

A ‘red flag’ for abuse

“Psychiatric treatments for past trauma may differ from treatments for depression, so psychiatrists need to try to understand the cause so that they can offer the correct treatment to each patient,” said Ms. De Bles.

Ms. De Bles noted that childhood trauma has many negative consequences later in life and that it is associated with a higher prevalence of adult depression and anxiety.

“There are several potential mechanisms for psychopathology in the context of childhood trauma, and emotion regulation seems to be one of the key mechanisms,” she said.

The researchers previously found that anger was highly prevalent among patients with affective disorders. It was present in 30% of those with current anxiety or depressive disorder and in 40% of those with comorbid depression and anxiety with a tendency toward anger versus 5% of healthy control persons.

Other studies have shown that anger is associated with poor treatment outcomes and dropping out of treatment.

To further investigate the link between childhood trauma and anger in adulthood, the researchers examined data on 2,271 participants in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety (NESDA).

Childhood trauma was assessed at baseline using the semistructured Childhood Trauma Interview. Anger was measured at a 4-year follow-up using the Spielberger Trait Anger Subscale, the Anger Attacks Questionnaire, and the borderline and antisocial subscales of the Personality Disorder Questionnaire 4 to identify cluster B personality traits.

Results showed that emotional neglect during childhood was significantly associated with trait anger in adulthood, at an adjusted odds ratio of 1.42 (P < .001), anger attacks (OR, 1.35; P = .004), and borderline (OR, 1.76; P < .001) and antisocial (OR, 1.88; P = .001) personality traits.

Childhood psychological abuse was also significantly associated with later trait anger (OR, 1.28; P = .002), anger attacks (OR, 1.31; P = .024), and borderline (OR, 1.77; P < .001) and antisocial (OR, 1.69; P = .011) traits.

There was also a significant association between childhood psychical abuse and trait anger in adulthood (OR, 1.37; P < .001), anger attacks (OR, 1.48; P = .004), and borderline (OR, 1.71; P < .001) and antisocial (OR, 1.98; P = .002) traits.

There was no significant association between sexual abuse experienced in childhood and later anger or personality traits.

Ms. De Bles said the findings suggest “there is indeed a relationship between childhood trauma and anger in adulthood, and this is something that might be interesting for clinicians, as anger could be a red flag for a history of childhood trauma.”

She said in an interview that anger is a “very normal human emotion” but that it has not been as widely studied as sadness and anxiety.

She suggested that future research could examine the use of trauma-based therapies for patients with a history of childhood trauma and anger.
 

Overlooked, neglected

Commenting on the findings, Nur Hani Zainal, PhD, department of healthcare policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, said the findings are “very consistent with the current biopsychosocial models in psychiatry and clinical psychology.”

Dr. Zainal, who was coauthor of a recent study that showed that anger appears to mediate the relationship between childhood trauma and adult psychopathology, said the current study offers a “good, incremental contribution” to the literature.

She noted there are “good uses” for the emotion of anger, as “sometimes we need anger to set healthy boundaries for ourselves.” However, she agreed that, as an aspect of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder, it is often “overlooked.”

Dr. Zainal said that the findings reinforce the importance of thoroughly evaluating adult patients’ experiences during childhood.

Julian Beezhold, MD, secretary general of the EPA and a consultant psychiatrist with the Norwich (England) Medical School, University of East Anglia, commented in the release that anger is a “somewhat neglected symptom.

“The findings are in line with what we see in day-to-day clinical practice and will hopefully help increase the awareness of the importance of both anger and associated childhood trauma.”

The infrastructure for the NESDA study is funded through the Geestkracht program of the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and financial contributions by participating universities and mental health care organizations. The authors disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

THE CASE

Janice M* presented to the emergency department (ED) with worsening slurred speech. The 55-year-old patient’s history was significant for diabetes; hypertension; depression; sleep apnea; multiple transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) thought to be stress related; and left lower-extremity weakness secondary to prior infarct. Ms. M had been to the hospital multiple times in the previous 2 to 3 years for similar symptoms. Her most recent visit to the ED had been 2 months earlier.

In the ED, the patient’s NIH stroke score was 1 for the presence of dysarthria, and a code for emergency stroke management was initiated. Ms. M was alert and oriented x 3, with no focal motor or sensory deficits noted. Computed tomography (CT) and CT angiography were negative for any acute abnormality. Throughout the course of the ED visit, her NIH score improved to 0. Ms. M exhibited staccato/stuttering speech, but it was believed that this would likely improve over the next few days.

According to the hospital neurologist, the ED work-up suggested either a TIA, stress-induced psychiatric speech disorder, or conversion disorder. The patient was discharged home in stable condition and was asked to follow up with the outpatient neurologist in 1 week.

Ms. M was seen approximately 2 weeks later in the outpatient neurology stroke ­clinic. Her symptoms had resolved, and she did not report any new or worsening symptoms. An outpatient stroke work-up was initiated, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain, echocardiography, and measurement of low-density lipoprotein and hemoglobin A1C; all results were unremarkable. Given the timeline for symptom improvement and results of the work-up, the patient was given a diagnosis of conversion disorder. Ms. M was encouraged to follow up with her primary care physician (PCP) for further medical management.

● How would you proceed with this patient?

* The patient’s name has been changed to protect her identity.

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, text revision, conversion disorder (also known as functional neurological symptom disorder) is characterized as a somatic symptom and related disorder.¹ The prominent feature shared among disorders in this category is the presence of somatic symptoms that are associated with distress and impairment.

In conversion disorder, the focus is on symptoms that are neurologic in nature but are not due to underlying neurologic disease and are incongruent with typical patterns of presentation for any neurologic condition. Patients with conversion disorder may present with motor symptoms (eg, weakness, paralysis, tremor, dystonia), altered sensory or cognitive function, seizure-like symptoms, alterations in speech, or changes in swallowing.^1,2

For a diagnosis of conversion disorder, the following criteria must be met¹:

• The patient has 1 or more symptoms of altered voluntary motor or sensory function.
• Symptom presentation is incongruent with recognized neurologic or medical disease or conditions.
• Symptoms are not better explained by another medical or mental health condition.
• There is significant distress or impairment in functioning due to symptoms or the deficit.

The etiology of conversion disorder has not been firmly established. While the literature suggests that psychological stressors play a role,^3,4 an effort also has been made to better understand the underlying neural and biological basis. Specifically, studies have utilized brain imaging to explore brain pathways and mechanisms that could account for symptom presentation.^5,6

Prevalence rates for conversion disorder vary depending on the population studied. While it is estimated that 5% of patients in a general hospital setting meet full criteria for conversion disorder,⁷ higher rates may exist in specialty settings; 1 study found that 30% of patients in a neurology specialty clinic exhibited symptoms that were medically unexplained.⁸

Continue to: In primary care...

One study indicated that physicians identified medically unexplained symptoms as the main presenting problem for nearly 20% of patients in a primary care setting.

In primary care, prevalence of conversion disorder can be difficult to pinpoint; however, 1 study indicated that physicians identified medically unexplained symptoms as the main presenting problem for nearly 20% of patients in a primary care setting.⁹ Therefore, it is important for family physicians (FPs) to be familiar with the assessment and treatment of conversion disorder (and other disorders in which medically unexplained symptoms may be at the core of the patient presentation).

The differential: Neurologic and psychiatric conditions

Patients with conversion disorder may present with a variety of neurologic symptoms that can mimic those of organic disease. This can pose a diagnostic challenge, increase the chance of misdiagnosis, and delay treatment.

Motor symptoms may include paralysis, gait disturbance, dysphagia, or aphasia. Patients also may have sensory symptoms, such as blindness, deafness, or anesthesia.^10,11 As a result, it is important to rule out both urgent neurologic presentations, such as TIA, acute stroke, and brain tumor, and other chronic neurologic conditions, including multiple sclerosis, myasthenia gravis, and epilepsy.^11,12

Multiple sclerosis will demonstrate characteristic lesions on MRI that differentiate it from conversion disorder.

Myasthenia gravis is distinguished by positive findings on autoantibodies testing and on electrophysiologic studies.

Continue to: Epilepsy

Epilepsy. Patients with conversion disorder may present with unresponsiveness and abnormal movements, such as generalized limb shaking and hip thrusting, that mimic an epileptic seizure. In contrast to epileptic seizures, psychogenic nonepileptic seizures may last longer, symptoms may wax and wane, and patients generally do not have bowel or bladder incontinence or sustain injury as they would during an actual seizure.¹²

There are several psychiatric/­psychosocial conditions that also should be considered in the differential diagnosis of conversion disorder.

Somatic symptom disorder, like conversion disorder, produces somatic symptoms that can cause significant distress for patients. The difference in the 2 conditions is that symptoms of somatic symptom disorder may be compatible with a recognized neurologic or general medical condition, whereas in conversion disorder, the symptoms are not consistent with a recognized disease.^1,12

Factitious disorder, similar to conversion disorder, can involve neurologic symptoms that are not attributed to disease. However, patients with factitious disorder deliberately simulate symptoms to receive medical care. A thorough clinical interview and physical exam can help to distinguish conversion disorder from factitious disorder.

Malingering is not a psychiatric condition but a behavior that involves intentionally feigning symptoms for the purpose of personal or financial gain. There is no evidence that patients with conversion disorder simulate their symptoms.^12,13

Continue to: Negative results and positive signs point to the Dx

Negative results and positive signs point to the Dx

Conversion disorder is not a diagnosis of exclusion. Diagnosis requires detailed history taking and a thorough neurologic exam. Laboratory testing and neuroimaging are also important, and results will have to be negative to support the diagnosis.

Conversion disorder is not a diagnosis of exclusion; diagnosis requires detailed history taking and a thorough neurologic exam.

Neurologic deficits with conversion disorder do not follow a known neurologic insult.¹⁴ There are many tests that can be used to distinguish functional symptoms vs organic symptoms. Two of the most well-known tests are the Hoover sign and the abductor sign, which will be positive in conversion disorder. Both can be performed easily in an outpatient setting.

The Hoover sign is considered positive when there is weakness of voluntary hip extension in the presence of normal involuntary hip extension during contralateral hip flexion against resistance. According to a meta-­analysis of multiple studies of patients with conversion disorder, the overall estimated sensitivity of this test is 94% and the specificity, 99%.¹⁵

The abductor sign follows the same principle as the Hoover sign: When the patient abducts the nonparetic leg, both the nonparetic and “paretic” leg are strong. When the patient abducts just the “paretic” leg, both legs become weak.¹⁶

Other symptom evaluations. For patients who have functional seizures, video electroencephalography is helpful to distinguish functional seizures from “true” seizures.^17,18 In conversion disorder, functional dysarthria normally resembles a stutter or speech that is extremely slow with long hesitations that are hard to interrupt.¹⁸ Dysphonia and functional dysphagia are also very common functional symptoms. Usually after extensive work-up, no organic cause of the patient’s symptoms is ever found.¹⁸

Continue to: Treatment requires an integrated team approach

Treatment for conversion disorder can be difficult due to the complex and not fully understood etiology of the condition. Due to its multifaceted nature, an integrated team approach can be beneficial at each stage, including assessment and intervention.

Explain the diagnosis clearly. An essential initial step in the treatment of conversion disorder is careful explanation of the diagnosis. Clear explanation of the terminology and presentation of conversion disorder may prevent the patient from misinterpreting their diagnosis as a suggestion that they are feigning or malingering symptoms or feeling that their symptoms or concerns are being dismissed.² Understanding the condition can help improve the likelihood of the patient accepting the treatment plan and help decrease the likelihood of unnecessary testing, health care visits, and consultations. Developing a strong rapport with the patient is key when explaining the diagnosis.

Recommend cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). In a meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials, CBT significantly reduced somatic, anxious, and depressive symptoms and improved physical functioning in patients with somatoform disorders and medically unexplained symptoms.¹⁹ Another study, utilizing a case series, demonstrated significant improvement in social, emotional, and behavioral functioning in children and adolescents with functional neurologic symptoms (conversion disorder) post–CBT intervention.²⁰

Given that research supports CBT’s effectiveness in the management of conversion disorder, it is beneficial to engage a behavioral health professional as a part of the treatment team to focus on factors such as stress management, development of coping skills, and treatment of underlying psychiatric conditions.

Consider these other options. The addition of medication management can be considered for patients with comorbid psychiatric disorders. Evidence suggests that physical therapy is helpful in the treatment of motor and gait dysfunction seen in conversion disorder.^21,22 The role of hypnosis in the management of conversion disorder has also been studied, but more randomized clinical trials are needed to further explore this treatment.^2,23,24

Continue to: The FP's role in coordination of care

The FP’s role in coordination of care

Conversion disorder can be challenging to diagnose and often involves a multidisciplinary approach. Patients with conversion disorder may see multiple clinicians as they undergo evaluation for their symptoms, but they usually are referred back to their PCP for management and coordination of care. Thus, the FP’s understanding of how the condition is diagnosed and appropriately managed is beneficial.

The prognosis of conversion disorder is associated with symptom duration; thus, consultation between FPs and mental health providers is essential.

Open and effective communication among all members of the health care team can ensure consistency in treatment, a strong patient–provider relationship, favorable prognosis, and prevention of symptom relapse. FPs, by establishing a good rapport with patients, can help them understand the condition and the mind-body connection. Once other diagnoses have been ruled out, the FP can provide reassurance to patients and minimize further diagnostic testing.

The prognosis of conversion disorder is associated with symptom duration²⁵; thus, consultation between FPs and mental health providers is essential. The FP also can be integral in the recognition of psychiatric comorbidities, such as anxiety and depression, helping to ensure that these conditions also are treated appropriately.^25,26

THE CASE

Ms. M was referred to a neuropsychologist for further assessment, and the diagnosis of conversion disorder was confirmed. She was then referred to a family medicine behavioral health psychologist for CBT. The initial consult indicated that psychological stressors were contributing to symptoms, and Ms. M was diagnosed with depression and anxiety as well as conversion disorder.

Treatment started with patient education. The treatment framework was carefully explained to Ms. M, with a focus on identifying possible symptom triggers, helping her build a more effective stress response, increasing skills to more effectively manage stressors, and managing underlying psychiatric disorders (ie, depression, anxiety).

Ms. M continued regular visits with the family medicine behavioral health psychologist for CBT and followed up with her PCP as needed to manage chronic health conditions and stroke risk factors. The patient was able to implement skills discussed in treatment sessions, including identifying triggers and implementing coping skills (eg, managing negative thoughts that contribute to symptoms, setting boundaries) to manage stressors.

Her depressive and anxious symptoms improved, as indicated by symptom measurement tools and self-report. The frequency and severity of episodes of slurred speech and muscle weakness decreased, and the patient reported only 1 ED visit related to speech difficulties in the 2 years while following up with the behavioral health psychologist.

CORRESPONDENCE
Kristen J. Alston, PhD, University of Mississippi Medical Center, 2400 North State Street, Jackson, MS 39216; [email protected]

THE CASE

Janice M* presented to the emergency department (ED) with worsening slurred speech. The 55-year-old patient’s history was significant for diabetes; hypertension; depression; sleep apnea; multiple transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) thought to be stress related; and left lower-extremity weakness secondary to prior infarct. Ms. M had been to the hospital multiple times in the previous 2 to 3 years for similar symptoms. Her most recent visit to the ED had been 2 months earlier.

In the ED, the patient’s NIH stroke score was 1 for the presence of dysarthria, and a code for emergency stroke management was initiated. Ms. M was alert and oriented x 3, with no focal motor or sensory deficits noted. Computed tomography (CT) and CT angiography were negative for any acute abnormality. Throughout the course of the ED visit, her NIH score improved to 0. Ms. M exhibited staccato/stuttering speech, but it was believed that this would likely improve over the next few days.

According to the hospital neurologist, the ED work-up suggested either a TIA, stress-induced psychiatric speech disorder, or conversion disorder. The patient was discharged home in stable condition and was asked to follow up with the outpatient neurologist in 1 week.

Ms. M was seen approximately 2 weeks later in the outpatient neurology stroke ­clinic. Her symptoms had resolved, and she did not report any new or worsening symptoms. An outpatient stroke work-up was initiated, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain, echocardiography, and measurement of low-density lipoprotein and hemoglobin A1C; all results were unremarkable. Given the timeline for symptom improvement and results of the work-up, the patient was given a diagnosis of conversion disorder. Ms. M was encouraged to follow up with her primary care physician (PCP) for further medical management.

● How would you proceed with this patient?

* The patient’s name has been changed to protect her identity.

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, text revision, conversion disorder (also known as functional neurological symptom disorder) is characterized as a somatic symptom and related disorder.¹ The prominent feature shared among disorders in this category is the presence of somatic symptoms that are associated with distress and impairment.

In conversion disorder, the focus is on symptoms that are neurologic in nature but are not due to underlying neurologic disease and are incongruent with typical patterns of presentation for any neurologic condition. Patients with conversion disorder may present with motor symptoms (eg, weakness, paralysis, tremor, dystonia), altered sensory or cognitive function, seizure-like symptoms, alterations in speech, or changes in swallowing.^1,2

For a diagnosis of conversion disorder, the following criteria must be met¹:

• The patient has 1 or more symptoms of altered voluntary motor or sensory function.
• Symptom presentation is incongruent with recognized neurologic or medical disease or conditions.
• Symptoms are not better explained by another medical or mental health condition.
• There is significant distress or impairment in functioning due to symptoms or the deficit.

The etiology of conversion disorder has not been firmly established. While the literature suggests that psychological stressors play a role,^3,4 an effort also has been made to better understand the underlying neural and biological basis. Specifically, studies have utilized brain imaging to explore brain pathways and mechanisms that could account for symptom presentation.^5,6

Prevalence rates for conversion disorder vary depending on the population studied. While it is estimated that 5% of patients in a general hospital setting meet full criteria for conversion disorder,⁷ higher rates may exist in specialty settings; 1 study found that 30% of patients in a neurology specialty clinic exhibited symptoms that were medically unexplained.⁸

Continue to: In primary care...

One study indicated that physicians identified medically unexplained symptoms as the main presenting problem for nearly 20% of patients in a primary care setting.

In primary care, prevalence of conversion disorder can be difficult to pinpoint; however, 1 study indicated that physicians identified medically unexplained symptoms as the main presenting problem for nearly 20% of patients in a primary care setting.⁹ Therefore, it is important for family physicians (FPs) to be familiar with the assessment and treatment of conversion disorder (and other disorders in which medically unexplained symptoms may be at the core of the patient presentation).

The differential: Neurologic and psychiatric conditions

Patients with conversion disorder may present with a variety of neurologic symptoms that can mimic those of organic disease. This can pose a diagnostic challenge, increase the chance of misdiagnosis, and delay treatment.

Motor symptoms may include paralysis, gait disturbance, dysphagia, or aphasia. Patients also may have sensory symptoms, such as blindness, deafness, or anesthesia.^10,11 As a result, it is important to rule out both urgent neurologic presentations, such as TIA, acute stroke, and brain tumor, and other chronic neurologic conditions, including multiple sclerosis, myasthenia gravis, and epilepsy.^11,12

Multiple sclerosis will demonstrate characteristic lesions on MRI that differentiate it from conversion disorder.

Myasthenia gravis is distinguished by positive findings on autoantibodies testing and on electrophysiologic studies.

Continue to: Epilepsy

Epilepsy. Patients with conversion disorder may present with unresponsiveness and abnormal movements, such as generalized limb shaking and hip thrusting, that mimic an epileptic seizure. In contrast to epileptic seizures, psychogenic nonepileptic seizures may last longer, symptoms may wax and wane, and patients generally do not have bowel or bladder incontinence or sustain injury as they would during an actual seizure.¹²

There are several psychiatric/­psychosocial conditions that also should be considered in the differential diagnosis of conversion disorder.

Somatic symptom disorder, like conversion disorder, produces somatic symptoms that can cause significant distress for patients. The difference in the 2 conditions is that symptoms of somatic symptom disorder may be compatible with a recognized neurologic or general medical condition, whereas in conversion disorder, the symptoms are not consistent with a recognized disease.^1,12

Factitious disorder, similar to conversion disorder, can involve neurologic symptoms that are not attributed to disease. However, patients with factitious disorder deliberately simulate symptoms to receive medical care. A thorough clinical interview and physical exam can help to distinguish conversion disorder from factitious disorder.

Malingering is not a psychiatric condition but a behavior that involves intentionally feigning symptoms for the purpose of personal or financial gain. There is no evidence that patients with conversion disorder simulate their symptoms.^12,13

Continue to: Negative results and positive signs point to the Dx

Negative results and positive signs point to the Dx

Conversion disorder is not a diagnosis of exclusion. Diagnosis requires detailed history taking and a thorough neurologic exam. Laboratory testing and neuroimaging are also important, and results will have to be negative to support the diagnosis.

Conversion disorder is not a diagnosis of exclusion; diagnosis requires detailed history taking and a thorough neurologic exam.

Neurologic deficits with conversion disorder do not follow a known neurologic insult.¹⁴ There are many tests that can be used to distinguish functional symptoms vs organic symptoms. Two of the most well-known tests are the Hoover sign and the abductor sign, which will be positive in conversion disorder. Both can be performed easily in an outpatient setting.

The Hoover sign is considered positive when there is weakness of voluntary hip extension in the presence of normal involuntary hip extension during contralateral hip flexion against resistance. According to a meta-­analysis of multiple studies of patients with conversion disorder, the overall estimated sensitivity of this test is 94% and the specificity, 99%.¹⁵

The abductor sign follows the same principle as the Hoover sign: When the patient abducts the nonparetic leg, both the nonparetic and “paretic” leg are strong. When the patient abducts just the “paretic” leg, both legs become weak.¹⁶

Other symptom evaluations. For patients who have functional seizures, video electroencephalography is helpful to distinguish functional seizures from “true” seizures.^17,18 In conversion disorder, functional dysarthria normally resembles a stutter or speech that is extremely slow with long hesitations that are hard to interrupt.¹⁸ Dysphonia and functional dysphagia are also very common functional symptoms. Usually after extensive work-up, no organic cause of the patient’s symptoms is ever found.¹⁸

Continue to: Treatment requires an integrated team approach

Treatment for conversion disorder can be difficult due to the complex and not fully understood etiology of the condition. Due to its multifaceted nature, an integrated team approach can be beneficial at each stage, including assessment and intervention.

Explain the diagnosis clearly. An essential initial step in the treatment of conversion disorder is careful explanation of the diagnosis. Clear explanation of the terminology and presentation of conversion disorder may prevent the patient from misinterpreting their diagnosis as a suggestion that they are feigning or malingering symptoms or feeling that their symptoms or concerns are being dismissed.² Understanding the condition can help improve the likelihood of the patient accepting the treatment plan and help decrease the likelihood of unnecessary testing, health care visits, and consultations. Developing a strong rapport with the patient is key when explaining the diagnosis.

Recommend cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). In a meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials, CBT significantly reduced somatic, anxious, and depressive symptoms and improved physical functioning in patients with somatoform disorders and medically unexplained symptoms.¹⁹ Another study, utilizing a case series, demonstrated significant improvement in social, emotional, and behavioral functioning in children and adolescents with functional neurologic symptoms (conversion disorder) post–CBT intervention.²⁰

Given that research supports CBT’s effectiveness in the management of conversion disorder, it is beneficial to engage a behavioral health professional as a part of the treatment team to focus on factors such as stress management, development of coping skills, and treatment of underlying psychiatric conditions.

Consider these other options. The addition of medication management can be considered for patients with comorbid psychiatric disorders. Evidence suggests that physical therapy is helpful in the treatment of motor and gait dysfunction seen in conversion disorder.^21,22 The role of hypnosis in the management of conversion disorder has also been studied, but more randomized clinical trials are needed to further explore this treatment.^2,23,24

Continue to: The FP's role in coordination of care

The FP’s role in coordination of care

Conversion disorder can be challenging to diagnose and often involves a multidisciplinary approach. Patients with conversion disorder may see multiple clinicians as they undergo evaluation for their symptoms, but they usually are referred back to their PCP for management and coordination of care. Thus, the FP’s understanding of how the condition is diagnosed and appropriately managed is beneficial.

The prognosis of conversion disorder is associated with symptom duration; thus, consultation between FPs and mental health providers is essential.

Open and effective communication among all members of the health care team can ensure consistency in treatment, a strong patient–provider relationship, favorable prognosis, and prevention of symptom relapse. FPs, by establishing a good rapport with patients, can help them understand the condition and the mind-body connection. Once other diagnoses have been ruled out, the FP can provide reassurance to patients and minimize further diagnostic testing.

The prognosis of conversion disorder is associated with symptom duration²⁵; thus, consultation between FPs and mental health providers is essential. The FP also can be integral in the recognition of psychiatric comorbidities, such as anxiety and depression, helping to ensure that these conditions also are treated appropriately.^25,26

THE CASE

Ms. M was referred to a neuropsychologist for further assessment, and the diagnosis of conversion disorder was confirmed. She was then referred to a family medicine behavioral health psychologist for CBT. The initial consult indicated that psychological stressors were contributing to symptoms, and Ms. M was diagnosed with depression and anxiety as well as conversion disorder.

Treatment started with patient education. The treatment framework was carefully explained to Ms. M, with a focus on identifying possible symptom triggers, helping her build a more effective stress response, increasing skills to more effectively manage stressors, and managing underlying psychiatric disorders (ie, depression, anxiety).

Ms. M continued regular visits with the family medicine behavioral health psychologist for CBT and followed up with her PCP as needed to manage chronic health conditions and stroke risk factors. The patient was able to implement skills discussed in treatment sessions, including identifying triggers and implementing coping skills (eg, managing negative thoughts that contribute to symptoms, setting boundaries) to manage stressors.

Her depressive and anxious symptoms improved, as indicated by symptom measurement tools and self-report. The frequency and severity of episodes of slurred speech and muscle weakness decreased, and the patient reported only 1 ED visit related to speech difficulties in the 2 years while following up with the behavioral health psychologist.

CORRESPONDENCE
Kristen J. Alston, PhD, University of Mississippi Medical Center, 2400 North State Street, Jackson, MS 39216; [email protected]

THE CASE

Janice M* presented to the emergency department (ED) with worsening slurred speech. The 55-year-old patient’s history was significant for diabetes; hypertension; depression; sleep apnea; multiple transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) thought to be stress related; and left lower-extremity weakness secondary to prior infarct. Ms. M had been to the hospital multiple times in the previous 2 to 3 years for similar symptoms. Her most recent visit to the ED had been 2 months earlier.

In the ED, the patient’s NIH stroke score was 1 for the presence of dysarthria, and a code for emergency stroke management was initiated. Ms. M was alert and oriented x 3, with no focal motor or sensory deficits noted. Computed tomography (CT) and CT angiography were negative for any acute abnormality. Throughout the course of the ED visit, her NIH score improved to 0. Ms. M exhibited staccato/stuttering speech, but it was believed that this would likely improve over the next few days.

According to the hospital neurologist, the ED work-up suggested either a TIA, stress-induced psychiatric speech disorder, or conversion disorder. The patient was discharged home in stable condition and was asked to follow up with the outpatient neurologist in 1 week.

Ms. M was seen approximately 2 weeks later in the outpatient neurology stroke ­clinic. Her symptoms had resolved, and she did not report any new or worsening symptoms. An outpatient stroke work-up was initiated, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the brain, echocardiography, and measurement of low-density lipoprotein and hemoglobin A1C; all results were unremarkable. Given the timeline for symptom improvement and results of the work-up, the patient was given a diagnosis of conversion disorder. Ms. M was encouraged to follow up with her primary care physician (PCP) for further medical management.

● How would you proceed with this patient?

* The patient’s name has been changed to protect her identity.

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, text revision, conversion disorder (also known as functional neurological symptom disorder) is characterized as a somatic symptom and related disorder.¹ The prominent feature shared among disorders in this category is the presence of somatic symptoms that are associated with distress and impairment.

In conversion disorder, the focus is on symptoms that are neurologic in nature but are not due to underlying neurologic disease and are incongruent with typical patterns of presentation for any neurologic condition. Patients with conversion disorder may present with motor symptoms (eg, weakness, paralysis, tremor, dystonia), altered sensory or cognitive function, seizure-like symptoms, alterations in speech, or changes in swallowing.^1,2

For a diagnosis of conversion disorder, the following criteria must be met¹:

• The patient has 1 or more symptoms of altered voluntary motor or sensory function.
• Symptom presentation is incongruent with recognized neurologic or medical disease or conditions.
• Symptoms are not better explained by another medical or mental health condition.
• There is significant distress or impairment in functioning due to symptoms or the deficit.

The etiology of conversion disorder has not been firmly established. While the literature suggests that psychological stressors play a role,^3,4 an effort also has been made to better understand the underlying neural and biological basis. Specifically, studies have utilized brain imaging to explore brain pathways and mechanisms that could account for symptom presentation.^5,6

Prevalence rates for conversion disorder vary depending on the population studied. While it is estimated that 5% of patients in a general hospital setting meet full criteria for conversion disorder,⁷ higher rates may exist in specialty settings; 1 study found that 30% of patients in a neurology specialty clinic exhibited symptoms that were medically unexplained.⁸

Continue to: In primary care...

One study indicated that physicians identified medically unexplained symptoms as the main presenting problem for nearly 20% of patients in a primary care setting.

In primary care, prevalence of conversion disorder can be difficult to pinpoint; however, 1 study indicated that physicians identified medically unexplained symptoms as the main presenting problem for nearly 20% of patients in a primary care setting.⁹ Therefore, it is important for family physicians (FPs) to be familiar with the assessment and treatment of conversion disorder (and other disorders in which medically unexplained symptoms may be at the core of the patient presentation).

The differential: Neurologic and psychiatric conditions

Patients with conversion disorder may present with a variety of neurologic symptoms that can mimic those of organic disease. This can pose a diagnostic challenge, increase the chance of misdiagnosis, and delay treatment.

Motor symptoms may include paralysis, gait disturbance, dysphagia, or aphasia. Patients also may have sensory symptoms, such as blindness, deafness, or anesthesia.^10,11 As a result, it is important to rule out both urgent neurologic presentations, such as TIA, acute stroke, and brain tumor, and other chronic neurologic conditions, including multiple sclerosis, myasthenia gravis, and epilepsy.^11,12

Multiple sclerosis will demonstrate characteristic lesions on MRI that differentiate it from conversion disorder.

Myasthenia gravis is distinguished by positive findings on autoantibodies testing and on electrophysiologic studies.

Continue to: Epilepsy

Epilepsy. Patients with conversion disorder may present with unresponsiveness and abnormal movements, such as generalized limb shaking and hip thrusting, that mimic an epileptic seizure. In contrast to epileptic seizures, psychogenic nonepileptic seizures may last longer, symptoms may wax and wane, and patients generally do not have bowel or bladder incontinence or sustain injury as they would during an actual seizure.¹²

There are several psychiatric/­psychosocial conditions that also should be considered in the differential diagnosis of conversion disorder.

Somatic symptom disorder, like conversion disorder, produces somatic symptoms that can cause significant distress for patients. The difference in the 2 conditions is that symptoms of somatic symptom disorder may be compatible with a recognized neurologic or general medical condition, whereas in conversion disorder, the symptoms are not consistent with a recognized disease.^1,12

Factitious disorder, similar to conversion disorder, can involve neurologic symptoms that are not attributed to disease. However, patients with factitious disorder deliberately simulate symptoms to receive medical care. A thorough clinical interview and physical exam can help to distinguish conversion disorder from factitious disorder.

Malingering is not a psychiatric condition but a behavior that involves intentionally feigning symptoms for the purpose of personal or financial gain. There is no evidence that patients with conversion disorder simulate their symptoms.^12,13

Continue to: Negative results and positive signs point to the Dx

Negative results and positive signs point to the Dx

Conversion disorder is not a diagnosis of exclusion. Diagnosis requires detailed history taking and a thorough neurologic exam. Laboratory testing and neuroimaging are also important, and results will have to be negative to support the diagnosis.

Conversion disorder is not a diagnosis of exclusion; diagnosis requires detailed history taking and a thorough neurologic exam.

Neurologic deficits with conversion disorder do not follow a known neurologic insult.¹⁴ There are many tests that can be used to distinguish functional symptoms vs organic symptoms. Two of the most well-known tests are the Hoover sign and the abductor sign, which will be positive in conversion disorder. Both can be performed easily in an outpatient setting.

The Hoover sign is considered positive when there is weakness of voluntary hip extension in the presence of normal involuntary hip extension during contralateral hip flexion against resistance. According to a meta-­analysis of multiple studies of patients with conversion disorder, the overall estimated sensitivity of this test is 94% and the specificity, 99%.¹⁵

The abductor sign follows the same principle as the Hoover sign: When the patient abducts the nonparetic leg, both the nonparetic and “paretic” leg are strong. When the patient abducts just the “paretic” leg, both legs become weak.¹⁶

Other symptom evaluations. For patients who have functional seizures, video electroencephalography is helpful to distinguish functional seizures from “true” seizures.^17,18 In conversion disorder, functional dysarthria normally resembles a stutter or speech that is extremely slow with long hesitations that are hard to interrupt.¹⁸ Dysphonia and functional dysphagia are also very common functional symptoms. Usually after extensive work-up, no organic cause of the patient’s symptoms is ever found.¹⁸

Continue to: Treatment requires an integrated team approach

Treatment for conversion disorder can be difficult due to the complex and not fully understood etiology of the condition. Due to its multifaceted nature, an integrated team approach can be beneficial at each stage, including assessment and intervention.

Explain the diagnosis clearly. An essential initial step in the treatment of conversion disorder is careful explanation of the diagnosis. Clear explanation of the terminology and presentation of conversion disorder may prevent the patient from misinterpreting their diagnosis as a suggestion that they are feigning or malingering symptoms or feeling that their symptoms or concerns are being dismissed.² Understanding the condition can help improve the likelihood of the patient accepting the treatment plan and help decrease the likelihood of unnecessary testing, health care visits, and consultations. Developing a strong rapport with the patient is key when explaining the diagnosis.

Recommend cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). In a meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials, CBT significantly reduced somatic, anxious, and depressive symptoms and improved physical functioning in patients with somatoform disorders and medically unexplained symptoms.¹⁹ Another study, utilizing a case series, demonstrated significant improvement in social, emotional, and behavioral functioning in children and adolescents with functional neurologic symptoms (conversion disorder) post–CBT intervention.²⁰

Given that research supports CBT’s effectiveness in the management of conversion disorder, it is beneficial to engage a behavioral health professional as a part of the treatment team to focus on factors such as stress management, development of coping skills, and treatment of underlying psychiatric conditions.

Consider these other options. The addition of medication management can be considered for patients with comorbid psychiatric disorders. Evidence suggests that physical therapy is helpful in the treatment of motor and gait dysfunction seen in conversion disorder.^21,22 The role of hypnosis in the management of conversion disorder has also been studied, but more randomized clinical trials are needed to further explore this treatment.^2,23,24

Continue to: The FP's role in coordination of care

The FP’s role in coordination of care

Conversion disorder can be challenging to diagnose and often involves a multidisciplinary approach. Patients with conversion disorder may see multiple clinicians as they undergo evaluation for their symptoms, but they usually are referred back to their PCP for management and coordination of care. Thus, the FP’s understanding of how the condition is diagnosed and appropriately managed is beneficial.

The prognosis of conversion disorder is associated with symptom duration; thus, consultation between FPs and mental health providers is essential.

Open and effective communication among all members of the health care team can ensure consistency in treatment, a strong patient–provider relationship, favorable prognosis, and prevention of symptom relapse. FPs, by establishing a good rapport with patients, can help them understand the condition and the mind-body connection. Once other diagnoses have been ruled out, the FP can provide reassurance to patients and minimize further diagnostic testing.

The prognosis of conversion disorder is associated with symptom duration²⁵; thus, consultation between FPs and mental health providers is essential. The FP also can be integral in the recognition of psychiatric comorbidities, such as anxiety and depression, helping to ensure that these conditions also are treated appropriately.^25,26

THE CASE

Ms. M was referred to a neuropsychologist for further assessment, and the diagnosis of conversion disorder was confirmed. She was then referred to a family medicine behavioral health psychologist for CBT. The initial consult indicated that psychological stressors were contributing to symptoms, and Ms. M was diagnosed with depression and anxiety as well as conversion disorder.

Treatment started with patient education. The treatment framework was carefully explained to Ms. M, with a focus on identifying possible symptom triggers, helping her build a more effective stress response, increasing skills to more effectively manage stressors, and managing underlying psychiatric disorders (ie, depression, anxiety).

Ms. M continued regular visits with the family medicine behavioral health psychologist for CBT and followed up with her PCP as needed to manage chronic health conditions and stroke risk factors. The patient was able to implement skills discussed in treatment sessions, including identifying triggers and implementing coping skills (eg, managing negative thoughts that contribute to symptoms, setting boundaries) to manage stressors.

Her depressive and anxious symptoms improved, as indicated by symptom measurement tools and self-report. The frequency and severity of episodes of slurred speech and muscle weakness decreased, and the patient reported only 1 ED visit related to speech difficulties in the 2 years while following up with the behavioral health psychologist.

CORRESPONDENCE
Kristen J. Alston, PhD, University of Mississippi Medical Center, 2400 North State Street, Jackson, MS 39216; [email protected]

ILLUSTRATIVE CASE

A healthy 33-year-old woman presents to your office with a 3-month history of depressed mood. She reports difficulty concentrating, insomnia, decreased appetite, and generalized fatigue. She denies suicidal or homicidal ideation, substance misuse, or history consistent with manic episodes. Her vital signs are normal and overall her physical examination is unremarkable, although the patient is tearful when discussing her mood. Using shared decision-making, you and the patient determine it is appropriate to initiate pharmacotherapy. Is there a role for combination pharmacotherapy to treat this patient’s acute depression?

Unipolar depression is a highly prevalent condition, estimated to affect 21% of US adults at some point in their lifetime.² It is the second leading cause of disability in the United States, with an ­estimated economic impact of more than $200 billion annually.³

The diagnosis of unipolar depression is based on the criteria set forth in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and commonly includes depressed mood, anhedonia, sleep disturbance, appetite changes, fatigue, feelings of worthlessness or guilt, decreased ability to concentrate, and psychomotor symptoms occurring over at least a 2-week period.⁴ Symptoms represent a decrease in functioning from previous levels that are not attributable to another medical condition or substance, and must not include a history of past manic or hypomanic episodes. Thoughts of death and suicidal ideation are common.

Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses have shown that a combination of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy is more efficacious for treatment of unipolar depression than either therapy alone.^5-7 As for which medication is most effective and tolerable, multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses have not demonstrated superiority of 1 second-generation antidepressant (eg, SSRIs, SNRIs) over another.^7,8

General practice guidelines support titration of the dose or a switch in monotherapy medications until treatment response is achieved, prior to initiation of a second agent. When an adjunctive medication is considered, there are several options: a ­second-generation antipsychotic, a second antidepressant from a different class, thyroid hormone, and lithium. Special consideration is given to the adverse effect profile and potential tolerability; higher adverse effect profiles are observed with second-generation antipsychotics and lithium.⁹

This study suggests that combination pharmacotherapy is superior to monotherapy, both at the time of treatment initiation and in patients with previous inadequate pharmacologic response.

It is not common practice to initiate 2 antidepressants for a new diagnosis of acute depression. The systematic review and meta-analysis conducted by Henssler et al¹ attempted to provide evidence to support the efficacy and tolerability of specific antidepressants when used in combination for initial treatment of acute depression. Of note, a 2008 national survey showed that a majority of psychotropic medications in the United States are prescribed by primary care physicians (73.6%) rather than psychiatrists, making this analysis relevant to family physicians.¹⁰

STUDY SUMMARY

Combination pharmacotherapy yields superior efficacy in acute depression

This 2022 systematic review and meta-­analysis (39 randomized clinical trials [RCTs]; N = 6751) compared the efficacy and tolerability of monotherapy to combination therapy in the treatment of patients with acute depression.¹ The study also aimed to address which specific combination therapies were superior.

Continue to: Selected RCTs included...

Selected RCTs included an intervention group using a combination of 2 antidepressants, regardless of dosage, and a control group of patients taking antidepressant monotherapy. Studies evaluated both patients being treated for the first time and those with a previously inadequate response to medical treatment. All participants were ages 18 years or older (mean age not reported) and had received a diagnosis of depressive disorder according to standard operationalized criteria; patients with multiple psychiatric comorbidities were not excluded.

Studies used various standardized questionnaires—most frequently, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)—to determine the severity of depression at baseline and following treatment. The HDRS is a 17-item depression scale and the MADRS is a 10-item depression scale; for both, higher scores indicate worsening depression. Follow-up time ranged from 2 to 12 weeks.

The primary outcome was treatment efficacy measured as the standardized mean difference (SMD). Secondary outcomes included remission (normal-range scores) and response to treatment (eg, ≥ 50% reduction in scores), as defined by the study authors.

Combination therapy was determined to have superior efficacy relative to monotherapy (SMD = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.19-0.44; P < .001). Combinations with a presynaptic α2-autoreceptor antagonist (eg, mirtazapine, trazodone, or mianserin [the last of which is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in the United States]) and a monoamine reuptake inhibitor (eg, an SSRI, SNRI, or TCA) were superior to other combinations (SMD = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.19-0.55). Combinations that included bupropion were not superior to monotherapy (SMD = 0.10; 95% CI, –0.07 to 0.27).

Secondary outcomes revealed combination therapy to be superior to monotherapy with respect to remission (odds ratio [OR] = 1.52; 95% CI, 1.20-1.92) and response (OR = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.15-1.69). Subgroup analyses showed that combinations with presynaptic α2-autoreceptor antagonists led to improved remission (OR = 1.42; 95% CI, 1.01-2.01) and response (OR = 1.49; 95% CI, 1.18-1.87) compared with monotherapy, whereas combinations that included bupropion were not superior to monotherapy. For patients who dropped out of treatment for any reason, including adverse drug events, results for combination pharmacotherapy and monotherapy were similar.

Continue to: WHAT'S NEW

One combination proved more effective than others

Current clinical guidelines indicate the suitability of trialing pharmacologic monotherapy during the acute phase of depression treatment prior to initiating an adjunctive medication.⁹ All classes of medication investigated in this meta-analysis are generally regarded as first-line therapies, although they are rarely started in combination. This study’s findings suggest that combination pharmacotherapy, especially with a presynaptic α2-autoreceptor antagonist (eg, mirtazapine, trazodone) and a monoamine reuptake inhibitor (eg, an SSRI, SNRI, or a TCA), is superior to monotherapy, both at the time of treatment initiation and in patients with previous inadequate pharmacologic response.

CAVEATS

Potential limitations due to publication bias

Concerns about publication bias and significant study heterogeneity may limit the generalizability of these findings. However, conclusions were robust in a subgroup analysis that was restricted to publications with low risk for bias.

CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION

None to report

There are no major challenges to implementing this combination treatment. Importantly, there were no differences in tolerability between monotherapy and combination treatment. 

ILLUSTRATIVE CASE

A healthy 33-year-old woman presents to your office with a 3-month history of depressed mood. She reports difficulty concentrating, insomnia, decreased appetite, and generalized fatigue. She denies suicidal or homicidal ideation, substance misuse, or history consistent with manic episodes. Her vital signs are normal and overall her physical examination is unremarkable, although the patient is tearful when discussing her mood. Using shared decision-making, you and the patient determine it is appropriate to initiate pharmacotherapy. Is there a role for combination pharmacotherapy to treat this patient’s acute depression?

Unipolar depression is a highly prevalent condition, estimated to affect 21% of US adults at some point in their lifetime.² It is the second leading cause of disability in the United States, with an ­estimated economic impact of more than $200 billion annually.³

The diagnosis of unipolar depression is based on the criteria set forth in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and commonly includes depressed mood, anhedonia, sleep disturbance, appetite changes, fatigue, feelings of worthlessness or guilt, decreased ability to concentrate, and psychomotor symptoms occurring over at least a 2-week period.⁴ Symptoms represent a decrease in functioning from previous levels that are not attributable to another medical condition or substance, and must not include a history of past manic or hypomanic episodes. Thoughts of death and suicidal ideation are common.

Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses have shown that a combination of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy is more efficacious for treatment of unipolar depression than either therapy alone.^5-7 As for which medication is most effective and tolerable, multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses have not demonstrated superiority of 1 second-generation antidepressant (eg, SSRIs, SNRIs) over another.^7,8

General practice guidelines support titration of the dose or a switch in monotherapy medications until treatment response is achieved, prior to initiation of a second agent. When an adjunctive medication is considered, there are several options: a ­second-generation antipsychotic, a second antidepressant from a different class, thyroid hormone, and lithium. Special consideration is given to the adverse effect profile and potential tolerability; higher adverse effect profiles are observed with second-generation antipsychotics and lithium.⁹

This study suggests that combination pharmacotherapy is superior to monotherapy, both at the time of treatment initiation and in patients with previous inadequate pharmacologic response.

It is not common practice to initiate 2 antidepressants for a new diagnosis of acute depression. The systematic review and meta-analysis conducted by Henssler et al¹ attempted to provide evidence to support the efficacy and tolerability of specific antidepressants when used in combination for initial treatment of acute depression. Of note, a 2008 national survey showed that a majority of psychotropic medications in the United States are prescribed by primary care physicians (73.6%) rather than psychiatrists, making this analysis relevant to family physicians.¹⁰

STUDY SUMMARY

Combination pharmacotherapy yields superior efficacy in acute depression

This 2022 systematic review and meta-­analysis (39 randomized clinical trials [RCTs]; N = 6751) compared the efficacy and tolerability of monotherapy to combination therapy in the treatment of patients with acute depression.¹ The study also aimed to address which specific combination therapies were superior.

Continue to: Selected RCTs included...

Selected RCTs included an intervention group using a combination of 2 antidepressants, regardless of dosage, and a control group of patients taking antidepressant monotherapy. Studies evaluated both patients being treated for the first time and those with a previously inadequate response to medical treatment. All participants were ages 18 years or older (mean age not reported) and had received a diagnosis of depressive disorder according to standard operationalized criteria; patients with multiple psychiatric comorbidities were not excluded.

Studies used various standardized questionnaires—most frequently, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)—to determine the severity of depression at baseline and following treatment. The HDRS is a 17-item depression scale and the MADRS is a 10-item depression scale; for both, higher scores indicate worsening depression. Follow-up time ranged from 2 to 12 weeks.

The primary outcome was treatment efficacy measured as the standardized mean difference (SMD). Secondary outcomes included remission (normal-range scores) and response to treatment (eg, ≥ 50% reduction in scores), as defined by the study authors.

Combination therapy was determined to have superior efficacy relative to monotherapy (SMD = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.19-0.44; P < .001). Combinations with a presynaptic α2-autoreceptor antagonist (eg, mirtazapine, trazodone, or mianserin [the last of which is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in the United States]) and a monoamine reuptake inhibitor (eg, an SSRI, SNRI, or TCA) were superior to other combinations (SMD = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.19-0.55). Combinations that included bupropion were not superior to monotherapy (SMD = 0.10; 95% CI, –0.07 to 0.27).

Secondary outcomes revealed combination therapy to be superior to monotherapy with respect to remission (odds ratio [OR] = 1.52; 95% CI, 1.20-1.92) and response (OR = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.15-1.69). Subgroup analyses showed that combinations with presynaptic α2-autoreceptor antagonists led to improved remission (OR = 1.42; 95% CI, 1.01-2.01) and response (OR = 1.49; 95% CI, 1.18-1.87) compared with monotherapy, whereas combinations that included bupropion were not superior to monotherapy. For patients who dropped out of treatment for any reason, including adverse drug events, results for combination pharmacotherapy and monotherapy were similar.

Continue to: WHAT'S NEW

One combination proved more effective than others

Current clinical guidelines indicate the suitability of trialing pharmacologic monotherapy during the acute phase of depression treatment prior to initiating an adjunctive medication.⁹ All classes of medication investigated in this meta-analysis are generally regarded as first-line therapies, although they are rarely started in combination. This study’s findings suggest that combination pharmacotherapy, especially with a presynaptic α2-autoreceptor antagonist (eg, mirtazapine, trazodone) and a monoamine reuptake inhibitor (eg, an SSRI, SNRI, or a TCA), is superior to monotherapy, both at the time of treatment initiation and in patients with previous inadequate pharmacologic response.

CAVEATS

Potential limitations due to publication bias

Concerns about publication bias and significant study heterogeneity may limit the generalizability of these findings. However, conclusions were robust in a subgroup analysis that was restricted to publications with low risk for bias.

CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION

None to report

There are no major challenges to implementing this combination treatment. Importantly, there were no differences in tolerability between monotherapy and combination treatment. 

ILLUSTRATIVE CASE

A healthy 33-year-old woman presents to your office with a 3-month history of depressed mood. She reports difficulty concentrating, insomnia, decreased appetite, and generalized fatigue. She denies suicidal or homicidal ideation, substance misuse, or history consistent with manic episodes. Her vital signs are normal and overall her physical examination is unremarkable, although the patient is tearful when discussing her mood. Using shared decision-making, you and the patient determine it is appropriate to initiate pharmacotherapy. Is there a role for combination pharmacotherapy to treat this patient’s acute depression?

Unipolar depression is a highly prevalent condition, estimated to affect 21% of US adults at some point in their lifetime.² It is the second leading cause of disability in the United States, with an ­estimated economic impact of more than $200 billion annually.³

The diagnosis of unipolar depression is based on the criteria set forth in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) and commonly includes depressed mood, anhedonia, sleep disturbance, appetite changes, fatigue, feelings of worthlessness or guilt, decreased ability to concentrate, and psychomotor symptoms occurring over at least a 2-week period.⁴ Symptoms represent a decrease in functioning from previous levels that are not attributable to another medical condition or substance, and must not include a history of past manic or hypomanic episodes. Thoughts of death and suicidal ideation are common.

Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses have shown that a combination of psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy is more efficacious for treatment of unipolar depression than either therapy alone.^5-7 As for which medication is most effective and tolerable, multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses have not demonstrated superiority of 1 second-generation antidepressant (eg, SSRIs, SNRIs) over another.^7,8

General practice guidelines support titration of the dose or a switch in monotherapy medications until treatment response is achieved, prior to initiation of a second agent. When an adjunctive medication is considered, there are several options: a ­second-generation antipsychotic, a second antidepressant from a different class, thyroid hormone, and lithium. Special consideration is given to the adverse effect profile and potential tolerability; higher adverse effect profiles are observed with second-generation antipsychotics and lithium.⁹

This study suggests that combination pharmacotherapy is superior to monotherapy, both at the time of treatment initiation and in patients with previous inadequate pharmacologic response.

It is not common practice to initiate 2 antidepressants for a new diagnosis of acute depression. The systematic review and meta-analysis conducted by Henssler et al¹ attempted to provide evidence to support the efficacy and tolerability of specific antidepressants when used in combination for initial treatment of acute depression. Of note, a 2008 national survey showed that a majority of psychotropic medications in the United States are prescribed by primary care physicians (73.6%) rather than psychiatrists, making this analysis relevant to family physicians.¹⁰

STUDY SUMMARY

Combination pharmacotherapy yields superior efficacy in acute depression

This 2022 systematic review and meta-­analysis (39 randomized clinical trials [RCTs]; N = 6751) compared the efficacy and tolerability of monotherapy to combination therapy in the treatment of patients with acute depression.¹ The study also aimed to address which specific combination therapies were superior.

Continue to: Selected RCTs included...

Selected RCTs included an intervention group using a combination of 2 antidepressants, regardless of dosage, and a control group of patients taking antidepressant monotherapy. Studies evaluated both patients being treated for the first time and those with a previously inadequate response to medical treatment. All participants were ages 18 years or older (mean age not reported) and had received a diagnosis of depressive disorder according to standard operationalized criteria; patients with multiple psychiatric comorbidities were not excluded.

Studies used various standardized questionnaires—most frequently, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)—to determine the severity of depression at baseline and following treatment. The HDRS is a 17-item depression scale and the MADRS is a 10-item depression scale; for both, higher scores indicate worsening depression. Follow-up time ranged from 2 to 12 weeks.

The primary outcome was treatment efficacy measured as the standardized mean difference (SMD). Secondary outcomes included remission (normal-range scores) and response to treatment (eg, ≥ 50% reduction in scores), as defined by the study authors.

Combination therapy was determined to have superior efficacy relative to monotherapy (SMD = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.19-0.44; P < .001). Combinations with a presynaptic α2-autoreceptor antagonist (eg, mirtazapine, trazodone, or mianserin [the last of which is not approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in the United States]) and a monoamine reuptake inhibitor (eg, an SSRI, SNRI, or TCA) were superior to other combinations (SMD = 0.37; 95% CI, 0.19-0.55). Combinations that included bupropion were not superior to monotherapy (SMD = 0.10; 95% CI, –0.07 to 0.27).

Secondary outcomes revealed combination therapy to be superior to monotherapy with respect to remission (odds ratio [OR] = 1.52; 95% CI, 1.20-1.92) and response (OR = 1.40; 95% CI, 1.15-1.69). Subgroup analyses showed that combinations with presynaptic α2-autoreceptor antagonists led to improved remission (OR = 1.42; 95% CI, 1.01-2.01) and response (OR = 1.49; 95% CI, 1.18-1.87) compared with monotherapy, whereas combinations that included bupropion were not superior to monotherapy. For patients who dropped out of treatment for any reason, including adverse drug events, results for combination pharmacotherapy and monotherapy were similar.

Continue to: WHAT'S NEW

One combination proved more effective than others

Current clinical guidelines indicate the suitability of trialing pharmacologic monotherapy during the acute phase of depression treatment prior to initiating an adjunctive medication.⁹ All classes of medication investigated in this meta-analysis are generally regarded as first-line therapies, although they are rarely started in combination. This study’s findings suggest that combination pharmacotherapy, especially with a presynaptic α2-autoreceptor antagonist (eg, mirtazapine, trazodone) and a monoamine reuptake inhibitor (eg, an SSRI, SNRI, or a TCA), is superior to monotherapy, both at the time of treatment initiation and in patients with previous inadequate pharmacologic response.

CAVEATS

Potential limitations due to publication bias

Concerns about publication bias and significant study heterogeneity may limit the generalizability of these findings. However, conclusions were robust in a subgroup analysis that was restricted to publications with low risk for bias.

CHALLENGES TO IMPLEMENTATION

None to report

There are no major challenges to implementing this combination treatment. Importantly, there were no differences in tolerability between monotherapy and combination treatment. 

PARIS – A single 25-mg dose of a synthetic formulation of psilocybin appears to improve the core symptoms of treatment-resistant depression (TRD), a new analysis of phase 2 trial data suggests.

Known as COMP360, the synthetic agent, a proprietary, purified form of psilocybin, improved symptoms related to mood and anhedonia while leaving aspects such as appetite and weight changes unaffected, reported investigators led by Guy M. Goodwin, PhD, emeritus professor of psychiatry, University of Oxford, England, and chief medical officer, COMPASS Pathways.

The study was presented at the European Psychiatric Association (EPA) 2023 Congress.
 

100 million affected

Affecting up to 100 million people globally, TRD is “not an official diagnosis,” although it is often defined as the failure to elicit a response with at least two antidepressant treatments, said Dr. Goodwin.

Compared to their counterparts with non-TRD, those with TRD experience higher relapse rates, higher rates of suicidal behavior, and more residual symptoms even when they do respond to treatment.

Previous results from the study known as P-TRD indicated that a single 25-mg dose of COMP360 significantly reduced depression scores for up to 12 weeks when given along with psychological support, although a later analysis suggested the effect subsequently dropped off.

The vast majority of the patients in the trial were naive to psychedelics, and so, Dr. Goodwin explained, they undergo a preparation phase during which they receive psychoeducation and have at least two visits with a therapist, who then stays with them during administration of the drug to offer support if they experience psychological distress.

Following the psilocybin session, participants go through a process known as integration, which involves two sessions with a therapist within 2 weeks.

“That, in our view, is essentially about safety, and about identifying problems that have arisen as a result of taking the drug,” said Dr. Goodwin.

The phase 2b trial examined changes in specific depression symptoms after psilocybin treatment in 233 patients with TRD. Participants were a mean age of 39.8 years and 59% were women. They were randomized to receive one of three doses of the drug: a 1-mg dose (n = 79), a 10-mg dose (n = 75), or a 25-mg dose (n = 79).

The primary outcome was changes in individual items on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology–Self Report (QIDS-SR-16) scale.

While the effect on overall depression scores is important, said Dr. Goodwin, many of the items included in the depression assessment scales are “uninformative.”
 

Reduction in ‘core’ symptoms

Participants were assessed by a blinded rater at baseline, day 1, day 2, and at 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12 weeks after administration of COMP360. The primary endpoint was a reduction in individual items on MADRS and scores from baseline to 3 weeks. Individual items on the QIDS-SR-16 were rated by participants at the same time points.

Investigators found the largest mean changes from baseline were on reported and apparent sadness, lassitude, inability to feel, and concentration difficulties, with “very nice and clear dose-related differences,” Dr. Goodwin said.

The results indicate that the significant benefit with the largest dose at 3 weeks versus baseline was confined to items such as inability to feel and reported and apparent sadness on the MADRS and feeling sad and general interest on the QIDS-SR-16 (Table 1).

The results suggest the effect of COMP360 is “on the core symptoms of depression,” said Dr. Goodwin.

Enthusiasm running ahead of the data

Commenting on the findings, Bertha K. Madras, PhD, professor of psychobiology, department of psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, who was not involved in the study, said “hallucinogens are an intriguing class of drugs and I support ongoing high-quality research in this area.”

However, she told this news organization that the “breathtaking endorsement of this drug is far ahead of scientific data.”

She cited concerns such as the “narrow demographics” of participants, their previous experience with and expectations of hallucinogens, the “potential for symptom fluidity of enrollees,” such as depression evolving into psychosis, and the “undefined role” of the therapist during a hallucinogenic session.

“Finally, I am concerned that enthusiasm for therapeutic potential has been, and will continue to be, preempted and directed towards legalization and widespread access for vulnerable populations,” Dr. Madras said.

This, she said, “is occurring at breakneck speed in the U.S., with scant resistance or skepticism from the investigators engaged in therapeutic assessment.”

The study was funded by COMPASS Pathways. Dr. Goodwin has reported relationships with COMPASS Pathways, Buckley Psytech, Boehringer Ingelheim, Clerkenwell Health, EVA Pharma, Lundbeck, Janssen Global Services, Novartis, Ocean Neurosciences, P1vital, Sage Therapeutics, Servier, Takeda, and WebMD.
 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

PARIS – A single 25-mg dose of a synthetic formulation of psilocybin appears to improve the core symptoms of treatment-resistant depression (TRD), a new analysis of phase 2 trial data suggests.

Known as COMP360, the synthetic agent, a proprietary, purified form of psilocybin, improved symptoms related to mood and anhedonia while leaving aspects such as appetite and weight changes unaffected, reported investigators led by Guy M. Goodwin, PhD, emeritus professor of psychiatry, University of Oxford, England, and chief medical officer, COMPASS Pathways.

The study was presented at the European Psychiatric Association (EPA) 2023 Congress.
 

100 million affected

Affecting up to 100 million people globally, TRD is “not an official diagnosis,” although it is often defined as the failure to elicit a response with at least two antidepressant treatments, said Dr. Goodwin.

Compared to their counterparts with non-TRD, those with TRD experience higher relapse rates, higher rates of suicidal behavior, and more residual symptoms even when they do respond to treatment.

Previous results from the study known as P-TRD indicated that a single 25-mg dose of COMP360 significantly reduced depression scores for up to 12 weeks when given along with psychological support, although a later analysis suggested the effect subsequently dropped off.

The vast majority of the patients in the trial were naive to psychedelics, and so, Dr. Goodwin explained, they undergo a preparation phase during which they receive psychoeducation and have at least two visits with a therapist, who then stays with them during administration of the drug to offer support if they experience psychological distress.

Following the psilocybin session, participants go through a process known as integration, which involves two sessions with a therapist within 2 weeks.

“That, in our view, is essentially about safety, and about identifying problems that have arisen as a result of taking the drug,” said Dr. Goodwin.

The phase 2b trial examined changes in specific depression symptoms after psilocybin treatment in 233 patients with TRD. Participants were a mean age of 39.8 years and 59% were women. They were randomized to receive one of three doses of the drug: a 1-mg dose (n = 79), a 10-mg dose (n = 75), or a 25-mg dose (n = 79).

The primary outcome was changes in individual items on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology–Self Report (QIDS-SR-16) scale.

While the effect on overall depression scores is important, said Dr. Goodwin, many of the items included in the depression assessment scales are “uninformative.”
 

Reduction in ‘core’ symptoms

Participants were assessed by a blinded rater at baseline, day 1, day 2, and at 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12 weeks after administration of COMP360. The primary endpoint was a reduction in individual items on MADRS and scores from baseline to 3 weeks. Individual items on the QIDS-SR-16 were rated by participants at the same time points.

Investigators found the largest mean changes from baseline were on reported and apparent sadness, lassitude, inability to feel, and concentration difficulties, with “very nice and clear dose-related differences,” Dr. Goodwin said.

The results indicate that the significant benefit with the largest dose at 3 weeks versus baseline was confined to items such as inability to feel and reported and apparent sadness on the MADRS and feeling sad and general interest on the QIDS-SR-16 (Table 1).

The results suggest the effect of COMP360 is “on the core symptoms of depression,” said Dr. Goodwin.

Enthusiasm running ahead of the data

Commenting on the findings, Bertha K. Madras, PhD, professor of psychobiology, department of psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, who was not involved in the study, said “hallucinogens are an intriguing class of drugs and I support ongoing high-quality research in this area.”

However, she told this news organization that the “breathtaking endorsement of this drug is far ahead of scientific data.”

She cited concerns such as the “narrow demographics” of participants, their previous experience with and expectations of hallucinogens, the “potential for symptom fluidity of enrollees,” such as depression evolving into psychosis, and the “undefined role” of the therapist during a hallucinogenic session.

“Finally, I am concerned that enthusiasm for therapeutic potential has been, and will continue to be, preempted and directed towards legalization and widespread access for vulnerable populations,” Dr. Madras said.

This, she said, “is occurring at breakneck speed in the U.S., with scant resistance or skepticism from the investigators engaged in therapeutic assessment.”

The study was funded by COMPASS Pathways. Dr. Goodwin has reported relationships with COMPASS Pathways, Buckley Psytech, Boehringer Ingelheim, Clerkenwell Health, EVA Pharma, Lundbeck, Janssen Global Services, Novartis, Ocean Neurosciences, P1vital, Sage Therapeutics, Servier, Takeda, and WebMD.
 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

PARIS – A single 25-mg dose of a synthetic formulation of psilocybin appears to improve the core symptoms of treatment-resistant depression (TRD), a new analysis of phase 2 trial data suggests.

Known as COMP360, the synthetic agent, a proprietary, purified form of psilocybin, improved symptoms related to mood and anhedonia while leaving aspects such as appetite and weight changes unaffected, reported investigators led by Guy M. Goodwin, PhD, emeritus professor of psychiatry, University of Oxford, England, and chief medical officer, COMPASS Pathways.

The study was presented at the European Psychiatric Association (EPA) 2023 Congress.
 

100 million affected

Affecting up to 100 million people globally, TRD is “not an official diagnosis,” although it is often defined as the failure to elicit a response with at least two antidepressant treatments, said Dr. Goodwin.

Compared to their counterparts with non-TRD, those with TRD experience higher relapse rates, higher rates of suicidal behavior, and more residual symptoms even when they do respond to treatment.

Previous results from the study known as P-TRD indicated that a single 25-mg dose of COMP360 significantly reduced depression scores for up to 12 weeks when given along with psychological support, although a later analysis suggested the effect subsequently dropped off.

The vast majority of the patients in the trial were naive to psychedelics, and so, Dr. Goodwin explained, they undergo a preparation phase during which they receive psychoeducation and have at least two visits with a therapist, who then stays with them during administration of the drug to offer support if they experience psychological distress.

Following the psilocybin session, participants go through a process known as integration, which involves two sessions with a therapist within 2 weeks.

“That, in our view, is essentially about safety, and about identifying problems that have arisen as a result of taking the drug,” said Dr. Goodwin.

The phase 2b trial examined changes in specific depression symptoms after psilocybin treatment in 233 patients with TRD. Participants were a mean age of 39.8 years and 59% were women. They were randomized to receive one of three doses of the drug: a 1-mg dose (n = 79), a 10-mg dose (n = 75), or a 25-mg dose (n = 79).

The primary outcome was changes in individual items on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology–Self Report (QIDS-SR-16) scale.

While the effect on overall depression scores is important, said Dr. Goodwin, many of the items included in the depression assessment scales are “uninformative.”
 

Reduction in ‘core’ symptoms

Participants were assessed by a blinded rater at baseline, day 1, day 2, and at 1, 2, 3, 6, 9, and 12 weeks after administration of COMP360. The primary endpoint was a reduction in individual items on MADRS and scores from baseline to 3 weeks. Individual items on the QIDS-SR-16 were rated by participants at the same time points.

Investigators found the largest mean changes from baseline were on reported and apparent sadness, lassitude, inability to feel, and concentration difficulties, with “very nice and clear dose-related differences,” Dr. Goodwin said.

The results indicate that the significant benefit with the largest dose at 3 weeks versus baseline was confined to items such as inability to feel and reported and apparent sadness on the MADRS and feeling sad and general interest on the QIDS-SR-16 (Table 1).

The results suggest the effect of COMP360 is “on the core symptoms of depression,” said Dr. Goodwin.

Enthusiasm running ahead of the data

Commenting on the findings, Bertha K. Madras, PhD, professor of psychobiology, department of psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, who was not involved in the study, said “hallucinogens are an intriguing class of drugs and I support ongoing high-quality research in this area.”

However, she told this news organization that the “breathtaking endorsement of this drug is far ahead of scientific data.”

She cited concerns such as the “narrow demographics” of participants, their previous experience with and expectations of hallucinogens, the “potential for symptom fluidity of enrollees,” such as depression evolving into psychosis, and the “undefined role” of the therapist during a hallucinogenic session.

“Finally, I am concerned that enthusiasm for therapeutic potential has been, and will continue to be, preempted and directed towards legalization and widespread access for vulnerable populations,” Dr. Madras said.

This, she said, “is occurring at breakneck speed in the U.S., with scant resistance or skepticism from the investigators engaged in therapeutic assessment.”

The study was funded by COMPASS Pathways. Dr. Goodwin has reported relationships with COMPASS Pathways, Buckley Psytech, Boehringer Ingelheim, Clerkenwell Health, EVA Pharma, Lundbeck, Janssen Global Services, Novartis, Ocean Neurosciences, P1vital, Sage Therapeutics, Servier, Takeda, and WebMD.
 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Although I have worked with depressed patients for many years, I have come to realize that it is now unfortunately an essential primary care skill to have nuanced conversations about reducing access to and use of deadly weapons (lethal means) for all families.

Firearms are now the leading cause of death for U.S. children and youth aged 1-24 years, an increase of 29.5% from 2019 to 2020. Among all youth firearm deaths, homicides (58%), suicides (37%), unintentional shootings (2%), and legal intervention (1%) were causes. These horrific numbers do not even include almost 400,000 child ED visits from 2010 to 2019 for nonfatal firearm injuries that were unintentional (39.4%), assault-related (37.7%), or self-harm (1.7%).

Accidental injury from firearms is greater when the weapon is a handgun or pistol as these are small enough to be fired by a 2-year-old, more likely to be stored loaded with ammunition as “self-protection,” and less likely to be in a gun storage case.

While an overall decline in gun ownership has occurred in homes with children ages 1-5, the proportion of weapons that are handguns has actually increased, posing higher danger to the family itself. We can’t assume hiding a weapon is ever enough as children often know the location of guns and their keys or lock codes.

Many Americans fear for their safety, have doubts about policing as protective, and strongly assert the need to protect themselves. While asking about guns in the home is universally recommended, these beliefs need to be taken into account in the discussion. It is also important to speak with the firearm owner, most often the father. We might ask, “Do you feel that you need a firearm in your home to feel safe?” as a way to nonjudgmentally acknowledge their beliefs. Because women are more likely to be killed by their spouses than by all other types of assailants combined, we can ask, “What dangers worry you the most?” and “Do you feel safe in your current and any past relationships?” If their answer is worrisome, the discussion must first turn to dealing with the family situation. If the perceived threat is outside the family, we can inform families that having a gun in evidence in the home greatly increases the risk of being hurt by an assailant as well as risk for child injury and death. We might ask, “Can you think of any other ways to protect your home (for example, alarm system, outdoor lighting, dog, or pepper spray)?”

If parents insist on keeping a gun, we can strongly and directly recommend that all firearms be stored locked, unloaded, and with ammunition locked and stored separately. We can provide information on such locking and storage options. Programs in which information on devices to disable the gun were provided – such as cables to pass through the chamber or trigger locks – have shown big increases in safe gun storage. It may be worth saying/posting information on the Child Access Prevention (CAP) laws, enacted by many states, making adults owning firearms that are not stored safely unloaded legally responsible for any resulting injuries or deaths. Such laws have reduced injuries of both children and adults by 30%-40%, unintentional gun deaths by 23%, and gun suicides by 11% (for 14- to 17-year-olds).

If the reason for owning a gun is for hunting, the owner is more likely to have had firearm safety training and use a long gun. Long guns are more difficult for a child. Discussing safe hunting gun storage is still worth recommending, as is removing any handguns they may own as these are most dangerous.

Removing or securing firearms is important for everyone’s safety but it is an essential and perhaps more difficult topic of discussion when a child is at risk for suicide or harming others. We need to consider some crucial facts about completed suicide, now the leading cause of death in children and adolescents and largely from guns. Most suicide attempts occur within 10 minutes of having a wave of suicidal thoughts. These waves of thoughts may be acted upon immediately when lethal means are available, with guns by far the most likely to result in death. It is therefore critical to assess access and counsel about lethal means in every family with a child reporting thoughts of killing themselves or others, or a history of violence or substance use. Even without imminent risk of self-harm, we can start a discussion about securing lethal means by saying, “It’s like wearing a seatbelt; you don’t expect a car crash, but if one happens, wearing a safety belt can greatly reduce injury. Guns are the most frequent cause of dying, so let’s make a plan to reduce access to those.”

Creating a written plan to deal with waves of suicidal thoughts is the basis of a Safety Plan. We can accurately remind families and youth that “When someone is struggling like this, sometimes suicidal feelings can show up and get worse fast. There are steps I routinely recommend to make things safer at home.”

It is important to assess the presence of guns in the primary home and other places the child spends time even if we have asked in the past, as things change. If firearms are present, even if locked up appropriately, when a child is having suicidal thoughts we can say, “What some gun owners in your situation do is store weapons elsewhere temporarily with someone they trust, at a self-storage unit, gun or pawn shop, or police department. I’d like to talk over storage options like that with you.” If the child themself owns the firearm, they need to agree with a removal or lock up plan for giving up their access.

If the gun owner is unwilling to remove firearms, even temporarily, we can ask them to lock them up separately from ammunition, a move that alone reduces danger a lot, and ensure the child has no access to the keys or combination. Better yet, we can ask, “Would you be willing to ask someone who doesn’t live in your home to hold the keys or to change the combination temporarily or at least store the ammunition?” They could also remove from the home a critical component of the gun so that it can’t fire, such as the slide or firing pin. If even those steps are not accepted, we can ask, “What other options would you be willing to consider to increase your child’s safety, at least until s/he is doing better?”

Whatever plan we negotiate with the family, as for any health behavior change strategy, it is more likely to be implemented if we summarize the specifics, write them down, and set a time-frame for carrying it out. We might say, “Let’s review who’s doing what and when: Dad will take the guns to his uncle’s house tomorrow and meanwhile, he will put them in the gun safe.” A follow-up call or contact soon, a key part of management of suicidal ideation, also signals how strongly we care about these safety measures and has been shown to increase implementation. We might call to say, “I wanted to check in and see how [you/your child] is doing and also ask how the plan is going that we talked about for gun storage.”

Discussions about firearms can spark strong emotions, especially if the family suspects political motivations. The Florida law prohibiting health care providers from discussing guns with patients was overturned but the thinking remains and may give us pause before having these important conversations. First of all, we need to stay calm and be prepared with key facts. The “sandwich” method is a useful approach to reduce resistance: start with something you can agree on (such as “What we hear on the news can make us all scared about safety”); then add the facts we want to convey (such as “You are actually less likely to get hurt in a break-in if you do not have a gun”); then conclude with a positive (such as “I can see that you are giving a lot of thought to how to keep your family safe”). Families generally trust our intentions and knowledge and appreciate rather than resent safety counseling when it is given in a nonjudgmental manner. Because we are protectors of child health, firearm safety must be an essential part of our anticipatory guidance.

Dr. Howard is assistant professor of pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and creator of CHADIS (www.CHADIS.com). She had no other relevant disclosures. Dr. Howard’s contribution to this publication was as a paid expert to MDedge News. E-mail her at [email protected].

*Wording suggestions adapted from https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/recommendations/clinicians.

Although I have worked with depressed patients for many years, I have come to realize that it is now unfortunately an essential primary care skill to have nuanced conversations about reducing access to and use of deadly weapons (lethal means) for all families.

Firearms are now the leading cause of death for U.S. children and youth aged 1-24 years, an increase of 29.5% from 2019 to 2020. Among all youth firearm deaths, homicides (58%), suicides (37%), unintentional shootings (2%), and legal intervention (1%) were causes. These horrific numbers do not even include almost 400,000 child ED visits from 2010 to 2019 for nonfatal firearm injuries that were unintentional (39.4%), assault-related (37.7%), or self-harm (1.7%).

Accidental injury from firearms is greater when the weapon is a handgun or pistol as these are small enough to be fired by a 2-year-old, more likely to be stored loaded with ammunition as “self-protection,” and less likely to be in a gun storage case.

While an overall decline in gun ownership has occurred in homes with children ages 1-5, the proportion of weapons that are handguns has actually increased, posing higher danger to the family itself. We can’t assume hiding a weapon is ever enough as children often know the location of guns and their keys or lock codes.

Many Americans fear for their safety, have doubts about policing as protective, and strongly assert the need to protect themselves. While asking about guns in the home is universally recommended, these beliefs need to be taken into account in the discussion. It is also important to speak with the firearm owner, most often the father. We might ask, “Do you feel that you need a firearm in your home to feel safe?” as a way to nonjudgmentally acknowledge their beliefs. Because women are more likely to be killed by their spouses than by all other types of assailants combined, we can ask, “What dangers worry you the most?” and “Do you feel safe in your current and any past relationships?” If their answer is worrisome, the discussion must first turn to dealing with the family situation. If the perceived threat is outside the family, we can inform families that having a gun in evidence in the home greatly increases the risk of being hurt by an assailant as well as risk for child injury and death. We might ask, “Can you think of any other ways to protect your home (for example, alarm system, outdoor lighting, dog, or pepper spray)?”

If parents insist on keeping a gun, we can strongly and directly recommend that all firearms be stored locked, unloaded, and with ammunition locked and stored separately. We can provide information on such locking and storage options. Programs in which information on devices to disable the gun were provided – such as cables to pass through the chamber or trigger locks – have shown big increases in safe gun storage. It may be worth saying/posting information on the Child Access Prevention (CAP) laws, enacted by many states, making adults owning firearms that are not stored safely unloaded legally responsible for any resulting injuries or deaths. Such laws have reduced injuries of both children and adults by 30%-40%, unintentional gun deaths by 23%, and gun suicides by 11% (for 14- to 17-year-olds).

If the reason for owning a gun is for hunting, the owner is more likely to have had firearm safety training and use a long gun. Long guns are more difficult for a child. Discussing safe hunting gun storage is still worth recommending, as is removing any handguns they may own as these are most dangerous.

Removing or securing firearms is important for everyone’s safety but it is an essential and perhaps more difficult topic of discussion when a child is at risk for suicide or harming others. We need to consider some crucial facts about completed suicide, now the leading cause of death in children and adolescents and largely from guns. Most suicide attempts occur within 10 minutes of having a wave of suicidal thoughts. These waves of thoughts may be acted upon immediately when lethal means are available, with guns by far the most likely to result in death. It is therefore critical to assess access and counsel about lethal means in every family with a child reporting thoughts of killing themselves or others, or a history of violence or substance use. Even without imminent risk of self-harm, we can start a discussion about securing lethal means by saying, “It’s like wearing a seatbelt; you don’t expect a car crash, but if one happens, wearing a safety belt can greatly reduce injury. Guns are the most frequent cause of dying, so let’s make a plan to reduce access to those.”

Creating a written plan to deal with waves of suicidal thoughts is the basis of a Safety Plan. We can accurately remind families and youth that “When someone is struggling like this, sometimes suicidal feelings can show up and get worse fast. There are steps I routinely recommend to make things safer at home.”

It is important to assess the presence of guns in the primary home and other places the child spends time even if we have asked in the past, as things change. If firearms are present, even if locked up appropriately, when a child is having suicidal thoughts we can say, “What some gun owners in your situation do is store weapons elsewhere temporarily with someone they trust, at a self-storage unit, gun or pawn shop, or police department. I’d like to talk over storage options like that with you.” If the child themself owns the firearm, they need to agree with a removal or lock up plan for giving up their access.

If the gun owner is unwilling to remove firearms, even temporarily, we can ask them to lock them up separately from ammunition, a move that alone reduces danger a lot, and ensure the child has no access to the keys or combination. Better yet, we can ask, “Would you be willing to ask someone who doesn’t live in your home to hold the keys or to change the combination temporarily or at least store the ammunition?” They could also remove from the home a critical component of the gun so that it can’t fire, such as the slide or firing pin. If even those steps are not accepted, we can ask, “What other options would you be willing to consider to increase your child’s safety, at least until s/he is doing better?”

Whatever plan we negotiate with the family, as for any health behavior change strategy, it is more likely to be implemented if we summarize the specifics, write them down, and set a time-frame for carrying it out. We might say, “Let’s review who’s doing what and when: Dad will take the guns to his uncle’s house tomorrow and meanwhile, he will put them in the gun safe.” A follow-up call or contact soon, a key part of management of suicidal ideation, also signals how strongly we care about these safety measures and has been shown to increase implementation. We might call to say, “I wanted to check in and see how [you/your child] is doing and also ask how the plan is going that we talked about for gun storage.”

Discussions about firearms can spark strong emotions, especially if the family suspects political motivations. The Florida law prohibiting health care providers from discussing guns with patients was overturned but the thinking remains and may give us pause before having these important conversations. First of all, we need to stay calm and be prepared with key facts. The “sandwich” method is a useful approach to reduce resistance: start with something you can agree on (such as “What we hear on the news can make us all scared about safety”); then add the facts we want to convey (such as “You are actually less likely to get hurt in a break-in if you do not have a gun”); then conclude with a positive (such as “I can see that you are giving a lot of thought to how to keep your family safe”). Families generally trust our intentions and knowledge and appreciate rather than resent safety counseling when it is given in a nonjudgmental manner. Because we are protectors of child health, firearm safety must be an essential part of our anticipatory guidance.

Dr. Howard is assistant professor of pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and creator of CHADIS (www.CHADIS.com). She had no other relevant disclosures. Dr. Howard’s contribution to this publication was as a paid expert to MDedge News. E-mail her at [email protected].

*Wording suggestions adapted from https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/recommendations/clinicians.

Although I have worked with depressed patients for many years, I have come to realize that it is now unfortunately an essential primary care skill to have nuanced conversations about reducing access to and use of deadly weapons (lethal means) for all families.

Firearms are now the leading cause of death for U.S. children and youth aged 1-24 years, an increase of 29.5% from 2019 to 2020. Among all youth firearm deaths, homicides (58%), suicides (37%), unintentional shootings (2%), and legal intervention (1%) were causes. These horrific numbers do not even include almost 400,000 child ED visits from 2010 to 2019 for nonfatal firearm injuries that were unintentional (39.4%), assault-related (37.7%), or self-harm (1.7%).

Accidental injury from firearms is greater when the weapon is a handgun or pistol as these are small enough to be fired by a 2-year-old, more likely to be stored loaded with ammunition as “self-protection,” and less likely to be in a gun storage case.

While an overall decline in gun ownership has occurred in homes with children ages 1-5, the proportion of weapons that are handguns has actually increased, posing higher danger to the family itself. We can’t assume hiding a weapon is ever enough as children often know the location of guns and their keys or lock codes.

Many Americans fear for their safety, have doubts about policing as protective, and strongly assert the need to protect themselves. While asking about guns in the home is universally recommended, these beliefs need to be taken into account in the discussion. It is also important to speak with the firearm owner, most often the father. We might ask, “Do you feel that you need a firearm in your home to feel safe?” as a way to nonjudgmentally acknowledge their beliefs. Because women are more likely to be killed by their spouses than by all other types of assailants combined, we can ask, “What dangers worry you the most?” and “Do you feel safe in your current and any past relationships?” If their answer is worrisome, the discussion must first turn to dealing with the family situation. If the perceived threat is outside the family, we can inform families that having a gun in evidence in the home greatly increases the risk of being hurt by an assailant as well as risk for child injury and death. We might ask, “Can you think of any other ways to protect your home (for example, alarm system, outdoor lighting, dog, or pepper spray)?”

If parents insist on keeping a gun, we can strongly and directly recommend that all firearms be stored locked, unloaded, and with ammunition locked and stored separately. We can provide information on such locking and storage options. Programs in which information on devices to disable the gun were provided – such as cables to pass through the chamber or trigger locks – have shown big increases in safe gun storage. It may be worth saying/posting information on the Child Access Prevention (CAP) laws, enacted by many states, making adults owning firearms that are not stored safely unloaded legally responsible for any resulting injuries or deaths. Such laws have reduced injuries of both children and adults by 30%-40%, unintentional gun deaths by 23%, and gun suicides by 11% (for 14- to 17-year-olds).

If the reason for owning a gun is for hunting, the owner is more likely to have had firearm safety training and use a long gun. Long guns are more difficult for a child. Discussing safe hunting gun storage is still worth recommending, as is removing any handguns they may own as these are most dangerous.

Removing or securing firearms is important for everyone’s safety but it is an essential and perhaps more difficult topic of discussion when a child is at risk for suicide or harming others. We need to consider some crucial facts about completed suicide, now the leading cause of death in children and adolescents and largely from guns. Most suicide attempts occur within 10 minutes of having a wave of suicidal thoughts. These waves of thoughts may be acted upon immediately when lethal means are available, with guns by far the most likely to result in death. It is therefore critical to assess access and counsel about lethal means in every family with a child reporting thoughts of killing themselves or others, or a history of violence or substance use. Even without imminent risk of self-harm, we can start a discussion about securing lethal means by saying, “It’s like wearing a seatbelt; you don’t expect a car crash, but if one happens, wearing a safety belt can greatly reduce injury. Guns are the most frequent cause of dying, so let’s make a plan to reduce access to those.”

Creating a written plan to deal with waves of suicidal thoughts is the basis of a Safety Plan. We can accurately remind families and youth that “When someone is struggling like this, sometimes suicidal feelings can show up and get worse fast. There are steps I routinely recommend to make things safer at home.”

It is important to assess the presence of guns in the primary home and other places the child spends time even if we have asked in the past, as things change. If firearms are present, even if locked up appropriately, when a child is having suicidal thoughts we can say, “What some gun owners in your situation do is store weapons elsewhere temporarily with someone they trust, at a self-storage unit, gun or pawn shop, or police department. I’d like to talk over storage options like that with you.” If the child themself owns the firearm, they need to agree with a removal or lock up plan for giving up their access.

If the gun owner is unwilling to remove firearms, even temporarily, we can ask them to lock them up separately from ammunition, a move that alone reduces danger a lot, and ensure the child has no access to the keys or combination. Better yet, we can ask, “Would you be willing to ask someone who doesn’t live in your home to hold the keys or to change the combination temporarily or at least store the ammunition?” They could also remove from the home a critical component of the gun so that it can’t fire, such as the slide or firing pin. If even those steps are not accepted, we can ask, “What other options would you be willing to consider to increase your child’s safety, at least until s/he is doing better?”

Whatever plan we negotiate with the family, as for any health behavior change strategy, it is more likely to be implemented if we summarize the specifics, write them down, and set a time-frame for carrying it out. We might say, “Let’s review who’s doing what and when: Dad will take the guns to his uncle’s house tomorrow and meanwhile, he will put them in the gun safe.” A follow-up call or contact soon, a key part of management of suicidal ideation, also signals how strongly we care about these safety measures and has been shown to increase implementation. We might call to say, “I wanted to check in and see how [you/your child] is doing and also ask how the plan is going that we talked about for gun storage.”

Discussions about firearms can spark strong emotions, especially if the family suspects political motivations. The Florida law prohibiting health care providers from discussing guns with patients was overturned but the thinking remains and may give us pause before having these important conversations. First of all, we need to stay calm and be prepared with key facts. The “sandwich” method is a useful approach to reduce resistance: start with something you can agree on (such as “What we hear on the news can make us all scared about safety”); then add the facts we want to convey (such as “You are actually less likely to get hurt in a break-in if you do not have a gun”); then conclude with a positive (such as “I can see that you are giving a lot of thought to how to keep your family safe”). Families generally trust our intentions and knowledge and appreciate rather than resent safety counseling when it is given in a nonjudgmental manner. Because we are protectors of child health, firearm safety must be an essential part of our anticipatory guidance.

Dr. Howard is assistant professor of pediatrics at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and creator of CHADIS (www.CHADIS.com). She had no other relevant disclosures. Dr. Howard’s contribution to this publication was as a paid expert to MDedge News. E-mail her at [email protected].

*Wording suggestions adapted from https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/recommendations/clinicians.

Approximately 10,000 suicide deaths are recorded in Brazil every year. The suicide risk is highest among patients with depressive disorders, particularly women (> 18% vs. 11% for men).

There are countless people who work to prevent suicide, and the challenges they face are many. But now, on the horizon, there are new tools that could prove invaluable to their efforts – tools such as biomarkers. In a study recently published in the journal Frontiers in Psychiatry, researchers from the Catholic University of Pelotas (UCPel), Brazil, reported an association of glutathione (GSH) with the degree of suicide risk in women at 18 months postpartum. Specifically, they found that reduced serum GSH levels were significantly lower for those with moderate to high suicide risk than for those without suicide risk. Their findings suggest that GSH may be a potential biomarker or etiologic factor among women at risk for suicide, with therapeutic implications.

This was a case-control study nested within a cohort study. From this cohort, 45 women were selected at 18 months postpartum. Thirty of them had mood disorders, such as major depression and bipolar disorder. The other 15 participants, none of whom had a mood disorder, made up the control group.

Depression and the risk for suicide were assessed using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview Plus (MINI-Plus 5.0.0 Brazilian version), module A and module C, respectively. Blood samples were collected to evaluate serum levels of the following oxidative stress biomarkers: reactive oxygen species, superoxide dismutase, and GSH.

The prevalence of suicide risk observed in the women at 18 months postpartum was 24.4%. The prevalence of suicide risk in the mood disorder group was 36.7%.

In addition, the statistical analysis found that women with moderate to high suicide risk had cerebral redox imbalance, resulting in a decrease in blood GSH levels.

The study team was led by neuroscientist Adriano Martimbianco de Assis, PhD, the coordinator of UCPel’s postgraduate program in health and behavior. He said that the correlation identified between GSH serum levels and suicide risk gives rise to two possible applications: using GSH as a biomarker for suicide risk and using GSH therapeutically.

Regarding the former application, Dr. Martimbianco de Assis explained that additional studies are needed to take a step forward. “Although we believe that most of the GSH came from the brain – given that it’s the brain’s main antioxidant – as we analyze blood samples, we’re not yet able to rule out the possibility that it came from other organs,” he said in an interview. So, confirming that hypothesis will require studies that involve imaging brain tissue. According to Dr. Martimbianco de Assis, once there is confirmation, it will be possible to move to using the antioxidant as a biomarker for suicide risk.

He also shared his views about the second application: using GSH therapeutically. “We already know that there are very simple alternatives that can influence GSH levels, [and they] mostly have to do with exercise and [improving the quality of] the food one eats. But there are also drugs: for example, N-acetyl cysteine, which is a precursor of GSH.” Adopting strategies to increase the levels of this antioxidant in the body should reverse the imbalance identified in the study and, as a result, may lead to lowering the risk for suicide. But, he reiterated, “getting to a place where GSH [can be used] in clinical practice hinges on getting that confirmation that it did, in fact, come from the brain. Recall that our study found lower levels of GSH in women at risk for suicide.”

Even though the study evaluated postpartum women, it’s possible that the results can be extrapolated to other populations, said Dr. Martimbianco de Assis. This is because when the data were collected, 18 months had already passed since giving birth. The participants’ physiological condition at that point was more similar to the one prior to becoming pregnant.

The UCPel researchers continue to follow the cohort. “We intend to continue monitoring GSH levels at other times. Forty-eight months have now passed since the women gave birth, and the idea is to continue studying [the patients involved in the study],” said Dr. Martimbianco de Assis, adding that the team also intends to analyze brain tissue from in vitro studies using cell cultures.

This article was translated from the Medscape Portuguese Edition and a version appeared on Medscape.com.

Approximately 10,000 suicide deaths are recorded in Brazil every year. The suicide risk is highest among patients with depressive disorders, particularly women (> 18% vs. 11% for men).

There are countless people who work to prevent suicide, and the challenges they face are many. But now, on the horizon, there are new tools that could prove invaluable to their efforts – tools such as biomarkers. In a study recently published in the journal Frontiers in Psychiatry, researchers from the Catholic University of Pelotas (UCPel), Brazil, reported an association of glutathione (GSH) with the degree of suicide risk in women at 18 months postpartum. Specifically, they found that reduced serum GSH levels were significantly lower for those with moderate to high suicide risk than for those without suicide risk. Their findings suggest that GSH may be a potential biomarker or etiologic factor among women at risk for suicide, with therapeutic implications.

This was a case-control study nested within a cohort study. From this cohort, 45 women were selected at 18 months postpartum. Thirty of them had mood disorders, such as major depression and bipolar disorder. The other 15 participants, none of whom had a mood disorder, made up the control group.

Depression and the risk for suicide were assessed using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview Plus (MINI-Plus 5.0.0 Brazilian version), module A and module C, respectively. Blood samples were collected to evaluate serum levels of the following oxidative stress biomarkers: reactive oxygen species, superoxide dismutase, and GSH.

The prevalence of suicide risk observed in the women at 18 months postpartum was 24.4%. The prevalence of suicide risk in the mood disorder group was 36.7%.

In addition, the statistical analysis found that women with moderate to high suicide risk had cerebral redox imbalance, resulting in a decrease in blood GSH levels.

The study team was led by neuroscientist Adriano Martimbianco de Assis, PhD, the coordinator of UCPel’s postgraduate program in health and behavior. He said that the correlation identified between GSH serum levels and suicide risk gives rise to two possible applications: using GSH as a biomarker for suicide risk and using GSH therapeutically.

Regarding the former application, Dr. Martimbianco de Assis explained that additional studies are needed to take a step forward. “Although we believe that most of the GSH came from the brain – given that it’s the brain’s main antioxidant – as we analyze blood samples, we’re not yet able to rule out the possibility that it came from other organs,” he said in an interview. So, confirming that hypothesis will require studies that involve imaging brain tissue. According to Dr. Martimbianco de Assis, once there is confirmation, it will be possible to move to using the antioxidant as a biomarker for suicide risk.

He also shared his views about the second application: using GSH therapeutically. “We already know that there are very simple alternatives that can influence GSH levels, [and they] mostly have to do with exercise and [improving the quality of] the food one eats. But there are also drugs: for example, N-acetyl cysteine, which is a precursor of GSH.” Adopting strategies to increase the levels of this antioxidant in the body should reverse the imbalance identified in the study and, as a result, may lead to lowering the risk for suicide. But, he reiterated, “getting to a place where GSH [can be used] in clinical practice hinges on getting that confirmation that it did, in fact, come from the brain. Recall that our study found lower levels of GSH in women at risk for suicide.”

Even though the study evaluated postpartum women, it’s possible that the results can be extrapolated to other populations, said Dr. Martimbianco de Assis. This is because when the data were collected, 18 months had already passed since giving birth. The participants’ physiological condition at that point was more similar to the one prior to becoming pregnant.

The UCPel researchers continue to follow the cohort. “We intend to continue monitoring GSH levels at other times. Forty-eight months have now passed since the women gave birth, and the idea is to continue studying [the patients involved in the study],” said Dr. Martimbianco de Assis, adding that the team also intends to analyze brain tissue from in vitro studies using cell cultures.

This article was translated from the Medscape Portuguese Edition and a version appeared on Medscape.com.

Approximately 10,000 suicide deaths are recorded in Brazil every year. The suicide risk is highest among patients with depressive disorders, particularly women (> 18% vs. 11% for men).

There are countless people who work to prevent suicide, and the challenges they face are many. But now, on the horizon, there are new tools that could prove invaluable to their efforts – tools such as biomarkers. In a study recently published in the journal Frontiers in Psychiatry, researchers from the Catholic University of Pelotas (UCPel), Brazil, reported an association of glutathione (GSH) with the degree of suicide risk in women at 18 months postpartum. Specifically, they found that reduced serum GSH levels were significantly lower for those with moderate to high suicide risk than for those without suicide risk. Their findings suggest that GSH may be a potential biomarker or etiologic factor among women at risk for suicide, with therapeutic implications.

This was a case-control study nested within a cohort study. From this cohort, 45 women were selected at 18 months postpartum. Thirty of them had mood disorders, such as major depression and bipolar disorder. The other 15 participants, none of whom had a mood disorder, made up the control group.

Depression and the risk for suicide were assessed using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview Plus (MINI-Plus 5.0.0 Brazilian version), module A and module C, respectively. Blood samples were collected to evaluate serum levels of the following oxidative stress biomarkers: reactive oxygen species, superoxide dismutase, and GSH.

The prevalence of suicide risk observed in the women at 18 months postpartum was 24.4%. The prevalence of suicide risk in the mood disorder group was 36.7%.

In addition, the statistical analysis found that women with moderate to high suicide risk had cerebral redox imbalance, resulting in a decrease in blood GSH levels.

The study team was led by neuroscientist Adriano Martimbianco de Assis, PhD, the coordinator of UCPel’s postgraduate program in health and behavior. He said that the correlation identified between GSH serum levels and suicide risk gives rise to two possible applications: using GSH as a biomarker for suicide risk and using GSH therapeutically.

Regarding the former application, Dr. Martimbianco de Assis explained that additional studies are needed to take a step forward. “Although we believe that most of the GSH came from the brain – given that it’s the brain’s main antioxidant – as we analyze blood samples, we’re not yet able to rule out the possibility that it came from other organs,” he said in an interview. So, confirming that hypothesis will require studies that involve imaging brain tissue. According to Dr. Martimbianco de Assis, once there is confirmation, it will be possible to move to using the antioxidant as a biomarker for suicide risk.

He also shared his views about the second application: using GSH therapeutically. “We already know that there are very simple alternatives that can influence GSH levels, [and they] mostly have to do with exercise and [improving the quality of] the food one eats. But there are also drugs: for example, N-acetyl cysteine, which is a precursor of GSH.” Adopting strategies to increase the levels of this antioxidant in the body should reverse the imbalance identified in the study and, as a result, may lead to lowering the risk for suicide. But, he reiterated, “getting to a place where GSH [can be used] in clinical practice hinges on getting that confirmation that it did, in fact, come from the brain. Recall that our study found lower levels of GSH in women at risk for suicide.”

Even though the study evaluated postpartum women, it’s possible that the results can be extrapolated to other populations, said Dr. Martimbianco de Assis. This is because when the data were collected, 18 months had already passed since giving birth. The participants’ physiological condition at that point was more similar to the one prior to becoming pregnant.

The UCPel researchers continue to follow the cohort. “We intend to continue monitoring GSH levels at other times. Forty-eight months have now passed since the women gave birth, and the idea is to continue studying [the patients involved in the study],” said Dr. Martimbianco de Assis, adding that the team also intends to analyze brain tissue from in vitro studies using cell cultures.

This article was translated from the Medscape Portuguese Edition and a version appeared on Medscape.com.

Three studies provide new insight into the growing problem of gaming disorder (GD), including the condition’s genesis, effective treatments, and the need for a greater focus on recovery.

A team of international researchers led by Orsolya Király, PhD, of the Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, reviewed the characteristics and etiology of GD. They concluded that its genesis arises from the interaction of environmental factors, game-specific factors and individual factors, including personality traits, comorbid psychopathology, and genetic predisposition.

“The development of GD is a complex process and we identified three major factors involved,” study coauthor Mark Griffiths, PhD, distinguished professor of behavioral addiction and director of the international gaming research unit, psychology department, Nottingham (England) Trent University, said in an interview. Because of this complexity, “prevention and intervention in GD require multiprofessional action.”

The review was published in Comprehensive Psychiatry.

In a second paper, published online in Frontiers in Psychiatry, Chinese investigators reviewing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) presented “compelling evidence” to support four effective interventions for GD: group counseling, acceptance and cognitive restructuring intervention program (ACRIP), short-term cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and craving behavioral intervention (CBI).

A third paper, published online in the Journal of Behavioral Addictions, in which researchers analyzed close to 50 studies of GD, found that the concept of “recovery” is rarely mentioned in GD research. Lead author Belle Gavriel-Fried, PhD, senior professor, Bob Shapell School of Social Work, Tel Aviv University, said in an interview that recovery is a “holistic concept that taps into many aspects of life.”

Understanding the “differences in the impact and availability” of negative and positive human resources and their effect on recovery “can help clinicians to customize treatment,” she said.
 

Complex interplay

GD is garnering increasing attention in the clinical community, especially since 2019, when the World Health Organization included it in the ICD-11.

“Although for most individuals, gaming is a recreational activity or even a passion, a small group of gamers experiences negative symptoms which impact their mental and physical health and cause functional impairment,” wrote Dr. Király and colleagues.

Dr. Griffiths explained that his team wanted to provide an “up-to-date primer – a ‘one-stop shop’ – on all things etiologic concerning gaming disorder for academics and practitioners” as well as others, such as health policy makers, teachers, and individuals in the gaming industry.

The researchers identified three factors that increase the risk of developing GD, the first being gaming-related factors, which make video games “addictive in a way that vulnerable individuals may develop GD.”

For example, GD is more prevalent among online versus offline game players, possibly because online multiplayer games “provide safe environments in which players can fulfill their social needs while remaining invisible and anonymous.”

Game genre also matters, with massively multiplayer online role-playing games, first-person/third-person shooter games, real-time strategy games, and multiplayer online battle arena games most implicated in problematic gaming. Moreover, the “monetization techniques” of certain games also increase their addictive potential.

The researchers point to individual factors that increase the risk of developing GD, including male sex and younger age, personality traits like impulsivity and sensation-seeking, and comorbidities including ADHD, anxiety, and depression.

Poor self-esteem and lack of social competencies make gaming “an easy and efficient way to compensate for these deficiencies, which in turn, heightens the risk for developing GD,” they add. Neurobiological processes and genetic predisposition also play a role.

Lastly, the authors mentioned environmental factors, including family and peer-group issues, problems at work or school, and cultural factors.

“The take-home messages are that problematic gaming has had a long history of empirical research; that the psychiatric community now views GD as a legitimate mental health issue; and that the reasons for GD are complex, with many different factors involved in the acquisition, development, and maintenance of GD,” said Dr. Griffiths.
 

Beneficial behavioral therapies

Yuzhou Chen and colleagues, Southwest University, Chongqing, China, conducted a systematic review of RCTs investigating interventions for treating GD. Despite the “large number of intervention approaches developed over the past decade, as yet, there are no authoritative guidelines for what makes an effective GD intervention,” they wrote.

Few studies have focused specifically on GD but instead have focused on a combination of internet addiction and GD. But the interventions used to treat internet addiction may not apply to GD. And few studies have utilized an RCT design. The researchers therefore set out to review studies that specifically used an RCT design to investigate interventions for GD.

They searched six databases to identify RCTs that tested GD interventions from the inception of each database until the end of 2021. To be included, participants had to be diagnosed with GD and receive either a “complete and systematic intervention” or be in a comparator control group receiving no intervention or placebo.

Seven studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 332 participants). The studies tested five interventions:
 

• Group counseling with three different themes (interpersonal interaction, acceptance and commitment, cognition and behavior)
• CBI, which addresses cravings
• Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)
• ACRIP with the main objectives of reducing GD symptoms and improving psychological well-being
• Short-term CBT, which addresses maladaptive cognitions

The mean duration of the interventions ranged from 3 to 15 weeks.

The primary outcome was GD severity, with secondary outcomes including depression, anxiety, cognition, game time, self-esteem, self-compassion, shyness, impulsivity, and psychological well-being.

Group counseling, CBI, ACRIP, and short-term CBT interventions had “a significant effect on decreasing the severity of GD,” while tDCS had “no significant effect.”

Behavioral therapy “exerts its effect on the behavioral mechanism of GD; for example, by reducing the association between game-related stimuli and the game player’s response to them,” the authors suggested.

Recovery vs. pathology

Recovery “traditionally represents the transition from trauma and illness to health,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues noted.

Two paradigms of recovery are “deficit based” and “strength based.” The first assesses recovery in terms of abstinence, sobriety, and symptom reduction; and the second focuses on “growth, rather than a reduction in pathology.”

But although recovery is “embedded within mental health addiction policies and practice,” the concept has received “scant attention” in GD research.

The researchers therefore aimed to “map and summarize the state of the art on recovery from GD,” defining “recovery” as the “ability to handle conflicting feelings and emotions without external mediation.”

They conducted a scoping review of all literature regarding GD or internet GD published before February 2022 (47 studies, 2,924 participants with GD; mean age range, 13-26 years).

Most studies (n = 32) consisted of exclusively male subjects. Only 10 included both sexes, and female participants were in the minority.

Most studies (n = 42) did not address the concept of recovery, although all studies did report significant improvements in gaming-related pathology. Typical terminology used to describe changes in participants’ GD were “reduction” and/or “decrease” in symptom severity.

Although 18 studies mentioned the word “recovery,” only 5 actually discussed issues related to the notion of recovery, and only 5 used the term “abstinence.”

In addition, only 13 studies examined positive components of life in patients with GD, such as increased psychological well-being, life satisfaction, quality of life, improved emotional state, relational skills, and executive control, as well as improved self-care, hygiene, sleep, and interest in school studies.

“As a person and researcher who believes that words shape the way we perceive things, I think we should use the word ‘recovery’ rather than ‘pathology’ much more in research, therapy, and policy,” said Dr. Gavriel-Fried.

She noted that, because GD is a “relatively new behavioral addictive disorder, theories are still being developed and definitions of the symptoms are still being fine-tuned.”

“The field as a whole will benefit from future theoretical work that will lead to practical solutions for treating GD and ways to identify the risk factors,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried said.
 

Filling a research gap

In a comment, David Greenfield, MD, founder and medical director of the Connecticut-based Center for Internet and Technology Addiction, noted that 3 decades ago, there was almost no research into this area.

“The fact that we have these reviews and studies is good because all of the research adds to the science providing more data about an area we still don’t know that much about, where research is still in its infancy,” said Dr. Greenfield, who was not involved with the present study.

“Although we have definitions, there’s no complete agreement about the definitions of GD, and we do not yet have a unified approach,” continued Dr. Greenfield, who wrote the books Overcoming Internet Addiction for Dummies and Virtual Addiction.

He suggested that “recovery” is rarely used as a concept in GD research perhaps because there’s a “bifurcation in the field of addiction medicine in which behavioral addictions are not seen as equivalent to substance addictions,” and, particularly with GD, the principles of “recovery” have not yet matured.

“Recovery means meaningful life away from the screen, not just abstinence from the screen,” said Dr. Greenfield.

The study by Mr. Chen and colleagues was supported by grants from the National Social Science Foundation of China, the Chongqing Research Program of Basic Research and Frontier Technology, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. Dr. Griffiths has reported receiving research funding from Norsk Tipping (the gambling operator owned by the Norwegian government). The study by Dr. Király and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. The study by Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. Dr. Gavriel-Fried has reported receiving grants from the Israel National Insurance Institute and the Committee for Independent Studies of the Israel Lottery. Dr. Greenfield reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Three studies provide new insight into the growing problem of gaming disorder (GD), including the condition’s genesis, effective treatments, and the need for a greater focus on recovery.

A team of international researchers led by Orsolya Király, PhD, of the Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, reviewed the characteristics and etiology of GD. They concluded that its genesis arises from the interaction of environmental factors, game-specific factors and individual factors, including personality traits, comorbid psychopathology, and genetic predisposition.

“The development of GD is a complex process and we identified three major factors involved,” study coauthor Mark Griffiths, PhD, distinguished professor of behavioral addiction and director of the international gaming research unit, psychology department, Nottingham (England) Trent University, said in an interview. Because of this complexity, “prevention and intervention in GD require multiprofessional action.”

The review was published in Comprehensive Psychiatry.

In a second paper, published online in Frontiers in Psychiatry, Chinese investigators reviewing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) presented “compelling evidence” to support four effective interventions for GD: group counseling, acceptance and cognitive restructuring intervention program (ACRIP), short-term cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and craving behavioral intervention (CBI).

A third paper, published online in the Journal of Behavioral Addictions, in which researchers analyzed close to 50 studies of GD, found that the concept of “recovery” is rarely mentioned in GD research. Lead author Belle Gavriel-Fried, PhD, senior professor, Bob Shapell School of Social Work, Tel Aviv University, said in an interview that recovery is a “holistic concept that taps into many aspects of life.”

Understanding the “differences in the impact and availability” of negative and positive human resources and their effect on recovery “can help clinicians to customize treatment,” she said.
 

Complex interplay

GD is garnering increasing attention in the clinical community, especially since 2019, when the World Health Organization included it in the ICD-11.

“Although for most individuals, gaming is a recreational activity or even a passion, a small group of gamers experiences negative symptoms which impact their mental and physical health and cause functional impairment,” wrote Dr. Király and colleagues.

Dr. Griffiths explained that his team wanted to provide an “up-to-date primer – a ‘one-stop shop’ – on all things etiologic concerning gaming disorder for academics and practitioners” as well as others, such as health policy makers, teachers, and individuals in the gaming industry.

The researchers identified three factors that increase the risk of developing GD, the first being gaming-related factors, which make video games “addictive in a way that vulnerable individuals may develop GD.”

For example, GD is more prevalent among online versus offline game players, possibly because online multiplayer games “provide safe environments in which players can fulfill their social needs while remaining invisible and anonymous.”

Game genre also matters, with massively multiplayer online role-playing games, first-person/third-person shooter games, real-time strategy games, and multiplayer online battle arena games most implicated in problematic gaming. Moreover, the “monetization techniques” of certain games also increase their addictive potential.

The researchers point to individual factors that increase the risk of developing GD, including male sex and younger age, personality traits like impulsivity and sensation-seeking, and comorbidities including ADHD, anxiety, and depression.

Poor self-esteem and lack of social competencies make gaming “an easy and efficient way to compensate for these deficiencies, which in turn, heightens the risk for developing GD,” they add. Neurobiological processes and genetic predisposition also play a role.

Lastly, the authors mentioned environmental factors, including family and peer-group issues, problems at work or school, and cultural factors.

“The take-home messages are that problematic gaming has had a long history of empirical research; that the psychiatric community now views GD as a legitimate mental health issue; and that the reasons for GD are complex, with many different factors involved in the acquisition, development, and maintenance of GD,” said Dr. Griffiths.
 

Beneficial behavioral therapies

Yuzhou Chen and colleagues, Southwest University, Chongqing, China, conducted a systematic review of RCTs investigating interventions for treating GD. Despite the “large number of intervention approaches developed over the past decade, as yet, there are no authoritative guidelines for what makes an effective GD intervention,” they wrote.

Few studies have focused specifically on GD but instead have focused on a combination of internet addiction and GD. But the interventions used to treat internet addiction may not apply to GD. And few studies have utilized an RCT design. The researchers therefore set out to review studies that specifically used an RCT design to investigate interventions for GD.

They searched six databases to identify RCTs that tested GD interventions from the inception of each database until the end of 2021. To be included, participants had to be diagnosed with GD and receive either a “complete and systematic intervention” or be in a comparator control group receiving no intervention or placebo.

Seven studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 332 participants). The studies tested five interventions:
 

• Group counseling with three different themes (interpersonal interaction, acceptance and commitment, cognition and behavior)
• CBI, which addresses cravings
• Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)
• ACRIP with the main objectives of reducing GD symptoms and improving psychological well-being
• Short-term CBT, which addresses maladaptive cognitions

The mean duration of the interventions ranged from 3 to 15 weeks.

The primary outcome was GD severity, with secondary outcomes including depression, anxiety, cognition, game time, self-esteem, self-compassion, shyness, impulsivity, and psychological well-being.

Group counseling, CBI, ACRIP, and short-term CBT interventions had “a significant effect on decreasing the severity of GD,” while tDCS had “no significant effect.”

Behavioral therapy “exerts its effect on the behavioral mechanism of GD; for example, by reducing the association between game-related stimuli and the game player’s response to them,” the authors suggested.

Recovery vs. pathology

Recovery “traditionally represents the transition from trauma and illness to health,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues noted.

Two paradigms of recovery are “deficit based” and “strength based.” The first assesses recovery in terms of abstinence, sobriety, and symptom reduction; and the second focuses on “growth, rather than a reduction in pathology.”

But although recovery is “embedded within mental health addiction policies and practice,” the concept has received “scant attention” in GD research.

The researchers therefore aimed to “map and summarize the state of the art on recovery from GD,” defining “recovery” as the “ability to handle conflicting feelings and emotions without external mediation.”

They conducted a scoping review of all literature regarding GD or internet GD published before February 2022 (47 studies, 2,924 participants with GD; mean age range, 13-26 years).

Most studies (n = 32) consisted of exclusively male subjects. Only 10 included both sexes, and female participants were in the minority.

Most studies (n = 42) did not address the concept of recovery, although all studies did report significant improvements in gaming-related pathology. Typical terminology used to describe changes in participants’ GD were “reduction” and/or “decrease” in symptom severity.

Although 18 studies mentioned the word “recovery,” only 5 actually discussed issues related to the notion of recovery, and only 5 used the term “abstinence.”

In addition, only 13 studies examined positive components of life in patients with GD, such as increased psychological well-being, life satisfaction, quality of life, improved emotional state, relational skills, and executive control, as well as improved self-care, hygiene, sleep, and interest in school studies.

“As a person and researcher who believes that words shape the way we perceive things, I think we should use the word ‘recovery’ rather than ‘pathology’ much more in research, therapy, and policy,” said Dr. Gavriel-Fried.

She noted that, because GD is a “relatively new behavioral addictive disorder, theories are still being developed and definitions of the symptoms are still being fine-tuned.”

“The field as a whole will benefit from future theoretical work that will lead to practical solutions for treating GD and ways to identify the risk factors,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried said.
 

Filling a research gap

In a comment, David Greenfield, MD, founder and medical director of the Connecticut-based Center for Internet and Technology Addiction, noted that 3 decades ago, there was almost no research into this area.

“The fact that we have these reviews and studies is good because all of the research adds to the science providing more data about an area we still don’t know that much about, where research is still in its infancy,” said Dr. Greenfield, who was not involved with the present study.

“Although we have definitions, there’s no complete agreement about the definitions of GD, and we do not yet have a unified approach,” continued Dr. Greenfield, who wrote the books Overcoming Internet Addiction for Dummies and Virtual Addiction.

He suggested that “recovery” is rarely used as a concept in GD research perhaps because there’s a “bifurcation in the field of addiction medicine in which behavioral addictions are not seen as equivalent to substance addictions,” and, particularly with GD, the principles of “recovery” have not yet matured.

“Recovery means meaningful life away from the screen, not just abstinence from the screen,” said Dr. Greenfield.

The study by Mr. Chen and colleagues was supported by grants from the National Social Science Foundation of China, the Chongqing Research Program of Basic Research and Frontier Technology, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. Dr. Griffiths has reported receiving research funding from Norsk Tipping (the gambling operator owned by the Norwegian government). The study by Dr. Király and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. The study by Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. Dr. Gavriel-Fried has reported receiving grants from the Israel National Insurance Institute and the Committee for Independent Studies of the Israel Lottery. Dr. Greenfield reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Three studies provide new insight into the growing problem of gaming disorder (GD), including the condition’s genesis, effective treatments, and the need for a greater focus on recovery.

A team of international researchers led by Orsolya Király, PhD, of the Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, reviewed the characteristics and etiology of GD. They concluded that its genesis arises from the interaction of environmental factors, game-specific factors and individual factors, including personality traits, comorbid psychopathology, and genetic predisposition.

“The development of GD is a complex process and we identified three major factors involved,” study coauthor Mark Griffiths, PhD, distinguished professor of behavioral addiction and director of the international gaming research unit, psychology department, Nottingham (England) Trent University, said in an interview. Because of this complexity, “prevention and intervention in GD require multiprofessional action.”

The review was published in Comprehensive Psychiatry.

In a second paper, published online in Frontiers in Psychiatry, Chinese investigators reviewing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) presented “compelling evidence” to support four effective interventions for GD: group counseling, acceptance and cognitive restructuring intervention program (ACRIP), short-term cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and craving behavioral intervention (CBI).

A third paper, published online in the Journal of Behavioral Addictions, in which researchers analyzed close to 50 studies of GD, found that the concept of “recovery” is rarely mentioned in GD research. Lead author Belle Gavriel-Fried, PhD, senior professor, Bob Shapell School of Social Work, Tel Aviv University, said in an interview that recovery is a “holistic concept that taps into many aspects of life.”

Understanding the “differences in the impact and availability” of negative and positive human resources and their effect on recovery “can help clinicians to customize treatment,” she said.
 

Complex interplay

GD is garnering increasing attention in the clinical community, especially since 2019, when the World Health Organization included it in the ICD-11.

“Although for most individuals, gaming is a recreational activity or even a passion, a small group of gamers experiences negative symptoms which impact their mental and physical health and cause functional impairment,” wrote Dr. Király and colleagues.

Dr. Griffiths explained that his team wanted to provide an “up-to-date primer – a ‘one-stop shop’ – on all things etiologic concerning gaming disorder for academics and practitioners” as well as others, such as health policy makers, teachers, and individuals in the gaming industry.

The researchers identified three factors that increase the risk of developing GD, the first being gaming-related factors, which make video games “addictive in a way that vulnerable individuals may develop GD.”

For example, GD is more prevalent among online versus offline game players, possibly because online multiplayer games “provide safe environments in which players can fulfill their social needs while remaining invisible and anonymous.”

Game genre also matters, with massively multiplayer online role-playing games, first-person/third-person shooter games, real-time strategy games, and multiplayer online battle arena games most implicated in problematic gaming. Moreover, the “monetization techniques” of certain games also increase their addictive potential.

The researchers point to individual factors that increase the risk of developing GD, including male sex and younger age, personality traits like impulsivity and sensation-seeking, and comorbidities including ADHD, anxiety, and depression.

Poor self-esteem and lack of social competencies make gaming “an easy and efficient way to compensate for these deficiencies, which in turn, heightens the risk for developing GD,” they add. Neurobiological processes and genetic predisposition also play a role.

Lastly, the authors mentioned environmental factors, including family and peer-group issues, problems at work or school, and cultural factors.

“The take-home messages are that problematic gaming has had a long history of empirical research; that the psychiatric community now views GD as a legitimate mental health issue; and that the reasons for GD are complex, with many different factors involved in the acquisition, development, and maintenance of GD,” said Dr. Griffiths.
 

Beneficial behavioral therapies

Yuzhou Chen and colleagues, Southwest University, Chongqing, China, conducted a systematic review of RCTs investigating interventions for treating GD. Despite the “large number of intervention approaches developed over the past decade, as yet, there are no authoritative guidelines for what makes an effective GD intervention,” they wrote.

Few studies have focused specifically on GD but instead have focused on a combination of internet addiction and GD. But the interventions used to treat internet addiction may not apply to GD. And few studies have utilized an RCT design. The researchers therefore set out to review studies that specifically used an RCT design to investigate interventions for GD.

They searched six databases to identify RCTs that tested GD interventions from the inception of each database until the end of 2021. To be included, participants had to be diagnosed with GD and receive either a “complete and systematic intervention” or be in a comparator control group receiving no intervention or placebo.

Seven studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 332 participants). The studies tested five interventions:
 

• Group counseling with three different themes (interpersonal interaction, acceptance and commitment, cognition and behavior)
• CBI, which addresses cravings
• Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)
• ACRIP with the main objectives of reducing GD symptoms and improving psychological well-being
• Short-term CBT, which addresses maladaptive cognitions

The mean duration of the interventions ranged from 3 to 15 weeks.

The primary outcome was GD severity, with secondary outcomes including depression, anxiety, cognition, game time, self-esteem, self-compassion, shyness, impulsivity, and psychological well-being.

Group counseling, CBI, ACRIP, and short-term CBT interventions had “a significant effect on decreasing the severity of GD,” while tDCS had “no significant effect.”

Behavioral therapy “exerts its effect on the behavioral mechanism of GD; for example, by reducing the association between game-related stimuli and the game player’s response to them,” the authors suggested.

Recovery vs. pathology

Recovery “traditionally represents the transition from trauma and illness to health,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues noted.

Two paradigms of recovery are “deficit based” and “strength based.” The first assesses recovery in terms of abstinence, sobriety, and symptom reduction; and the second focuses on “growth, rather than a reduction in pathology.”

But although recovery is “embedded within mental health addiction policies and practice,” the concept has received “scant attention” in GD research.

The researchers therefore aimed to “map and summarize the state of the art on recovery from GD,” defining “recovery” as the “ability to handle conflicting feelings and emotions without external mediation.”

They conducted a scoping review of all literature regarding GD or internet GD published before February 2022 (47 studies, 2,924 participants with GD; mean age range, 13-26 years).

Most studies (n = 32) consisted of exclusively male subjects. Only 10 included both sexes, and female participants were in the minority.

Most studies (n = 42) did not address the concept of recovery, although all studies did report significant improvements in gaming-related pathology. Typical terminology used to describe changes in participants’ GD were “reduction” and/or “decrease” in symptom severity.

Although 18 studies mentioned the word “recovery,” only 5 actually discussed issues related to the notion of recovery, and only 5 used the term “abstinence.”

In addition, only 13 studies examined positive components of life in patients with GD, such as increased psychological well-being, life satisfaction, quality of life, improved emotional state, relational skills, and executive control, as well as improved self-care, hygiene, sleep, and interest in school studies.

“As a person and researcher who believes that words shape the way we perceive things, I think we should use the word ‘recovery’ rather than ‘pathology’ much more in research, therapy, and policy,” said Dr. Gavriel-Fried.

She noted that, because GD is a “relatively new behavioral addictive disorder, theories are still being developed and definitions of the symptoms are still being fine-tuned.”

“The field as a whole will benefit from future theoretical work that will lead to practical solutions for treating GD and ways to identify the risk factors,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried said.
 

Filling a research gap

In a comment, David Greenfield, MD, founder and medical director of the Connecticut-based Center for Internet and Technology Addiction, noted that 3 decades ago, there was almost no research into this area.

“The fact that we have these reviews and studies is good because all of the research adds to the science providing more data about an area we still don’t know that much about, where research is still in its infancy,” said Dr. Greenfield, who was not involved with the present study.

“Although we have definitions, there’s no complete agreement about the definitions of GD, and we do not yet have a unified approach,” continued Dr. Greenfield, who wrote the books Overcoming Internet Addiction for Dummies and Virtual Addiction.

He suggested that “recovery” is rarely used as a concept in GD research perhaps because there’s a “bifurcation in the field of addiction medicine in which behavioral addictions are not seen as equivalent to substance addictions,” and, particularly with GD, the principles of “recovery” have not yet matured.

“Recovery means meaningful life away from the screen, not just abstinence from the screen,” said Dr. Greenfield.

The study by Mr. Chen and colleagues was supported by grants from the National Social Science Foundation of China, the Chongqing Research Program of Basic Research and Frontier Technology, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. Dr. Griffiths has reported receiving research funding from Norsk Tipping (the gambling operator owned by the Norwegian government). The study by Dr. Király and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. The study by Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. Dr. Gavriel-Fried has reported receiving grants from the Israel National Insurance Institute and the Committee for Independent Studies of the Israel Lottery. Dr. Greenfield reported no relevant financial relationships.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A mindfulness-based cognitive therapy self-help (MBCT-SH) intervention in which patients were supported by a trained practitioner led to better clinical outcomes at lower cost than practitioner-supported cognitive-behavioral therapy self-help (CBT-SH), new research shows.

The findings suggest that “offering practitioner-supported MBCT-SH as an intervention for mild to moderate depression would improve outcomes and save money compared with practitioner-supported CBT-SH,” noted the investigators, led by Clara Strauss, PhD, DClinPsy, with the University of Sussex School of Psychology in England.

Practitioner-supported CBT-SH is recommended in U.K. national treatment guidelines for mild to moderate depression. However, some patients’ conditions don’t respond, and dropout rates are high.

The Low-Intensity Guided Help Through Mindfulness (LIGHTMind) trial tested practitioner-supported MBCT-SH as an alternative.

The findings have “important implications” for the more than 100,000 people currently offered CBT-SH for depression in the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) program each year and in publicly funded services elsewhere, the researchers noted.

If translated into routine practice, “this would see many more people recovering from depression while costing health services less money,” they added.

The study was published online in JAMA Psychiatry .
 

Practice changing?

The trial included 410 adults (mean age, 32 years; 62% women) with mild to moderate depression who were recruited from 10 publicly funded psychological therapy services in England as part of the IAPT program.

Participants were given one of two established self-help workbooks – The Mindful Way Workbook: An 8-Week Program to Free Yourself from Depression and Emotional Distress, written by the pioneers of MBCT, or Overcoming Depression and Low Mood, 3rd Edition: A Five Areas Approach, which is a CBT-SH program widely used in IAPT.

Use of the self-help books was supported by six structured phone or in-person sessions with a trained psychological well-being practitioner.

The primary outcome was depression symptom severity at 16 weeks, which was determined on the basis of Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) score.

At 16 weeks following randomization, MBCT-SH led to significantly greater reductions in depression symptom severity compared with CBT-SH (mean PHQ-9 score, 7.2 vs. 8.6; between-group difference, 1.5 points; P = .009; d = −0.36).

MBCT-SH also had superior effects on anxiety symptom severity at 16 weeks.

At the 42-week follow-up, between-group effects on depression and anxiety symptom severity remained in the hypothesized direction but were nonsignificant.

This could be due in part by the greater postintervention psychological therapy accessed by participants in the CBT-SH group, the investigators noted.

Practitioner-supported MBCT-SH was more cost-effective than supported CBT-SH.

On average, the CBT-SH intervention cost health services £526 ($631) more per participant than the MBCT-SH intervention over the 42-week follow-up. The probability of MBCT-SH being cost-effective compared with CBT-SH exceeded 95%, the researchers noted.
 

Useful model for the United States

Commenting for this news organization, Zindel Segal, PhD, professor of psychology, University of Toronto, Scarborough, cautioned against making too much of the differences between the groups, because CBT-SH “trended positive and had a pretty healthy effect size, it just never reached significance.

“I wouldn’t say mindfulness drastically outperformed cognitive therapy. But cognitive therapy is a robust treatment in its own right, and so doing a little bit better is significant,” Dr. Segal said.

He also noted that, appropriately, the trial enrolled adults who were experiencing moderate depression and were not acutely ill. “That’s one of the rationales for self-help compared to providing patients with a more resource-intensive group treatment.

“If you look at the needs of people with moderate depression, what you find is that for cognitive therapy to work, negative thoughts and feelings need to be pervasive in order to make use of the techniques,” Dr. Segal explained.

“With mindfulness, you don’t need any to have constant negative thoughts or feelings. Anything that arises in your experience serves as grist for mill in terms of concentration and focus,” Dr. Segal said.

He also noted that mindfulness-based intervention is “more optimized” for people who are experiencing some measure of recovery or remission.

“It’s well suited for that, as it trends towards the wellness spectrum. But for people who might have greater levels of acuity or severity, cognitive-behavioral therapy might be indicated,” said Dr. Segal.

He also said the U.K. study findings are relevant to U.S. patients with depression.

“While it’s not disseminated in the same way through any kind of national program, the self-help books that are used are widely available, and the support that people were offered, either in person, telephone, or email, could be easily delivered. This would be a very useful model,” Dr. Segal said.

The LIGHTMind trial was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research and the Brighton and Sussex Clinical Trials Unit. Dr. Strauss has received grants from Headspace, is research lead for Sussex Mindfulness Centre, and has been chief investigator on National Institute for Health and Care Research. Dr. Segal is one of the authors of the MBCT-SH workbooks used in the study.
 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A mindfulness-based cognitive therapy self-help (MBCT-SH) intervention in which patients were supported by a trained practitioner led to better clinical outcomes at lower cost than practitioner-supported cognitive-behavioral therapy self-help (CBT-SH), new research shows.

The findings suggest that “offering practitioner-supported MBCT-SH as an intervention for mild to moderate depression would improve outcomes and save money compared with practitioner-supported CBT-SH,” noted the investigators, led by Clara Strauss, PhD, DClinPsy, with the University of Sussex School of Psychology in England.

Practitioner-supported CBT-SH is recommended in U.K. national treatment guidelines for mild to moderate depression. However, some patients’ conditions don’t respond, and dropout rates are high.

The Low-Intensity Guided Help Through Mindfulness (LIGHTMind) trial tested practitioner-supported MBCT-SH as an alternative.

The findings have “important implications” for the more than 100,000 people currently offered CBT-SH for depression in the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) program each year and in publicly funded services elsewhere, the researchers noted.

If translated into routine practice, “this would see many more people recovering from depression while costing health services less money,” they added.

The study was published online in JAMA Psychiatry .
 

Practice changing?

The trial included 410 adults (mean age, 32 years; 62% women) with mild to moderate depression who were recruited from 10 publicly funded psychological therapy services in England as part of the IAPT program.

Participants were given one of two established self-help workbooks – The Mindful Way Workbook: An 8-Week Program to Free Yourself from Depression and Emotional Distress, written by the pioneers of MBCT, or Overcoming Depression and Low Mood, 3rd Edition: A Five Areas Approach, which is a CBT-SH program widely used in IAPT.

Use of the self-help books was supported by six structured phone or in-person sessions with a trained psychological well-being practitioner.

The primary outcome was depression symptom severity at 16 weeks, which was determined on the basis of Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) score.

At 16 weeks following randomization, MBCT-SH led to significantly greater reductions in depression symptom severity compared with CBT-SH (mean PHQ-9 score, 7.2 vs. 8.6; between-group difference, 1.5 points; P = .009; d = −0.36).

MBCT-SH also had superior effects on anxiety symptom severity at 16 weeks.

At the 42-week follow-up, between-group effects on depression and anxiety symptom severity remained in the hypothesized direction but were nonsignificant.

This could be due in part by the greater postintervention psychological therapy accessed by participants in the CBT-SH group, the investigators noted.

Practitioner-supported MBCT-SH was more cost-effective than supported CBT-SH.

On average, the CBT-SH intervention cost health services £526 ($631) more per participant than the MBCT-SH intervention over the 42-week follow-up. The probability of MBCT-SH being cost-effective compared with CBT-SH exceeded 95%, the researchers noted.
 

Useful model for the United States

Commenting for this news organization, Zindel Segal, PhD, professor of psychology, University of Toronto, Scarborough, cautioned against making too much of the differences between the groups, because CBT-SH “trended positive and had a pretty healthy effect size, it just never reached significance.

“I wouldn’t say mindfulness drastically outperformed cognitive therapy. But cognitive therapy is a robust treatment in its own right, and so doing a little bit better is significant,” Dr. Segal said.

He also noted that, appropriately, the trial enrolled adults who were experiencing moderate depression and were not acutely ill. “That’s one of the rationales for self-help compared to providing patients with a more resource-intensive group treatment.

“If you look at the needs of people with moderate depression, what you find is that for cognitive therapy to work, negative thoughts and feelings need to be pervasive in order to make use of the techniques,” Dr. Segal explained.

“With mindfulness, you don’t need any to have constant negative thoughts or feelings. Anything that arises in your experience serves as grist for mill in terms of concentration and focus,” Dr. Segal said.

He also noted that mindfulness-based intervention is “more optimized” for people who are experiencing some measure of recovery or remission.

“It’s well suited for that, as it trends towards the wellness spectrum. But for people who might have greater levels of acuity or severity, cognitive-behavioral therapy might be indicated,” said Dr. Segal.

He also said the U.K. study findings are relevant to U.S. patients with depression.

“While it’s not disseminated in the same way through any kind of national program, the self-help books that are used are widely available, and the support that people were offered, either in person, telephone, or email, could be easily delivered. This would be a very useful model,” Dr. Segal said.

The LIGHTMind trial was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research and the Brighton and Sussex Clinical Trials Unit. Dr. Strauss has received grants from Headspace, is research lead for Sussex Mindfulness Centre, and has been chief investigator on National Institute for Health and Care Research. Dr. Segal is one of the authors of the MBCT-SH workbooks used in the study.
 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

A mindfulness-based cognitive therapy self-help (MBCT-SH) intervention in which patients were supported by a trained practitioner led to better clinical outcomes at lower cost than practitioner-supported cognitive-behavioral therapy self-help (CBT-SH), new research shows.

The findings suggest that “offering practitioner-supported MBCT-SH as an intervention for mild to moderate depression would improve outcomes and save money compared with practitioner-supported CBT-SH,” noted the investigators, led by Clara Strauss, PhD, DClinPsy, with the University of Sussex School of Psychology in England.

Practitioner-supported CBT-SH is recommended in U.K. national treatment guidelines for mild to moderate depression. However, some patients’ conditions don’t respond, and dropout rates are high.

The Low-Intensity Guided Help Through Mindfulness (LIGHTMind) trial tested practitioner-supported MBCT-SH as an alternative.

The findings have “important implications” for the more than 100,000 people currently offered CBT-SH for depression in the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) program each year and in publicly funded services elsewhere, the researchers noted.

If translated into routine practice, “this would see many more people recovering from depression while costing health services less money,” they added.

The study was published online in JAMA Psychiatry .
 

Practice changing?

The trial included 410 adults (mean age, 32 years; 62% women) with mild to moderate depression who were recruited from 10 publicly funded psychological therapy services in England as part of the IAPT program.

Participants were given one of two established self-help workbooks – The Mindful Way Workbook: An 8-Week Program to Free Yourself from Depression and Emotional Distress, written by the pioneers of MBCT, or Overcoming Depression and Low Mood, 3rd Edition: A Five Areas Approach, which is a CBT-SH program widely used in IAPT.

Use of the self-help books was supported by six structured phone or in-person sessions with a trained psychological well-being practitioner.

The primary outcome was depression symptom severity at 16 weeks, which was determined on the basis of Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9) score.

At 16 weeks following randomization, MBCT-SH led to significantly greater reductions in depression symptom severity compared with CBT-SH (mean PHQ-9 score, 7.2 vs. 8.6; between-group difference, 1.5 points; P = .009; d = −0.36).

MBCT-SH also had superior effects on anxiety symptom severity at 16 weeks.

At the 42-week follow-up, between-group effects on depression and anxiety symptom severity remained in the hypothesized direction but were nonsignificant.

This could be due in part by the greater postintervention psychological therapy accessed by participants in the CBT-SH group, the investigators noted.

Practitioner-supported MBCT-SH was more cost-effective than supported CBT-SH.

On average, the CBT-SH intervention cost health services £526 ($631) more per participant than the MBCT-SH intervention over the 42-week follow-up. The probability of MBCT-SH being cost-effective compared with CBT-SH exceeded 95%, the researchers noted.
 

Useful model for the United States

Commenting for this news organization, Zindel Segal, PhD, professor of psychology, University of Toronto, Scarborough, cautioned against making too much of the differences between the groups, because CBT-SH “trended positive and had a pretty healthy effect size, it just never reached significance.

“I wouldn’t say mindfulness drastically outperformed cognitive therapy. But cognitive therapy is a robust treatment in its own right, and so doing a little bit better is significant,” Dr. Segal said.

He also noted that, appropriately, the trial enrolled adults who were experiencing moderate depression and were not acutely ill. “That’s one of the rationales for self-help compared to providing patients with a more resource-intensive group treatment.

“If you look at the needs of people with moderate depression, what you find is that for cognitive therapy to work, negative thoughts and feelings need to be pervasive in order to make use of the techniques,” Dr. Segal explained.

“With mindfulness, you don’t need any to have constant negative thoughts or feelings. Anything that arises in your experience serves as grist for mill in terms of concentration and focus,” Dr. Segal said.

He also noted that mindfulness-based intervention is “more optimized” for people who are experiencing some measure of recovery or remission.

“It’s well suited for that, as it trends towards the wellness spectrum. But for people who might have greater levels of acuity or severity, cognitive-behavioral therapy might be indicated,” said Dr. Segal.

He also said the U.K. study findings are relevant to U.S. patients with depression.

“While it’s not disseminated in the same way through any kind of national program, the self-help books that are used are widely available, and the support that people were offered, either in person, telephone, or email, could be easily delivered. This would be a very useful model,” Dr. Segal said.

The LIGHTMind trial was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research and the Brighton and Sussex Clinical Trials Unit. Dr. Strauss has received grants from Headspace, is research lead for Sussex Mindfulness Centre, and has been chief investigator on National Institute for Health and Care Research. Dr. Segal is one of the authors of the MBCT-SH workbooks used in the study.
 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The youngest patient with cannabis-induced psychosis (CIP) whom Karen Randall, DO, has treated was a 7-year-old boy. She remembers the screaming, the yelling, the uncontrollable rage.

Dr. Randall is an emergency medicine physician at Southern Colorado Emergency Medicine Associates, a group practice in Pueblo, Colo. She treats youth for cannabis-related medical problems in the emergency department an average of two or three times per shift, she said.

Colorado legalized the recreational use of cannabis for adults older than 21 in 2012. Since then, Dr. Randall said, she has noticed an uptick in cannabis use among youth, as well as an increase in CIP, a syndrome that can be indistinguishable from other psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia in the emergency department. But the two conditions require different approaches to care.

“You can’t differentiate unless you know the patient,” Dr. Randall said in an interview.

In 2019, 37% of high school students in the United States reported ever using marijuana, and 22% reported use in the past 30 days. Rates remained steady in 2020 following increases in 2018 and 2019, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The CDC also found that 8% of 8th graders, 19% of 10th graders, and 22% of 12th graders reported vaping marijuana in the past year.

Clinicians in states where recreational marijuana has been legalized say they have noticed an increase in young patients with psychiatric problems – especially after consumption of cannabis products in high doses. But CIP can be tricky to distinguish from psychoses of other causes, such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, which often begin to present in adolescence.
 

How to differentiate

CIP is characterized by delusions and hallucinations and sometimes anxiety, disorganized thoughts, paranoia, dissociation, and changes in mood and behavior. Symptoms typically last for a couple hours and do not require specific treatment, although they can persist, depending on a patient’s tolerance and the dose of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) they have consumed. Research suggests that the higher the dose and concentration of the drug consumed, the more likely a person will develop symptoms of psychosis.

Diagnosis requires gathering information on previous bipolar disorder or schizophrenia diagnosis, prescriptions for mental illness indications, whether there is a family history of mental illness, and whether the patient recently started using marijuana. In some cases, marijuana use might exacerbate or unmask mental illness.

If symptoms of CIP resolve, and usually they do, clinicians can recommend that patients abstain from cannabis going forward, and psychosis would not need further treatment, according to Divya Singh, MD, a psychiatrist at Banner Behavioral Health Hospital in Scottsdale, Ariz., where recreational cannabis became legal in 2020.

“When I have limited information, especially in the first couple of days, I err on the side of safety,” Dr. Singh said.

Psychosis is the combination of symptoms, including delusions, hallucinations, and disorganized behavior, but it is not a disorder in itself. Rather, it is the primary symptom of schizophrenia and other chronic psychiatric illnesses.

Schizophrenia can be diagnosed only after a patient presents with signs of disturbance for at least 6 months, according to guidelines in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. Dr. Singh said a diagnosis of schizophrenia cannot be made in a one-off interaction.

If the patient is younger than 24 years and has no family history of mental illness, a full recovery is likely if the patient abstains from marijuana, he said. But if the patient does have a family history, “the chances of them having a full-blown mental illness is very high,” Dr. Singh said.

If a patient reports that he or she has recently started using marijuana and was previously diagnosed with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia, Dr. Singh said he generally prescribes medications such as lithium or quetiapine and refers the patient to services such as cognitive-behavioral therapy. He also advises against continuing use of cannabis.

“Cannabis can result in people requiring a higher dose of medication than they took before,” Dr. Singh said. “If they were stable on 600 mg of lithium before, they might need more and may never be able to lower the dose in some cases, even after the acute episode.”
 

The science of cannabis

As of March 2023, 21 states and the District of Columbia permit the recreational use of marijuana, according to the Congressional Research Service. Thirty-seven states and the District of Columbia allow medicinal use of marijuana, and 10 states allow “limited access to medical cannabis,” defined as low-THC cannabis or cannabidiol (CBD) oil.

THC is the main psychoactive compound in cannabis. It creates a high feeling after binding with receptors in the brain that control pain and mood. CBD is another chemical found in cannabis, but it does not create a high.

Some research suggests cannabinoids may help reduce anxiety, reduce inflammation, relieve pain, control nausea, reduce cancer cells, slow the growth of tumor cells, relax tight muscles, and stimulate appetite.

The drug also carries risks, according to Mayo Clinic. Use of marijuana is linked to mental health problems in teens and adults, such as depression, social anxiety, and temporary psychosis, and long-lasting mental disorders, such as schizophrenia.

In the worst cases, CIP can persist for weeks or months – long after a negative drug test – and sometimes does not subside at all, according to Ken Finn, MD, president and founder of Springs Rehabilitation, PC, a pain medicine practice in Colorado Springs, Colo.

Dr. Finn, the co–vice president of the International Academy on the Science and Impact of Cannabis, which opposes making the drug more accessible, said educating health care providers is an urgent need.

Studies are mixed on whether the legalization of cannabis has led to more cases of CIP.

A 2021 study found that experiences of psychosis among users of cannabis jumped 2.5-fold between 2001 and 2013. But a study published earlier this year of more than 63 million medical claims from 2003 to 2017 found no statistically significant difference in rates of psychosis-related diagnoses or prescribed antipsychotics in states that have legalized medical or recreational cannabis compared with states where cannabis is still illegal. However, a secondary analysis did find that rates of psychosis-related diagnoses increased significantly among men, people aged 55-64 years, and Asian adults in states where recreational marijuana has been legalized.

Complicating matters, researchers say, is the question of causality. Cannabis may exacerbate or trigger psychosis, but people with an underlying psychological illness may also be more likely to use cannabis.

Dr. Finn said clinicians in Colorado and other states with legalization laws are seeing more patients with CIP. As more states consider legalizing recreational marijuana, he expects the data will reflect what doctors experience on the ground.

Cannabis-induced “psychosis is complicated and likely underdiagnosed,” Dr. Finn said.
 

Talking to teens

Clinicians outside the emergency department can play a role in aiding young people at risk for CIP. Primary care physicians, for instance, might explain to young patients that the brain only becomes fully developed at roughly age 26, after which the long-term health consequences of using cannabis become less likely. According to the CDC, using cannabis before age 18 can change how the brain builds connections and can impair attention, memory, and learning.

Dr. Singh takes a harm reduction approach when he engages with a patient who is forthcoming about substance use.

“If I see an 18-year-old, I tell them to abstain,” he said. “I tell them if they are ever going to use it, to use it after 26.”

Clinicians also should understand dosages to provide the optimal guidance to their patients who use cannabis.

“People often have no idea how much cannabis they are taking,” especially when using vape cartridges, Dr. Singh said. “If you don’t know, you can’t tell patients about the harms – and if you tell them the wrong information, they will write you off.”

Dr. Singh said he advises his patients to avoid using cannabis vapes or dabbing pens. Both can contain much higher levels of THC than dried flower or edible forms of the drug. He also says patients should stick with low concentrations and use products that contain CBD, which some studies have shown has a protective effect against CIP, although other studies have found that CBD can induce anxiety.

He also tells patients to buy from legal dispensaries and to avoid buying street products that may have methamphetamine or fentanyl mixed in.

Despite the risks, Dr. Singh said legalization can reduce the stigma associated with cannabis use and may prompt patients to be honest with their clinicians. Dr. Singh recalled a 28-year-old patient who was using cannabis to alleviate her arthritic pain. She also was taking a transplant medication, which carried potential side effects of delirium, generalized anxiety disorder, and hallucinosis. After doubling her THC dose, the patient experienced severe anxiety and paranoia.

Dr. Singh’s patient paid him a visit and asked for help. Dr. Singh told her to reduce the dose and to keep track of how she felt. If she continued to feel anxious and paranoid, he recommended that she switch to CBD instead.

“I think education and knowledge is liberating,” Dr. Singh said. “Legalization and frank conversations help people understand how to use a product – and right now, I think that’s lacking.”
 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The youngest patient with cannabis-induced psychosis (CIP) whom Karen Randall, DO, has treated was a 7-year-old boy. She remembers the screaming, the yelling, the uncontrollable rage.

Dr. Randall is an emergency medicine physician at Southern Colorado Emergency Medicine Associates, a group practice in Pueblo, Colo. She treats youth for cannabis-related medical problems in the emergency department an average of two or three times per shift, she said.

Colorado legalized the recreational use of cannabis for adults older than 21 in 2012. Since then, Dr. Randall said, she has noticed an uptick in cannabis use among youth, as well as an increase in CIP, a syndrome that can be indistinguishable from other psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia in the emergency department. But the two conditions require different approaches to care.

“You can’t differentiate unless you know the patient,” Dr. Randall said in an interview.

In 2019, 37% of high school students in the United States reported ever using marijuana, and 22% reported use in the past 30 days. Rates remained steady in 2020 following increases in 2018 and 2019, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The CDC also found that 8% of 8th graders, 19% of 10th graders, and 22% of 12th graders reported vaping marijuana in the past year.

Clinicians in states where recreational marijuana has been legalized say they have noticed an increase in young patients with psychiatric problems – especially after consumption of cannabis products in high doses. But CIP can be tricky to distinguish from psychoses of other causes, such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, which often begin to present in adolescence.
 

How to differentiate

CIP is characterized by delusions and hallucinations and sometimes anxiety, disorganized thoughts, paranoia, dissociation, and changes in mood and behavior. Symptoms typically last for a couple hours and do not require specific treatment, although they can persist, depending on a patient’s tolerance and the dose of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) they have consumed. Research suggests that the higher the dose and concentration of the drug consumed, the more likely a person will develop symptoms of psychosis.

Diagnosis requires gathering information on previous bipolar disorder or schizophrenia diagnosis, prescriptions for mental illness indications, whether there is a family history of mental illness, and whether the patient recently started using marijuana. In some cases, marijuana use might exacerbate or unmask mental illness.

If symptoms of CIP resolve, and usually they do, clinicians can recommend that patients abstain from cannabis going forward, and psychosis would not need further treatment, according to Divya Singh, MD, a psychiatrist at Banner Behavioral Health Hospital in Scottsdale, Ariz., where recreational cannabis became legal in 2020.

“When I have limited information, especially in the first couple of days, I err on the side of safety,” Dr. Singh said.

Psychosis is the combination of symptoms, including delusions, hallucinations, and disorganized behavior, but it is not a disorder in itself. Rather, it is the primary symptom of schizophrenia and other chronic psychiatric illnesses.

Schizophrenia can be diagnosed only after a patient presents with signs of disturbance for at least 6 months, according to guidelines in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. Dr. Singh said a diagnosis of schizophrenia cannot be made in a one-off interaction.

If the patient is younger than 24 years and has no family history of mental illness, a full recovery is likely if the patient abstains from marijuana, he said. But if the patient does have a family history, “the chances of them having a full-blown mental illness is very high,” Dr. Singh said.

If a patient reports that he or she has recently started using marijuana and was previously diagnosed with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia, Dr. Singh said he generally prescribes medications such as lithium or quetiapine and refers the patient to services such as cognitive-behavioral therapy. He also advises against continuing use of cannabis.

“Cannabis can result in people requiring a higher dose of medication than they took before,” Dr. Singh said. “If they were stable on 600 mg of lithium before, they might need more and may never be able to lower the dose in some cases, even after the acute episode.”
 

The science of cannabis

As of March 2023, 21 states and the District of Columbia permit the recreational use of marijuana, according to the Congressional Research Service. Thirty-seven states and the District of Columbia allow medicinal use of marijuana, and 10 states allow “limited access to medical cannabis,” defined as low-THC cannabis or cannabidiol (CBD) oil.

THC is the main psychoactive compound in cannabis. It creates a high feeling after binding with receptors in the brain that control pain and mood. CBD is another chemical found in cannabis, but it does not create a high.

Some research suggests cannabinoids may help reduce anxiety, reduce inflammation, relieve pain, control nausea, reduce cancer cells, slow the growth of tumor cells, relax tight muscles, and stimulate appetite.

The drug also carries risks, according to Mayo Clinic. Use of marijuana is linked to mental health problems in teens and adults, such as depression, social anxiety, and temporary psychosis, and long-lasting mental disorders, such as schizophrenia.

In the worst cases, CIP can persist for weeks or months – long after a negative drug test – and sometimes does not subside at all, according to Ken Finn, MD, president and founder of Springs Rehabilitation, PC, a pain medicine practice in Colorado Springs, Colo.

Dr. Finn, the co–vice president of the International Academy on the Science and Impact of Cannabis, which opposes making the drug more accessible, said educating health care providers is an urgent need.

Studies are mixed on whether the legalization of cannabis has led to more cases of CIP.

A 2021 study found that experiences of psychosis among users of cannabis jumped 2.5-fold between 2001 and 2013. But a study published earlier this year of more than 63 million medical claims from 2003 to 2017 found no statistically significant difference in rates of psychosis-related diagnoses or prescribed antipsychotics in states that have legalized medical or recreational cannabis compared with states where cannabis is still illegal. However, a secondary analysis did find that rates of psychosis-related diagnoses increased significantly among men, people aged 55-64 years, and Asian adults in states where recreational marijuana has been legalized.

Complicating matters, researchers say, is the question of causality. Cannabis may exacerbate or trigger psychosis, but people with an underlying psychological illness may also be more likely to use cannabis.

Dr. Finn said clinicians in Colorado and other states with legalization laws are seeing more patients with CIP. As more states consider legalizing recreational marijuana, he expects the data will reflect what doctors experience on the ground.

Cannabis-induced “psychosis is complicated and likely underdiagnosed,” Dr. Finn said.
 

Talking to teens

Clinicians outside the emergency department can play a role in aiding young people at risk for CIP. Primary care physicians, for instance, might explain to young patients that the brain only becomes fully developed at roughly age 26, after which the long-term health consequences of using cannabis become less likely. According to the CDC, using cannabis before age 18 can change how the brain builds connections and can impair attention, memory, and learning.

Dr. Singh takes a harm reduction approach when he engages with a patient who is forthcoming about substance use.

“If I see an 18-year-old, I tell them to abstain,” he said. “I tell them if they are ever going to use it, to use it after 26.”

Clinicians also should understand dosages to provide the optimal guidance to their patients who use cannabis.

“People often have no idea how much cannabis they are taking,” especially when using vape cartridges, Dr. Singh said. “If you don’t know, you can’t tell patients about the harms – and if you tell them the wrong information, they will write you off.”

Dr. Singh said he advises his patients to avoid using cannabis vapes or dabbing pens. Both can contain much higher levels of THC than dried flower or edible forms of the drug. He also says patients should stick with low concentrations and use products that contain CBD, which some studies have shown has a protective effect against CIP, although other studies have found that CBD can induce anxiety.

He also tells patients to buy from legal dispensaries and to avoid buying street products that may have methamphetamine or fentanyl mixed in.

Despite the risks, Dr. Singh said legalization can reduce the stigma associated with cannabis use and may prompt patients to be honest with their clinicians. Dr. Singh recalled a 28-year-old patient who was using cannabis to alleviate her arthritic pain. She also was taking a transplant medication, which carried potential side effects of delirium, generalized anxiety disorder, and hallucinosis. After doubling her THC dose, the patient experienced severe anxiety and paranoia.

Dr. Singh’s patient paid him a visit and asked for help. Dr. Singh told her to reduce the dose and to keep track of how she felt. If she continued to feel anxious and paranoid, he recommended that she switch to CBD instead.

“I think education and knowledge is liberating,” Dr. Singh said. “Legalization and frank conversations help people understand how to use a product – and right now, I think that’s lacking.”
 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

The youngest patient with cannabis-induced psychosis (CIP) whom Karen Randall, DO, has treated was a 7-year-old boy. She remembers the screaming, the yelling, the uncontrollable rage.

Dr. Randall is an emergency medicine physician at Southern Colorado Emergency Medicine Associates, a group practice in Pueblo, Colo. She treats youth for cannabis-related medical problems in the emergency department an average of two or three times per shift, she said.

Colorado legalized the recreational use of cannabis for adults older than 21 in 2012. Since then, Dr. Randall said, she has noticed an uptick in cannabis use among youth, as well as an increase in CIP, a syndrome that can be indistinguishable from other psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia in the emergency department. But the two conditions require different approaches to care.

“You can’t differentiate unless you know the patient,” Dr. Randall said in an interview.

In 2019, 37% of high school students in the United States reported ever using marijuana, and 22% reported use in the past 30 days. Rates remained steady in 2020 following increases in 2018 and 2019, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The CDC also found that 8% of 8th graders, 19% of 10th graders, and 22% of 12th graders reported vaping marijuana in the past year.

Clinicians in states where recreational marijuana has been legalized say they have noticed an increase in young patients with psychiatric problems – especially after consumption of cannabis products in high doses. But CIP can be tricky to distinguish from psychoses of other causes, such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, which often begin to present in adolescence.
 

How to differentiate

CIP is characterized by delusions and hallucinations and sometimes anxiety, disorganized thoughts, paranoia, dissociation, and changes in mood and behavior. Symptoms typically last for a couple hours and do not require specific treatment, although they can persist, depending on a patient’s tolerance and the dose of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) they have consumed. Research suggests that the higher the dose and concentration of the drug consumed, the more likely a person will develop symptoms of psychosis.

Diagnosis requires gathering information on previous bipolar disorder or schizophrenia diagnosis, prescriptions for mental illness indications, whether there is a family history of mental illness, and whether the patient recently started using marijuana. In some cases, marijuana use might exacerbate or unmask mental illness.

If symptoms of CIP resolve, and usually they do, clinicians can recommend that patients abstain from cannabis going forward, and psychosis would not need further treatment, according to Divya Singh, MD, a psychiatrist at Banner Behavioral Health Hospital in Scottsdale, Ariz., where recreational cannabis became legal in 2020.

“When I have limited information, especially in the first couple of days, I err on the side of safety,” Dr. Singh said.

Psychosis is the combination of symptoms, including delusions, hallucinations, and disorganized behavior, but it is not a disorder in itself. Rather, it is the primary symptom of schizophrenia and other chronic psychiatric illnesses.

Schizophrenia can be diagnosed only after a patient presents with signs of disturbance for at least 6 months, according to guidelines in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. Dr. Singh said a diagnosis of schizophrenia cannot be made in a one-off interaction.

If the patient is younger than 24 years and has no family history of mental illness, a full recovery is likely if the patient abstains from marijuana, he said. But if the patient does have a family history, “the chances of them having a full-blown mental illness is very high,” Dr. Singh said.

If a patient reports that he or she has recently started using marijuana and was previously diagnosed with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia, Dr. Singh said he generally prescribes medications such as lithium or quetiapine and refers the patient to services such as cognitive-behavioral therapy. He also advises against continuing use of cannabis.

“Cannabis can result in people requiring a higher dose of medication than they took before,” Dr. Singh said. “If they were stable on 600 mg of lithium before, they might need more and may never be able to lower the dose in some cases, even after the acute episode.”
 

The science of cannabis

As of March 2023, 21 states and the District of Columbia permit the recreational use of marijuana, according to the Congressional Research Service. Thirty-seven states and the District of Columbia allow medicinal use of marijuana, and 10 states allow “limited access to medical cannabis,” defined as low-THC cannabis or cannabidiol (CBD) oil.

THC is the main psychoactive compound in cannabis. It creates a high feeling after binding with receptors in the brain that control pain and mood. CBD is another chemical found in cannabis, but it does not create a high.

Some research suggests cannabinoids may help reduce anxiety, reduce inflammation, relieve pain, control nausea, reduce cancer cells, slow the growth of tumor cells, relax tight muscles, and stimulate appetite.

The drug also carries risks, according to Mayo Clinic. Use of marijuana is linked to mental health problems in teens and adults, such as depression, social anxiety, and temporary psychosis, and long-lasting mental disorders, such as schizophrenia.

In the worst cases, CIP can persist for weeks or months – long after a negative drug test – and sometimes does not subside at all, according to Ken Finn, MD, president and founder of Springs Rehabilitation, PC, a pain medicine practice in Colorado Springs, Colo.

Dr. Finn, the co–vice president of the International Academy on the Science and Impact of Cannabis, which opposes making the drug more accessible, said educating health care providers is an urgent need.

Studies are mixed on whether the legalization of cannabis has led to more cases of CIP.

A 2021 study found that experiences of psychosis among users of cannabis jumped 2.5-fold between 2001 and 2013. But a study published earlier this year of more than 63 million medical claims from 2003 to 2017 found no statistically significant difference in rates of psychosis-related diagnoses or prescribed antipsychotics in states that have legalized medical or recreational cannabis compared with states where cannabis is still illegal. However, a secondary analysis did find that rates of psychosis-related diagnoses increased significantly among men, people aged 55-64 years, and Asian adults in states where recreational marijuana has been legalized.

Complicating matters, researchers say, is the question of causality. Cannabis may exacerbate or trigger psychosis, but people with an underlying psychological illness may also be more likely to use cannabis.

Dr. Finn said clinicians in Colorado and other states with legalization laws are seeing more patients with CIP. As more states consider legalizing recreational marijuana, he expects the data will reflect what doctors experience on the ground.

Cannabis-induced “psychosis is complicated and likely underdiagnosed,” Dr. Finn said.
 

Talking to teens

Clinicians outside the emergency department can play a role in aiding young people at risk for CIP. Primary care physicians, for instance, might explain to young patients that the brain only becomes fully developed at roughly age 26, after which the long-term health consequences of using cannabis become less likely. According to the CDC, using cannabis before age 18 can change how the brain builds connections and can impair attention, memory, and learning.

Dr. Singh takes a harm reduction approach when he engages with a patient who is forthcoming about substance use.

“If I see an 18-year-old, I tell them to abstain,” he said. “I tell them if they are ever going to use it, to use it after 26.”

Clinicians also should understand dosages to provide the optimal guidance to their patients who use cannabis.

“People often have no idea how much cannabis they are taking,” especially when using vape cartridges, Dr. Singh said. “If you don’t know, you can’t tell patients about the harms – and if you tell them the wrong information, they will write you off.”

Dr. Singh said he advises his patients to avoid using cannabis vapes or dabbing pens. Both can contain much higher levels of THC than dried flower or edible forms of the drug. He also says patients should stick with low concentrations and use products that contain CBD, which some studies have shown has a protective effect against CIP, although other studies have found that CBD can induce anxiety.

He also tells patients to buy from legal dispensaries and to avoid buying street products that may have methamphetamine or fentanyl mixed in.

Despite the risks, Dr. Singh said legalization can reduce the stigma associated with cannabis use and may prompt patients to be honest with their clinicians. Dr. Singh recalled a 28-year-old patient who was using cannabis to alleviate her arthritic pain. She also was taking a transplant medication, which carried potential side effects of delirium, generalized anxiety disorder, and hallucinosis. After doubling her THC dose, the patient experienced severe anxiety and paranoia.

Dr. Singh’s patient paid him a visit and asked for help. Dr. Singh told her to reduce the dose and to keep track of how she felt. If she continued to feel anxious and paranoid, he recommended that she switch to CBD instead.

“I think education and knowledge is liberating,” Dr. Singh said. “Legalization and frank conversations help people understand how to use a product – and right now, I think that’s lacking.”
 

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

Kathrin LaFaver, MD: Hello. I’m happy to talk today to Dr. Indu Subramanian, clinical professor at University of California, Los Angeles, and director of the Parkinson’s Disease Research, Education and Clinical Center in Los Angeles. I am a neurologist in Saratoga Springs, New York, and we will be talking today about Indu’s new paper on childhood trauma and Parkinson’s disease. Welcome and thanks for taking the time.

Indu Subramanian, MD: Thank you so much for letting us highlight this important topic.

Dr. LaFaver: There are many papers published every month on Parkinson’s disease, but this topic stands out because it’s not a thing that has been commonly looked at. What gave you the idea to study this?
 

Neurology behind other specialties

Dr. Subramanian: Kathrin, you and I have been looking at things that can inform us about our patients – the person who’s standing in front of us when they come in and we’re giving them this diagnosis. I think that so much of what we’ve done [in the past] is a cookie cutter approach to giving everybody the standard treatment. [We’ve been assuming that] It doesn’t matter if they’re a man or woman. It doesn’t matter if they’re a veteran. It doesn’t matter if they may be from a minoritized population.

Customization is so key, and we’re realizing that we have missed the boat often through the pandemic and in health care in general.

We’ve also been interested in approaches that are outside the box, right? We have this integrative medicine and lifestyle medicine background. I’ve been going to those meetings and really been struck by the mounting evidence on the importance of things like early adverse childhood events (ACEs), what zip code you live in, what your pollution index is, and how these things can affect people through their life and their health.

I think that it is high time neurologists pay attention to this. There’s been mounting evidence throughout many disease states, various types of cancers, and mental health. Cardiology is much more advanced, but we haven’t had much data in neurology. In fact, when we went to write this paper, there were just one or two papers that were looking at multiple sclerosis or general neurologic issues, but really nothing in Parkinson’s disease.

We know that Parkinson’s disease is not only a motor disease that affects mental health, but that it also affects nonmotor issues. Childhood adversity may affect how people progress or how quickly they may get a disease, and we were interested in how it may manifest in a disease like Parkinson’s disease.

That was the framework going to meetings. As we wrote this paper and were in various editing stages, there was a beautiful paper that came out by Nadine Burke Harris and team that really was a call to action for neurologists and caring about trauma.

Dr. LaFaver: I couldn’t agree more. It’s really an underrecognized issue. With my own background, being very interested in functional movement disorders, psychosomatic disorders, and so on, it becomes much more evident how common a trauma background is, not only for people we were traditionally asking about.

Why don’t you summarize your findings for us?
 

Adverse childhood events

Dr. Subramanian: This is a web-based survey, so obviously, these are patient self-reports of their disease. We have a large cohort of people that we’ve been following over 7 years. I’m looking at modifiable variables and what really impacts Parkinson’s disease. Some of our previous papers have looked at diet, exercise, and loneliness. This is the same cohort.

We ended up putting the ACEs questionnaire, which is 10 questions looking at whether you were exposed to certain things in your household below the age of 18. This is a relatively standard questionnaire that’s administered one time, and you get a score out of 10. This is something that has been pushed, at least in the state of California, as something that we should be checking more in all people coming in.

We introduced the survey, and we didn’t force everyone to take it. Unfortunately, there was 20% or so of our patients who chose not to answer these questions. One has to ask, who are those people that didn’t answer the questions? Are they the ones that may have had trauma and these questions were triggering? It was a gap. We didn’t add extra questions to explore why people didn’t answer those questions.

We have to also put this in context. We have a patient population that’s largely quite affluent, who are able to access web-based surveys through their computer, and largely Caucasian; there are not many minoritized populations in our cohort. We want to do better with that. We actually were able to gather a decent number of women. We represent women quite well in our survey. I think that’s because of this online approach and some of the things that we’re studying.

In our survey, we broke it down into people who had no ACEs, one to three ACEs, or four or more ACEs. This is a standard way to break down ACEs so that we’re able to categorize what to do with these patient populations.

What we saw – and it’s preliminary evidence – is that people who had higher ACE scores seemed to have more symptom severity when we controlled for things like years since diagnosis, age, and gender. They also seem to have a worse quality of life. There was some indication that there were more nonmotor issues in those populations, as you might expect, such as anxiety, depression, and things that presumably ACEs can affect separately.

There are some confounders, but I think we really want to use this as the first piece of evidence to hopefully pave the way for caring about trauma in Parkinson’s disease moving forward.

Dr. LaFaver: Thank you so much for that summary. You already mentioned the main methodology you used.

What is the next step for you? How do you see these findings informing our clinical care? Do you have suggestions for all of the neurologists listening in this regard?


 

PD not yet considered ACE-related

Dr. Subramanian: Dr. Burke Harris was the former surgeon general in California. She’s a woman of color and a brilliant speaker, and she had worked in inner cities, I think in San Francisco, with pediatric populations, seeing these effects of adversity in that time frame.

You see this population at risk, and then you’re following this cohort, which we knew from the Kaiser cohort determines earlier morbidity and mortality across a number of disease states. We’re seeing things like more heart attacks, more diabetes, and all kinds of things in these populations. This is not new news; we just have not been focusing on this.

In her paper, this call to action, they had talked about some ACE-related conditions that currently do not include Parkinson’s disease. There are three ACE-related neurologic conditions that people should be aware of. One is in the headache/pain universe. Another is in the stroke universe, and that’s understandable, given cardiovascular risk factors . Then the third is in this dementia risk category. I think Parkinson’s disease, as we know, can be associated with dementia. A large percentage of our patients get dementia, but we don’t have Parkinson’s disease called out in this framework.

What people are talking about is if you have no ACEs or are in this middle category of one to three ACEs and you don’t have an ACE-related diagnosis – which Parkinson’s disease is not currently – we just give some basic counseling about the importance of lifestyle. I think we would love to see that anyway. They’re talking about things like exercise, diet, sleep, social connection, getting out in nature, things like that, so just general counseling on the importance of that.

Then if you’re in this higher-risk category, and so with these ACE-related neurologic conditions, including dementia, headache, and stroke, if you had this middle range of one to three ACEs, they’re getting additional resources. Some of them may be referred for social work help or mental health support and things like that.

I’d really love to see that happening in Parkinson’s disease, because I think we have so many needs in our population. I’m always hoping to advocate for more mental health needs that are scarce and resources in the social support realm because I believe that social connection and social support is a huge buffer for this trauma.

ACEs are just one type of trauma. I take care of veterans in the Veterans [Affairs Department]. We have some information now coming out about posttraumatic stress disorder, predisposing to certain things in Parkinson’s disease, possibly head injury, and things like that. I think we have populations at risk that we can hopefully screen at intake, and I’m really pushing for that.

Maybe it’s not the neurologist that does this intake. It might be someone else on the team that can spend some time doing these questionnaires and understand if your patient has a high ACE score. Unless you ask, many patients don’t necessarily come forward to talk about this. I really am pushing for trying to screen and trying to advocate for more research in this area so that we can classify Parkinson’s disease as an ACE-related condition and thus give more resources from the mental health world, and also the social support world, to our patients.

Dr. LaFaver: Thank you. There are many important points, and I think it’s a very important thing to recognize that it may not be only trauma in childhood but also throughout life, as you said, and might really influence nonmotor symptoms of Parkinson’s disease in particular, including anxiety and pain, which are often difficult to treat.

I think there’s much more to do in research, advocacy, and education. We’re going to educate patients about this, and also educate other neurologists and providers. I think you mentioned that trauma-informed care is getting its spotlight in primary care and other specialties. I think we have catching up to do in neurology, and I think this is a really important work toward that goal.

Thank you so much for your work and for taking the time to share your thoughts. I hope to talk to you again soon.

Dr. Subramanian: Thank you so much, Kathrin.
 

Dr. LaFaver has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Subramanian disclosed ties with Acorda Therapeutics.

A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

Kathrin LaFaver, MD: Hello. I’m happy to talk today to Dr. Indu Subramanian, clinical professor at University of California, Los Angeles, and director of the Parkinson’s Disease Research, Education and Clinical Center in Los Angeles. I am a neurologist in Saratoga Springs, New York, and we will be talking today about Indu’s new paper on childhood trauma and Parkinson’s disease. Welcome and thanks for taking the time.

Indu Subramanian, MD: Thank you so much for letting us highlight this important topic.

Dr. LaFaver: There are many papers published every month on Parkinson’s disease, but this topic stands out because it’s not a thing that has been commonly looked at. What gave you the idea to study this?
 

Neurology behind other specialties

Dr. Subramanian: Kathrin, you and I have been looking at things that can inform us about our patients – the person who’s standing in front of us when they come in and we’re giving them this diagnosis. I think that so much of what we’ve done [in the past] is a cookie cutter approach to giving everybody the standard treatment. [We’ve been assuming that] It doesn’t matter if they’re a man or woman. It doesn’t matter if they’re a veteran. It doesn’t matter if they may be from a minoritized population.

Customization is so key, and we’re realizing that we have missed the boat often through the pandemic and in health care in general.

We’ve also been interested in approaches that are outside the box, right? We have this integrative medicine and lifestyle medicine background. I’ve been going to those meetings and really been struck by the mounting evidence on the importance of things like early adverse childhood events (ACEs), what zip code you live in, what your pollution index is, and how these things can affect people through their life and their health.

I think that it is high time neurologists pay attention to this. There’s been mounting evidence throughout many disease states, various types of cancers, and mental health. Cardiology is much more advanced, but we haven’t had much data in neurology. In fact, when we went to write this paper, there were just one or two papers that were looking at multiple sclerosis or general neurologic issues, but really nothing in Parkinson’s disease.

We know that Parkinson’s disease is not only a motor disease that affects mental health, but that it also affects nonmotor issues. Childhood adversity may affect how people progress or how quickly they may get a disease, and we were interested in how it may manifest in a disease like Parkinson’s disease.

That was the framework going to meetings. As we wrote this paper and were in various editing stages, there was a beautiful paper that came out by Nadine Burke Harris and team that really was a call to action for neurologists and caring about trauma.

Dr. LaFaver: I couldn’t agree more. It’s really an underrecognized issue. With my own background, being very interested in functional movement disorders, psychosomatic disorders, and so on, it becomes much more evident how common a trauma background is, not only for people we were traditionally asking about.

Why don’t you summarize your findings for us?
 

Adverse childhood events

Dr. Subramanian: This is a web-based survey, so obviously, these are patient self-reports of their disease. We have a large cohort of people that we’ve been following over 7 years. I’m looking at modifiable variables and what really impacts Parkinson’s disease. Some of our previous papers have looked at diet, exercise, and loneliness. This is the same cohort.

We ended up putting the ACEs questionnaire, which is 10 questions looking at whether you were exposed to certain things in your household below the age of 18. This is a relatively standard questionnaire that’s administered one time, and you get a score out of 10. This is something that has been pushed, at least in the state of California, as something that we should be checking more in all people coming in.

We introduced the survey, and we didn’t force everyone to take it. Unfortunately, there was 20% or so of our patients who chose not to answer these questions. One has to ask, who are those people that didn’t answer the questions? Are they the ones that may have had trauma and these questions were triggering? It was a gap. We didn’t add extra questions to explore why people didn’t answer those questions.

We have to also put this in context. We have a patient population that’s largely quite affluent, who are able to access web-based surveys through their computer, and largely Caucasian; there are not many minoritized populations in our cohort. We want to do better with that. We actually were able to gather a decent number of women. We represent women quite well in our survey. I think that’s because of this online approach and some of the things that we’re studying.

In our survey, we broke it down into people who had no ACEs, one to three ACEs, or four or more ACEs. This is a standard way to break down ACEs so that we’re able to categorize what to do with these patient populations.

What we saw – and it’s preliminary evidence – is that people who had higher ACE scores seemed to have more symptom severity when we controlled for things like years since diagnosis, age, and gender. They also seem to have a worse quality of life. There was some indication that there were more nonmotor issues in those populations, as you might expect, such as anxiety, depression, and things that presumably ACEs can affect separately.

There are some confounders, but I think we really want to use this as the first piece of evidence to hopefully pave the way for caring about trauma in Parkinson’s disease moving forward.

Dr. LaFaver: Thank you so much for that summary. You already mentioned the main methodology you used.

What is the next step for you? How do you see these findings informing our clinical care? Do you have suggestions for all of the neurologists listening in this regard?


 

PD not yet considered ACE-related

Dr. Subramanian: Dr. Burke Harris was the former surgeon general in California. She’s a woman of color and a brilliant speaker, and she had worked in inner cities, I think in San Francisco, with pediatric populations, seeing these effects of adversity in that time frame.

You see this population at risk, and then you’re following this cohort, which we knew from the Kaiser cohort determines earlier morbidity and mortality across a number of disease states. We’re seeing things like more heart attacks, more diabetes, and all kinds of things in these populations. This is not new news; we just have not been focusing on this.

In her paper, this call to action, they had talked about some ACE-related conditions that currently do not include Parkinson’s disease. There are three ACE-related neurologic conditions that people should be aware of. One is in the headache/pain universe. Another is in the stroke universe, and that’s understandable, given cardiovascular risk factors . Then the third is in this dementia risk category. I think Parkinson’s disease, as we know, can be associated with dementia. A large percentage of our patients get dementia, but we don’t have Parkinson’s disease called out in this framework.

What people are talking about is if you have no ACEs or are in this middle category of one to three ACEs and you don’t have an ACE-related diagnosis – which Parkinson’s disease is not currently – we just give some basic counseling about the importance of lifestyle. I think we would love to see that anyway. They’re talking about things like exercise, diet, sleep, social connection, getting out in nature, things like that, so just general counseling on the importance of that.

Then if you’re in this higher-risk category, and so with these ACE-related neurologic conditions, including dementia, headache, and stroke, if you had this middle range of one to three ACEs, they’re getting additional resources. Some of them may be referred for social work help or mental health support and things like that.

I’d really love to see that happening in Parkinson’s disease, because I think we have so many needs in our population. I’m always hoping to advocate for more mental health needs that are scarce and resources in the social support realm because I believe that social connection and social support is a huge buffer for this trauma.

ACEs are just one type of trauma. I take care of veterans in the Veterans [Affairs Department]. We have some information now coming out about posttraumatic stress disorder, predisposing to certain things in Parkinson’s disease, possibly head injury, and things like that. I think we have populations at risk that we can hopefully screen at intake, and I’m really pushing for that.

Maybe it’s not the neurologist that does this intake. It might be someone else on the team that can spend some time doing these questionnaires and understand if your patient has a high ACE score. Unless you ask, many patients don’t necessarily come forward to talk about this. I really am pushing for trying to screen and trying to advocate for more research in this area so that we can classify Parkinson’s disease as an ACE-related condition and thus give more resources from the mental health world, and also the social support world, to our patients.

Dr. LaFaver: Thank you. There are many important points, and I think it’s a very important thing to recognize that it may not be only trauma in childhood but also throughout life, as you said, and might really influence nonmotor symptoms of Parkinson’s disease in particular, including anxiety and pain, which are often difficult to treat.

I think there’s much more to do in research, advocacy, and education. We’re going to educate patients about this, and also educate other neurologists and providers. I think you mentioned that trauma-informed care is getting its spotlight in primary care and other specialties. I think we have catching up to do in neurology, and I think this is a really important work toward that goal.

Thank you so much for your work and for taking the time to share your thoughts. I hope to talk to you again soon.

Dr. Subramanian: Thank you so much, Kathrin.
 

Dr. LaFaver has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Subramanian disclosed ties with Acorda Therapeutics.

A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

Kathrin LaFaver, MD: Hello. I’m happy to talk today to Dr. Indu Subramanian, clinical professor at University of California, Los Angeles, and director of the Parkinson’s Disease Research, Education and Clinical Center in Los Angeles. I am a neurologist in Saratoga Springs, New York, and we will be talking today about Indu’s new paper on childhood trauma and Parkinson’s disease. Welcome and thanks for taking the time.

Indu Subramanian, MD: Thank you so much for letting us highlight this important topic.

Dr. LaFaver: There are many papers published every month on Parkinson’s disease, but this topic stands out because it’s not a thing that has been commonly looked at. What gave you the idea to study this?
 

Neurology behind other specialties

Dr. Subramanian: Kathrin, you and I have been looking at things that can inform us about our patients – the person who’s standing in front of us when they come in and we’re giving them this diagnosis. I think that so much of what we’ve done [in the past] is a cookie cutter approach to giving everybody the standard treatment. [We’ve been assuming that] It doesn’t matter if they’re a man or woman. It doesn’t matter if they’re a veteran. It doesn’t matter if they may be from a minoritized population.

Customization is so key, and we’re realizing that we have missed the boat often through the pandemic and in health care in general.

We’ve also been interested in approaches that are outside the box, right? We have this integrative medicine and lifestyle medicine background. I’ve been going to those meetings and really been struck by the mounting evidence on the importance of things like early adverse childhood events (ACEs), what zip code you live in, what your pollution index is, and how these things can affect people through their life and their health.

I think that it is high time neurologists pay attention to this. There’s been mounting evidence throughout many disease states, various types of cancers, and mental health. Cardiology is much more advanced, but we haven’t had much data in neurology. In fact, when we went to write this paper, there were just one or two papers that were looking at multiple sclerosis or general neurologic issues, but really nothing in Parkinson’s disease.

We know that Parkinson’s disease is not only a motor disease that affects mental health, but that it also affects nonmotor issues. Childhood adversity may affect how people progress or how quickly they may get a disease, and we were interested in how it may manifest in a disease like Parkinson’s disease.

That was the framework going to meetings. As we wrote this paper and were in various editing stages, there was a beautiful paper that came out by Nadine Burke Harris and team that really was a call to action for neurologists and caring about trauma.

Dr. LaFaver: I couldn’t agree more. It’s really an underrecognized issue. With my own background, being very interested in functional movement disorders, psychosomatic disorders, and so on, it becomes much more evident how common a trauma background is, not only for people we were traditionally asking about.

Why don’t you summarize your findings for us?
 

Adverse childhood events

Dr. Subramanian: This is a web-based survey, so obviously, these are patient self-reports of their disease. We have a large cohort of people that we’ve been following over 7 years. I’m looking at modifiable variables and what really impacts Parkinson’s disease. Some of our previous papers have looked at diet, exercise, and loneliness. This is the same cohort.

We ended up putting the ACEs questionnaire, which is 10 questions looking at whether you were exposed to certain things in your household below the age of 18. This is a relatively standard questionnaire that’s administered one time, and you get a score out of 10. This is something that has been pushed, at least in the state of California, as something that we should be checking more in all people coming in.

We introduced the survey, and we didn’t force everyone to take it. Unfortunately, there was 20% or so of our patients who chose not to answer these questions. One has to ask, who are those people that didn’t answer the questions? Are they the ones that may have had trauma and these questions were triggering? It was a gap. We didn’t add extra questions to explore why people didn’t answer those questions.

We have to also put this in context. We have a patient population that’s largely quite affluent, who are able to access web-based surveys through their computer, and largely Caucasian; there are not many minoritized populations in our cohort. We want to do better with that. We actually were able to gather a decent number of women. We represent women quite well in our survey. I think that’s because of this online approach and some of the things that we’re studying.

In our survey, we broke it down into people who had no ACEs, one to three ACEs, or four or more ACEs. This is a standard way to break down ACEs so that we’re able to categorize what to do with these patient populations.

What we saw – and it’s preliminary evidence – is that people who had higher ACE scores seemed to have more symptom severity when we controlled for things like years since diagnosis, age, and gender. They also seem to have a worse quality of life. There was some indication that there were more nonmotor issues in those populations, as you might expect, such as anxiety, depression, and things that presumably ACEs can affect separately.

There are some confounders, but I think we really want to use this as the first piece of evidence to hopefully pave the way for caring about trauma in Parkinson’s disease moving forward.

Dr. LaFaver: Thank you so much for that summary. You already mentioned the main methodology you used.

What is the next step for you? How do you see these findings informing our clinical care? Do you have suggestions for all of the neurologists listening in this regard?


 

PD not yet considered ACE-related

Dr. Subramanian: Dr. Burke Harris was the former surgeon general in California. She’s a woman of color and a brilliant speaker, and she had worked in inner cities, I think in San Francisco, with pediatric populations, seeing these effects of adversity in that time frame.

You see this population at risk, and then you’re following this cohort, which we knew from the Kaiser cohort determines earlier morbidity and mortality across a number of disease states. We’re seeing things like more heart attacks, more diabetes, and all kinds of things in these populations. This is not new news; we just have not been focusing on this.

In her paper, this call to action, they had talked about some ACE-related conditions that currently do not include Parkinson’s disease. There are three ACE-related neurologic conditions that people should be aware of. One is in the headache/pain universe. Another is in the stroke universe, and that’s understandable, given cardiovascular risk factors . Then the third is in this dementia risk category. I think Parkinson’s disease, as we know, can be associated with dementia. A large percentage of our patients get dementia, but we don’t have Parkinson’s disease called out in this framework.

What people are talking about is if you have no ACEs or are in this middle category of one to three ACEs and you don’t have an ACE-related diagnosis – which Parkinson’s disease is not currently – we just give some basic counseling about the importance of lifestyle. I think we would love to see that anyway. They’re talking about things like exercise, diet, sleep, social connection, getting out in nature, things like that, so just general counseling on the importance of that.

Then if you’re in this higher-risk category, and so with these ACE-related neurologic conditions, including dementia, headache, and stroke, if you had this middle range of one to three ACEs, they’re getting additional resources. Some of them may be referred for social work help or mental health support and things like that.

I’d really love to see that happening in Parkinson’s disease, because I think we have so many needs in our population. I’m always hoping to advocate for more mental health needs that are scarce and resources in the social support realm because I believe that social connection and social support is a huge buffer for this trauma.

ACEs are just one type of trauma. I take care of veterans in the Veterans [Affairs Department]. We have some information now coming out about posttraumatic stress disorder, predisposing to certain things in Parkinson’s disease, possibly head injury, and things like that. I think we have populations at risk that we can hopefully screen at intake, and I’m really pushing for that.

Maybe it’s not the neurologist that does this intake. It might be someone else on the team that can spend some time doing these questionnaires and understand if your patient has a high ACE score. Unless you ask, many patients don’t necessarily come forward to talk about this. I really am pushing for trying to screen and trying to advocate for more research in this area so that we can classify Parkinson’s disease as an ACE-related condition and thus give more resources from the mental health world, and also the social support world, to our patients.

Dr. LaFaver: Thank you. There are many important points, and I think it’s a very important thing to recognize that it may not be only trauma in childhood but also throughout life, as you said, and might really influence nonmotor symptoms of Parkinson’s disease in particular, including anxiety and pain, which are often difficult to treat.

I think there’s much more to do in research, advocacy, and education. We’re going to educate patients about this, and also educate other neurologists and providers. I think you mentioned that trauma-informed care is getting its spotlight in primary care and other specialties. I think we have catching up to do in neurology, and I think this is a really important work toward that goal.

Thank you so much for your work and for taking the time to share your thoughts. I hope to talk to you again soon.

Dr. Subramanian: Thank you so much, Kathrin.
 

Dr. LaFaver has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Subramanian disclosed ties with Acorda Therapeutics.

A version of this article originally appeared on Medscape.com.