User login
Excessive TV-watching tied to elevated risk for dementia, Parkinson’s disease, and depression
TOPLINE:
whereas a limited amount of daily computer use that is not work-related is linked to a lower risk for dementia.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators analyzed data on 473,184 people aged 39-72 years from the UK Biobank who were enrolled from 2006 to 2010 and followed until a diagnosis of dementia, PD, depression, death, or study end (2018 for Wales residents; 2021 for residents of England and Scotland).
- Participants reported on the number of hours they spent outside of work exercising, watching television, and using the computer.
- MRI was conducted to determine participants’ brain volume.
TAKEAWAY:
- During the study, 6096 people developed dementia, 3000 developed PD, 23,600 developed depression, 1200 developed dementia and depression, and 486 developed PD and depression.
- Compared with those who watched TV for under 1 hour per day, those who reported watching 4 or more hours per day had a 28% higher risk for dementia (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.17-1.39), a 35% higher risk for depression, (aHR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.29-1.40) and a 16% greater risk for PD (aHR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.29).
- However, moderate computer use outside of work seemed somewhat protective. Participants who used the computer for 30-60 minutes per day had lower risks for dementia (aHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.64-0.72), PD, (aHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.93), and depression (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.88) compared with those who reported the lowest levels of computer usage.
- Replacing 30 minutes per day of computer time with an equal amount of structured exercise was associated with decreased risk for dementia (aHR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95) and PD (aHR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.78-0.90).
IN PRACTICE:
The association between extended periods of TV use and higher risk for PD and dementia could be explained by a lack of activity, the authors note. They add that sedentary behavior is, “associated with biomarkers of low-grade inflammation and changes in inflammation markers that could initiate and or worsen neuroinflammation and contribute to neurodegeneration.”
SOURCE:
Hanzhang Wu, PhD, of Tianjin University of Traditional Medicine in Tianjin, China, led the study, which was published online in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.
LIMITATIONS:
Screen behaviors were assessed using self-report measures, which is subject to recall bias. Also, there may have been variables confounding the findings for which investigators did not account.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Tianjin Major Public Health Science and Technology Project, the National Health Commission of China, the Food Science and Technology Foundation of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology, the China Cohort Consortium, and the Chinese Nutrition Society Nutrition Research Foundation–DSM Research Fund, China. There were no disclosures reported.
Eve Bender has no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
whereas a limited amount of daily computer use that is not work-related is linked to a lower risk for dementia.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators analyzed data on 473,184 people aged 39-72 years from the UK Biobank who were enrolled from 2006 to 2010 and followed until a diagnosis of dementia, PD, depression, death, or study end (2018 for Wales residents; 2021 for residents of England and Scotland).
- Participants reported on the number of hours they spent outside of work exercising, watching television, and using the computer.
- MRI was conducted to determine participants’ brain volume.
TAKEAWAY:
- During the study, 6096 people developed dementia, 3000 developed PD, 23,600 developed depression, 1200 developed dementia and depression, and 486 developed PD and depression.
- Compared with those who watched TV for under 1 hour per day, those who reported watching 4 or more hours per day had a 28% higher risk for dementia (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.17-1.39), a 35% higher risk for depression, (aHR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.29-1.40) and a 16% greater risk for PD (aHR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.29).
- However, moderate computer use outside of work seemed somewhat protective. Participants who used the computer for 30-60 minutes per day had lower risks for dementia (aHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.64-0.72), PD, (aHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.93), and depression (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.88) compared with those who reported the lowest levels of computer usage.
- Replacing 30 minutes per day of computer time with an equal amount of structured exercise was associated with decreased risk for dementia (aHR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95) and PD (aHR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.78-0.90).
IN PRACTICE:
The association between extended periods of TV use and higher risk for PD and dementia could be explained by a lack of activity, the authors note. They add that sedentary behavior is, “associated with biomarkers of low-grade inflammation and changes in inflammation markers that could initiate and or worsen neuroinflammation and contribute to neurodegeneration.”
SOURCE:
Hanzhang Wu, PhD, of Tianjin University of Traditional Medicine in Tianjin, China, led the study, which was published online in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.
LIMITATIONS:
Screen behaviors were assessed using self-report measures, which is subject to recall bias. Also, there may have been variables confounding the findings for which investigators did not account.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Tianjin Major Public Health Science and Technology Project, the National Health Commission of China, the Food Science and Technology Foundation of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology, the China Cohort Consortium, and the Chinese Nutrition Society Nutrition Research Foundation–DSM Research Fund, China. There were no disclosures reported.
Eve Bender has no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
whereas a limited amount of daily computer use that is not work-related is linked to a lower risk for dementia.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators analyzed data on 473,184 people aged 39-72 years from the UK Biobank who were enrolled from 2006 to 2010 and followed until a diagnosis of dementia, PD, depression, death, or study end (2018 for Wales residents; 2021 for residents of England and Scotland).
- Participants reported on the number of hours they spent outside of work exercising, watching television, and using the computer.
- MRI was conducted to determine participants’ brain volume.
TAKEAWAY:
- During the study, 6096 people developed dementia, 3000 developed PD, 23,600 developed depression, 1200 developed dementia and depression, and 486 developed PD and depression.
- Compared with those who watched TV for under 1 hour per day, those who reported watching 4 or more hours per day had a 28% higher risk for dementia (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.17-1.39), a 35% higher risk for depression, (aHR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.29-1.40) and a 16% greater risk for PD (aHR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.03-1.29).
- However, moderate computer use outside of work seemed somewhat protective. Participants who used the computer for 30-60 minutes per day had lower risks for dementia (aHR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.64-0.72), PD, (aHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.79-0.93), and depression (aHR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.88) compared with those who reported the lowest levels of computer usage.
- Replacing 30 minutes per day of computer time with an equal amount of structured exercise was associated with decreased risk for dementia (aHR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.85-0.95) and PD (aHR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.78-0.90).
IN PRACTICE:
The association between extended periods of TV use and higher risk for PD and dementia could be explained by a lack of activity, the authors note. They add that sedentary behavior is, “associated with biomarkers of low-grade inflammation and changes in inflammation markers that could initiate and or worsen neuroinflammation and contribute to neurodegeneration.”
SOURCE:
Hanzhang Wu, PhD, of Tianjin University of Traditional Medicine in Tianjin, China, led the study, which was published online in the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.
LIMITATIONS:
Screen behaviors were assessed using self-report measures, which is subject to recall bias. Also, there may have been variables confounding the findings for which investigators did not account.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Tianjin Major Public Health Science and Technology Project, the National Health Commission of China, the Food Science and Technology Foundation of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology, the China Cohort Consortium, and the Chinese Nutrition Society Nutrition Research Foundation–DSM Research Fund, China. There were no disclosures reported.
Eve Bender has no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Secondhand smoke exposure linked to migraine, severe headache
TOPLINE:
, with effects of exposure varying depending on body mass index (BMI) and level of physical activity, new research shows.
METHODOLOGY:
Investigators analyzed data on 4,560 participants (median age, 43 years; 60% female; 71.5% White) from the 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
Participants were aged 20 years or older and had never smoked.
Migraine headache status was determined by asking whether participants experienced severe headaches or migraines during the previous 3 months.
SHS exposure was categorized as unexposed (serum cotinine levels <0.05 ng/mL and no smoker in the home), low (0.05 ng/mL ≤ serum cotinine level <1 ng/mL), or heavy (1 ng/mL ≤ serum cotinine level ≤ 10 ng/mL).
TAKEAWAY:
In all, 919 (20%) participants had severe headaches or migraines.
After adjustment for demographic and lifestyle factors (including medication use), heavy SHS exposure was positively associated with severe headache or migraine (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.02; 95% CI, 1.19-3.43).
No significant association was found between low SHS exposure and severe headaches or migraine (aOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.91-1.47).
In participants who were sedentary (P=.016) and those with a BMI <25 (P=.001), significant associations between SHS and severe headache or migraine were observed.
IN PRACTICE:
Noting a linear dose-response relationship between cotinine and severe headaches or migraine, the investigators write, “These findings underscore the need for stronger regulation of tobacco exposure, particularly in homes and public places.”
SOURCE:
Junpeng Wu, MMc, and Haitang Wang, MD, of Southern Medical University in Guangzhou, China, and their colleagues conducted the study. It was published online in Headache.
LIMITATIONS:
The study could not establish causal relationships between SHS and migraine or severe headache. In addition, the half-life of serum cotinine is 15-40 hours and thus this measure can reflect only recent SHS exposure.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was not funded. The investigators reported no disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
, with effects of exposure varying depending on body mass index (BMI) and level of physical activity, new research shows.
METHODOLOGY:
Investigators analyzed data on 4,560 participants (median age, 43 years; 60% female; 71.5% White) from the 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
Participants were aged 20 years or older and had never smoked.
Migraine headache status was determined by asking whether participants experienced severe headaches or migraines during the previous 3 months.
SHS exposure was categorized as unexposed (serum cotinine levels <0.05 ng/mL and no smoker in the home), low (0.05 ng/mL ≤ serum cotinine level <1 ng/mL), or heavy (1 ng/mL ≤ serum cotinine level ≤ 10 ng/mL).
TAKEAWAY:
In all, 919 (20%) participants had severe headaches or migraines.
After adjustment for demographic and lifestyle factors (including medication use), heavy SHS exposure was positively associated with severe headache or migraine (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.02; 95% CI, 1.19-3.43).
No significant association was found between low SHS exposure and severe headaches or migraine (aOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.91-1.47).
In participants who were sedentary (P=.016) and those with a BMI <25 (P=.001), significant associations between SHS and severe headache or migraine were observed.
IN PRACTICE:
Noting a linear dose-response relationship between cotinine and severe headaches or migraine, the investigators write, “These findings underscore the need for stronger regulation of tobacco exposure, particularly in homes and public places.”
SOURCE:
Junpeng Wu, MMc, and Haitang Wang, MD, of Southern Medical University in Guangzhou, China, and their colleagues conducted the study. It was published online in Headache.
LIMITATIONS:
The study could not establish causal relationships between SHS and migraine or severe headache. In addition, the half-life of serum cotinine is 15-40 hours and thus this measure can reflect only recent SHS exposure.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was not funded. The investigators reported no disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
, with effects of exposure varying depending on body mass index (BMI) and level of physical activity, new research shows.
METHODOLOGY:
Investigators analyzed data on 4,560 participants (median age, 43 years; 60% female; 71.5% White) from the 1999-2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.
Participants were aged 20 years or older and had never smoked.
Migraine headache status was determined by asking whether participants experienced severe headaches or migraines during the previous 3 months.
SHS exposure was categorized as unexposed (serum cotinine levels <0.05 ng/mL and no smoker in the home), low (0.05 ng/mL ≤ serum cotinine level <1 ng/mL), or heavy (1 ng/mL ≤ serum cotinine level ≤ 10 ng/mL).
TAKEAWAY:
In all, 919 (20%) participants had severe headaches or migraines.
After adjustment for demographic and lifestyle factors (including medication use), heavy SHS exposure was positively associated with severe headache or migraine (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.02; 95% CI, 1.19-3.43).
No significant association was found between low SHS exposure and severe headaches or migraine (aOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.91-1.47).
In participants who were sedentary (P=.016) and those with a BMI <25 (P=.001), significant associations between SHS and severe headache or migraine were observed.
IN PRACTICE:
Noting a linear dose-response relationship between cotinine and severe headaches or migraine, the investigators write, “These findings underscore the need for stronger regulation of tobacco exposure, particularly in homes and public places.”
SOURCE:
Junpeng Wu, MMc, and Haitang Wang, MD, of Southern Medical University in Guangzhou, China, and their colleagues conducted the study. It was published online in Headache.
LIMITATIONS:
The study could not establish causal relationships between SHS and migraine or severe headache. In addition, the half-life of serum cotinine is 15-40 hours and thus this measure can reflect only recent SHS exposure.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was not funded. The investigators reported no disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Yoga linked to seizure, anxiety reduction in epilepsy
TOPLINE:
in people with epilepsy, a new study shows.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators included participants aged 18-60 years with epilepsy who scored ≥ 4 on the Kilifi Stigma Scale of Epilepsy. A score greater than the 66th percentile indicates the presence of strongly felt stigma.
- Patients (n = 160) had an average of one seizure per week, and most took at least two antiseizure medications.
- The intervention group (n = 80) participated in a yoga module with muscle-loosening exercises, slow and synchronized breathing, meditation, and positive affirmations. The control group (n = 80) participated in sham yoga sessions with no instructions on the breathing exercises or attention to the body movements and sensations during practice.
- Both groups participated in seven 1-hour supervised group yoga sessions over 3 months, were asked to practice the interventions at home five times per week, and received a psychoeducation module on epilepsy.
TAKEAWAY:
- Participants practicing the intervention module had significant reductions in self-perceived stigma, compared with those in the control group (P = .01).
- The proportion of participants in the intervention group who had a more than 50% seizure reduction (odds ratio, 4.11; P = .01) and complete seizure remission (OR, 7.4; P = .005) at the end of the 6-month follow-up was significantly higher than in the control group.
- Compared with those in the control group, there were also significant improvements in anxiety (P = .032) and quality of life (P < .001) in the intervention group.
- The intervention group also experienced significant improvement in mindfulness (P < .001) and cognitive impairment, compared with the control group (P < .004).
IN PRACTICE:
“This stigma can affect a person’s life in many ways, including treatment, emergency department visits, and poor mental health,” study investigator Majari Tripathi, MD, of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, said in a press release. “Our study showed that doing yoga can alleviate the burden of epilepsy and improve the overall quality of life by reducing this perceived stigma.”
SOURCE:
Dr. Tripathi and Kirandeep Kaur, MD, also of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, conducted the study with their colleagues. It was published online in Neurology.
LIMITATIONS:
There was no passive control or treatment as usual group, which would indicate the effect size of the intervention. In addition, there was no monitoring of seizure frequency before the study began, which may have biased the change of seizure frequency as an outcome.
DISCLOSURES:
The study investigators reported no study funding or reported disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
in people with epilepsy, a new study shows.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators included participants aged 18-60 years with epilepsy who scored ≥ 4 on the Kilifi Stigma Scale of Epilepsy. A score greater than the 66th percentile indicates the presence of strongly felt stigma.
- Patients (n = 160) had an average of one seizure per week, and most took at least two antiseizure medications.
- The intervention group (n = 80) participated in a yoga module with muscle-loosening exercises, slow and synchronized breathing, meditation, and positive affirmations. The control group (n = 80) participated in sham yoga sessions with no instructions on the breathing exercises or attention to the body movements and sensations during practice.
- Both groups participated in seven 1-hour supervised group yoga sessions over 3 months, were asked to practice the interventions at home five times per week, and received a psychoeducation module on epilepsy.
TAKEAWAY:
- Participants practicing the intervention module had significant reductions in self-perceived stigma, compared with those in the control group (P = .01).
- The proportion of participants in the intervention group who had a more than 50% seizure reduction (odds ratio, 4.11; P = .01) and complete seizure remission (OR, 7.4; P = .005) at the end of the 6-month follow-up was significantly higher than in the control group.
- Compared with those in the control group, there were also significant improvements in anxiety (P = .032) and quality of life (P < .001) in the intervention group.
- The intervention group also experienced significant improvement in mindfulness (P < .001) and cognitive impairment, compared with the control group (P < .004).
IN PRACTICE:
“This stigma can affect a person’s life in many ways, including treatment, emergency department visits, and poor mental health,” study investigator Majari Tripathi, MD, of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, said in a press release. “Our study showed that doing yoga can alleviate the burden of epilepsy and improve the overall quality of life by reducing this perceived stigma.”
SOURCE:
Dr. Tripathi and Kirandeep Kaur, MD, also of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, conducted the study with their colleagues. It was published online in Neurology.
LIMITATIONS:
There was no passive control or treatment as usual group, which would indicate the effect size of the intervention. In addition, there was no monitoring of seizure frequency before the study began, which may have biased the change of seizure frequency as an outcome.
DISCLOSURES:
The study investigators reported no study funding or reported disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
in people with epilepsy, a new study shows.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators included participants aged 18-60 years with epilepsy who scored ≥ 4 on the Kilifi Stigma Scale of Epilepsy. A score greater than the 66th percentile indicates the presence of strongly felt stigma.
- Patients (n = 160) had an average of one seizure per week, and most took at least two antiseizure medications.
- The intervention group (n = 80) participated in a yoga module with muscle-loosening exercises, slow and synchronized breathing, meditation, and positive affirmations. The control group (n = 80) participated in sham yoga sessions with no instructions on the breathing exercises or attention to the body movements and sensations during practice.
- Both groups participated in seven 1-hour supervised group yoga sessions over 3 months, were asked to practice the interventions at home five times per week, and received a psychoeducation module on epilepsy.
TAKEAWAY:
- Participants practicing the intervention module had significant reductions in self-perceived stigma, compared with those in the control group (P = .01).
- The proportion of participants in the intervention group who had a more than 50% seizure reduction (odds ratio, 4.11; P = .01) and complete seizure remission (OR, 7.4; P = .005) at the end of the 6-month follow-up was significantly higher than in the control group.
- Compared with those in the control group, there were also significant improvements in anxiety (P = .032) and quality of life (P < .001) in the intervention group.
- The intervention group also experienced significant improvement in mindfulness (P < .001) and cognitive impairment, compared with the control group (P < .004).
IN PRACTICE:
“This stigma can affect a person’s life in many ways, including treatment, emergency department visits, and poor mental health,” study investigator Majari Tripathi, MD, of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, said in a press release. “Our study showed that doing yoga can alleviate the burden of epilepsy and improve the overall quality of life by reducing this perceived stigma.”
SOURCE:
Dr. Tripathi and Kirandeep Kaur, MD, also of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, conducted the study with their colleagues. It was published online in Neurology.
LIMITATIONS:
There was no passive control or treatment as usual group, which would indicate the effect size of the intervention. In addition, there was no monitoring of seizure frequency before the study began, which may have biased the change of seizure frequency as an outcome.
DISCLOSURES:
The study investigators reported no study funding or reported disclosures.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Chronic pain in the United States: New data
data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show.
Results from the annual National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) show that over-the-counter (OTC) pain relievers were the most commonly used pharmacologic treatment and exercise was the most common choice among nonpharmacologic options.
The results also revealed that prescription opioid use for chronic pain decreased from 15.2% in 2019 to 13.5% in 2020. However, there was no corresponding increase in nonpharmacologic therapies, despite current CDC guidelines that recommend maximizing the use of medication alternatives.
“Public health efforts may reduce health inequities by increasing access to pain management therapies so that all persons with chronic pain can receive safe and effective care,” S. Michaela Rikard, PhD, and colleagues wrote.
The findings were published online in a research letter in Annals of Internal Medicine.
Among 31,500 survey respondents, 7,400 indicated that they had pain on most days or every day for the past 3 months.
The survey collected data on self-reported opioid prescriptions in the past 3 months, as well as prescription and nonprescription opiate use during the same time period.
Among adult respondents, 60% used a combination of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments for pain and almost 27% used medications alone. Older adults, those with low incomes, uninsured individuals, and those living in the South were among those least likely to turn to nonpharmacologic treatment for pain.
After exercise, complementary therapies were the most commonly used nonpharmacologic options, including massage, meditation, or guided imagery, and spinal manipulation or other forms of chiropractic care.
For those taking medications, 76% self-reported using OTC pain relievers for pain, followed by prescription nonopioids (31%) and prescription opioids (13.5%).
Of those who used both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies, about half reported nonopioid and nonpharmacologic therapy use and 8% reported combined use of opioids, nonopioids, and nonpharmacologic therapy.
After adjustment for multiple factors, investigators found those who were older, had public insurance, or had more severe pain were more likely to use prescription opioids. They also reported severe pain (22%), but 4% reported only mild pain.
Study limitations included generalizability only to noninstitutionalized civilian adults, potential recall bias, and cross-sectional results that do not include patient or treatment history.
“Despite its limitations, this study identifies opportunities to improve guideline-concordant use of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies among adults with chronic pain,” the authors wrote.
There was no specific funding source for the study. The authors have reported no relevant financial disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show.
Results from the annual National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) show that over-the-counter (OTC) pain relievers were the most commonly used pharmacologic treatment and exercise was the most common choice among nonpharmacologic options.
The results also revealed that prescription opioid use for chronic pain decreased from 15.2% in 2019 to 13.5% in 2020. However, there was no corresponding increase in nonpharmacologic therapies, despite current CDC guidelines that recommend maximizing the use of medication alternatives.
“Public health efforts may reduce health inequities by increasing access to pain management therapies so that all persons with chronic pain can receive safe and effective care,” S. Michaela Rikard, PhD, and colleagues wrote.
The findings were published online in a research letter in Annals of Internal Medicine.
Among 31,500 survey respondents, 7,400 indicated that they had pain on most days or every day for the past 3 months.
The survey collected data on self-reported opioid prescriptions in the past 3 months, as well as prescription and nonprescription opiate use during the same time period.
Among adult respondents, 60% used a combination of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments for pain and almost 27% used medications alone. Older adults, those with low incomes, uninsured individuals, and those living in the South were among those least likely to turn to nonpharmacologic treatment for pain.
After exercise, complementary therapies were the most commonly used nonpharmacologic options, including massage, meditation, or guided imagery, and spinal manipulation or other forms of chiropractic care.
For those taking medications, 76% self-reported using OTC pain relievers for pain, followed by prescription nonopioids (31%) and prescription opioids (13.5%).
Of those who used both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies, about half reported nonopioid and nonpharmacologic therapy use and 8% reported combined use of opioids, nonopioids, and nonpharmacologic therapy.
After adjustment for multiple factors, investigators found those who were older, had public insurance, or had more severe pain were more likely to use prescription opioids. They also reported severe pain (22%), but 4% reported only mild pain.
Study limitations included generalizability only to noninstitutionalized civilian adults, potential recall bias, and cross-sectional results that do not include patient or treatment history.
“Despite its limitations, this study identifies opportunities to improve guideline-concordant use of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies among adults with chronic pain,” the authors wrote.
There was no specific funding source for the study. The authors have reported no relevant financial disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show.
Results from the annual National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) show that over-the-counter (OTC) pain relievers were the most commonly used pharmacologic treatment and exercise was the most common choice among nonpharmacologic options.
The results also revealed that prescription opioid use for chronic pain decreased from 15.2% in 2019 to 13.5% in 2020. However, there was no corresponding increase in nonpharmacologic therapies, despite current CDC guidelines that recommend maximizing the use of medication alternatives.
“Public health efforts may reduce health inequities by increasing access to pain management therapies so that all persons with chronic pain can receive safe and effective care,” S. Michaela Rikard, PhD, and colleagues wrote.
The findings were published online in a research letter in Annals of Internal Medicine.
Among 31,500 survey respondents, 7,400 indicated that they had pain on most days or every day for the past 3 months.
The survey collected data on self-reported opioid prescriptions in the past 3 months, as well as prescription and nonprescription opiate use during the same time period.
Among adult respondents, 60% used a combination of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments for pain and almost 27% used medications alone. Older adults, those with low incomes, uninsured individuals, and those living in the South were among those least likely to turn to nonpharmacologic treatment for pain.
After exercise, complementary therapies were the most commonly used nonpharmacologic options, including massage, meditation, or guided imagery, and spinal manipulation or other forms of chiropractic care.
For those taking medications, 76% self-reported using OTC pain relievers for pain, followed by prescription nonopioids (31%) and prescription opioids (13.5%).
Of those who used both pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies, about half reported nonopioid and nonpharmacologic therapy use and 8% reported combined use of opioids, nonopioids, and nonpharmacologic therapy.
After adjustment for multiple factors, investigators found those who were older, had public insurance, or had more severe pain were more likely to use prescription opioids. They also reported severe pain (22%), but 4% reported only mild pain.
Study limitations included generalizability only to noninstitutionalized civilian adults, potential recall bias, and cross-sectional results that do not include patient or treatment history.
“Despite its limitations, this study identifies opportunities to improve guideline-concordant use of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic therapies among adults with chronic pain,” the authors wrote.
There was no specific funding source for the study. The authors have reported no relevant financial disclosures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
Pandemic tied to a 50% drop in memory, executive function in older adults
TOPLINE:
alcohol use and a more sedentary lifestyle. This trend persisted into the second year of the pandemic, after social restrictions had eased.
This was attributed to an increase in known dementia risk factors, including increasedMETHODOLOGY:
- In total, 3,140 participants (54% women; mean age, 68 years) in the PROTECT study, a longitudinal aging study in the United Kingdom, completed annual cognitive assessments and self-reported questionnaires related to mental health and lifestyle.
- Investigators analyzed cognition across three time periods: during the year before the pandemic (March 2019 to February 2020), during pandemic year 1 (March 2020 to February 2021), and pandemic year 2 (March 2021 to February 2022).
- Investigators conducted a subanalysis on those with mild cognitive impairment and those with a history of COVID-19 (n = 752).
TAKEAWAY:
- During the first year of the pandemic, when there were societal lockdowns totaling 6 months, significant worsening of executive function and working memory was seen across the entire cohort (effect sizes, 0.15 and 0.51, respectively), in people with mild cognitive impairment (effect sizes, 0.13 and 0.40, respectively), and in those with a previous history of COVID-19 (effect sizes, 0.24 and 0.46, respectively).
- Worsening of working memory was sustained across the whole cohort in the second year of the pandemic after lockdowns were lifted (effect size, 0.47).
- Even after investigators removed data on people with mild cognitive impairment and COVID-19, the decline in executive function (effect size, 0.15; P < .0001) and working memory (effect size, 0.53; P < .0001) persisted.
- Cognitive decline was significantly associated with known risk factors for dementia, such as reduced exercise (P = .0049) and increased alcohol use (P = .049), across the whole cohort, as well as depression (P = .011) in those with a history of COVID-19 and loneliness (P = .0038) in those with mild cognitive impairment.
IN PRACTICE:
Investigators noted that these data add to existing knowledge of long-standing health consequences of COVID-19, especially for older people with memory problems. “On the positive note, there is evidence that lifestyle changes and improved health management can positively influence mental functioning,” study coauthor Dag Aarsland, MD, PhD, professor of old age psychiatry at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience of King’s College London, said in a press release. “The current study underlines the importance of careful monitoring of people at risk during major events such as the pandemic.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Anne Corbett, PhD, of University of Exeter, and was published online in The Lancet Healthy Longevity. The research was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London and the NIHR Exeter Biomedical Research Centre.
LIMITATIONS:
The study relied on self-reported data. In addition, the PROTECT cohort is self-selected and may skew toward participants with higher education levels.
DISCLOSURES:
Dr. Corbett reported receiving funding from the NIHR and grants from Synexus, reMYND, and Novo Nordisk. Other disclosures are noted in the original article.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
alcohol use and a more sedentary lifestyle. This trend persisted into the second year of the pandemic, after social restrictions had eased.
This was attributed to an increase in known dementia risk factors, including increasedMETHODOLOGY:
- In total, 3,140 participants (54% women; mean age, 68 years) in the PROTECT study, a longitudinal aging study in the United Kingdom, completed annual cognitive assessments and self-reported questionnaires related to mental health and lifestyle.
- Investigators analyzed cognition across three time periods: during the year before the pandemic (March 2019 to February 2020), during pandemic year 1 (March 2020 to February 2021), and pandemic year 2 (March 2021 to February 2022).
- Investigators conducted a subanalysis on those with mild cognitive impairment and those with a history of COVID-19 (n = 752).
TAKEAWAY:
- During the first year of the pandemic, when there were societal lockdowns totaling 6 months, significant worsening of executive function and working memory was seen across the entire cohort (effect sizes, 0.15 and 0.51, respectively), in people with mild cognitive impairment (effect sizes, 0.13 and 0.40, respectively), and in those with a previous history of COVID-19 (effect sizes, 0.24 and 0.46, respectively).
- Worsening of working memory was sustained across the whole cohort in the second year of the pandemic after lockdowns were lifted (effect size, 0.47).
- Even after investigators removed data on people with mild cognitive impairment and COVID-19, the decline in executive function (effect size, 0.15; P < .0001) and working memory (effect size, 0.53; P < .0001) persisted.
- Cognitive decline was significantly associated with known risk factors for dementia, such as reduced exercise (P = .0049) and increased alcohol use (P = .049), across the whole cohort, as well as depression (P = .011) in those with a history of COVID-19 and loneliness (P = .0038) in those with mild cognitive impairment.
IN PRACTICE:
Investigators noted that these data add to existing knowledge of long-standing health consequences of COVID-19, especially for older people with memory problems. “On the positive note, there is evidence that lifestyle changes and improved health management can positively influence mental functioning,” study coauthor Dag Aarsland, MD, PhD, professor of old age psychiatry at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience of King’s College London, said in a press release. “The current study underlines the importance of careful monitoring of people at risk during major events such as the pandemic.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Anne Corbett, PhD, of University of Exeter, and was published online in The Lancet Healthy Longevity. The research was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London and the NIHR Exeter Biomedical Research Centre.
LIMITATIONS:
The study relied on self-reported data. In addition, the PROTECT cohort is self-selected and may skew toward participants with higher education levels.
DISCLOSURES:
Dr. Corbett reported receiving funding from the NIHR and grants from Synexus, reMYND, and Novo Nordisk. Other disclosures are noted in the original article.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
alcohol use and a more sedentary lifestyle. This trend persisted into the second year of the pandemic, after social restrictions had eased.
This was attributed to an increase in known dementia risk factors, including increasedMETHODOLOGY:
- In total, 3,140 participants (54% women; mean age, 68 years) in the PROTECT study, a longitudinal aging study in the United Kingdom, completed annual cognitive assessments and self-reported questionnaires related to mental health and lifestyle.
- Investigators analyzed cognition across three time periods: during the year before the pandemic (March 2019 to February 2020), during pandemic year 1 (March 2020 to February 2021), and pandemic year 2 (March 2021 to February 2022).
- Investigators conducted a subanalysis on those with mild cognitive impairment and those with a history of COVID-19 (n = 752).
TAKEAWAY:
- During the first year of the pandemic, when there were societal lockdowns totaling 6 months, significant worsening of executive function and working memory was seen across the entire cohort (effect sizes, 0.15 and 0.51, respectively), in people with mild cognitive impairment (effect sizes, 0.13 and 0.40, respectively), and in those with a previous history of COVID-19 (effect sizes, 0.24 and 0.46, respectively).
- Worsening of working memory was sustained across the whole cohort in the second year of the pandemic after lockdowns were lifted (effect size, 0.47).
- Even after investigators removed data on people with mild cognitive impairment and COVID-19, the decline in executive function (effect size, 0.15; P < .0001) and working memory (effect size, 0.53; P < .0001) persisted.
- Cognitive decline was significantly associated with known risk factors for dementia, such as reduced exercise (P = .0049) and increased alcohol use (P = .049), across the whole cohort, as well as depression (P = .011) in those with a history of COVID-19 and loneliness (P = .0038) in those with mild cognitive impairment.
IN PRACTICE:
Investigators noted that these data add to existing knowledge of long-standing health consequences of COVID-19, especially for older people with memory problems. “On the positive note, there is evidence that lifestyle changes and improved health management can positively influence mental functioning,” study coauthor Dag Aarsland, MD, PhD, professor of old age psychiatry at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience of King’s College London, said in a press release. “The current study underlines the importance of careful monitoring of people at risk during major events such as the pandemic.”
SOURCE:
The study was led by Anne Corbett, PhD, of University of Exeter, and was published online in The Lancet Healthy Longevity. The research was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London and the NIHR Exeter Biomedical Research Centre.
LIMITATIONS:
The study relied on self-reported data. In addition, the PROTECT cohort is self-selected and may skew toward participants with higher education levels.
DISCLOSURES:
Dr. Corbett reported receiving funding from the NIHR and grants from Synexus, reMYND, and Novo Nordisk. Other disclosures are noted in the original article.
A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.
Serious mental illness tied to 50% higher all-cause mortality risk after COVID
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators analyzed data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink database, which contains health information on 13.5 million patients receiving care from family practices in England and Northern Ireland.
- The study included participants with SMI, including schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder.
- Participants were aged 5 years or older with a SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded between Feb. 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021, spanning two waves of the pandemic.
- Death rates among participants with SMI and COVID-19 (n = 7,150; 56% female) were compared with those in a control group of participants without SMI who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 (n = 650,000; 55% female).
TAKEAWAY:
- Participants with SMI and COVID-19 had a 53% higher risk for death than those in the non-SMI control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-1.68).
- Black Caribbean/Black African participants were more likely than White participants to die of COVID-19 (aHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.12-1.34), although ethnicity was not recorded in 30% of participants.
- After SARS-CoV-2 infection, for every additional multimorbid condition, the aHR for death increased by 6% in the SMI group and 16% in the non-SMI group (P = .001). Some of these conditions included hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, depression, and anxiety.
IN PRACTICE:
“From a public health perspective, our study has emphasized the need for early and timely preventative interventions (e.g. vaccination) for the SMI population. Future studies are needed to disentangle the complex biological and psychosocial factors, and health care pathways, that have led to the greater mortality rates in the SMI population,” the authors write.
SOURCE:
Jayati Das-Munshi, MD, of Kings College London, led the study, which was published online in the British Journal of Psychiatry. The study was funded by the Health Foundation.
LIMITATIONS:
COVID-19 may have been underdiagnosed or underreported in the records studied. Also, investigators did not have information about cause of death.
DISCLOSURES:
One author received funding from Janssen, GSK, and Takeda. All other authors declared no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators analyzed data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink database, which contains health information on 13.5 million patients receiving care from family practices in England and Northern Ireland.
- The study included participants with SMI, including schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder.
- Participants were aged 5 years or older with a SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded between Feb. 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021, spanning two waves of the pandemic.
- Death rates among participants with SMI and COVID-19 (n = 7,150; 56% female) were compared with those in a control group of participants without SMI who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 (n = 650,000; 55% female).
TAKEAWAY:
- Participants with SMI and COVID-19 had a 53% higher risk for death than those in the non-SMI control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-1.68).
- Black Caribbean/Black African participants were more likely than White participants to die of COVID-19 (aHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.12-1.34), although ethnicity was not recorded in 30% of participants.
- After SARS-CoV-2 infection, for every additional multimorbid condition, the aHR for death increased by 6% in the SMI group and 16% in the non-SMI group (P = .001). Some of these conditions included hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, depression, and anxiety.
IN PRACTICE:
“From a public health perspective, our study has emphasized the need for early and timely preventative interventions (e.g. vaccination) for the SMI population. Future studies are needed to disentangle the complex biological and psychosocial factors, and health care pathways, that have led to the greater mortality rates in the SMI population,” the authors write.
SOURCE:
Jayati Das-Munshi, MD, of Kings College London, led the study, which was published online in the British Journal of Psychiatry. The study was funded by the Health Foundation.
LIMITATIONS:
COVID-19 may have been underdiagnosed or underreported in the records studied. Also, investigators did not have information about cause of death.
DISCLOSURES:
One author received funding from Janssen, GSK, and Takeda. All other authors declared no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators analyzed data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink database, which contains health information on 13.5 million patients receiving care from family practices in England and Northern Ireland.
- The study included participants with SMI, including schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and bipolar disorder.
- Participants were aged 5 years or older with a SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded between Feb. 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021, spanning two waves of the pandemic.
- Death rates among participants with SMI and COVID-19 (n = 7,150; 56% female) were compared with those in a control group of participants without SMI who had been diagnosed with COVID-19 (n = 650,000; 55% female).
TAKEAWAY:
- Participants with SMI and COVID-19 had a 53% higher risk for death than those in the non-SMI control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.39-1.68).
- Black Caribbean/Black African participants were more likely than White participants to die of COVID-19 (aHR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.12-1.34), although ethnicity was not recorded in 30% of participants.
- After SARS-CoV-2 infection, for every additional multimorbid condition, the aHR for death increased by 6% in the SMI group and 16% in the non-SMI group (P = .001). Some of these conditions included hypertension, heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, depression, and anxiety.
IN PRACTICE:
“From a public health perspective, our study has emphasized the need for early and timely preventative interventions (e.g. vaccination) for the SMI population. Future studies are needed to disentangle the complex biological and psychosocial factors, and health care pathways, that have led to the greater mortality rates in the SMI population,” the authors write.
SOURCE:
Jayati Das-Munshi, MD, of Kings College London, led the study, which was published online in the British Journal of Psychiatry. The study was funded by the Health Foundation.
LIMITATIONS:
COVID-19 may have been underdiagnosed or underreported in the records studied. Also, investigators did not have information about cause of death.
DISCLOSURES:
One author received funding from Janssen, GSK, and Takeda. All other authors declared no conflicts of interest.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Ketamine no better for depression than placebo?
TOPLINE:
results of a new study suggest, contradicting prior research. Although symptoms improved in both study groups, investigators say participants’ expectations of an improvement from ketamine may be driving that result.
METHODOLOGY:
- The randomized, placebo-controlled trial included 40 patients who had previously been diagnosed with MDD and who were scheduled for elective noncardiac, nonintracranial surgery.
- Participants completed pre- and postsurgery depression screenings with the Patient Health Questionnaire–8 (inclusion score was ≥ 12) and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).
- Patients received an infusion of 0.5 mg/kg of saline (placebo group; n = 20) or ketamine (n = 20) during surgery, along with general anesthesia.
- At the end of a 14-day follow-up, patients were asked to guess whether they had received ketamine or placebo.
TAKEAWAY:
- MADRS scores dropped by around half 1 day after treatment, indicating an improvement in depressive symptoms in both the group that received ketamine (mean decrease from 25 to 12.6 points) and the group that received placebo (mean decrease from 30 to 15.3 points). There was no significant difference between the two.
- Participants in the ketamine and placebo groups also reported high rates of clinical response (60% and 50%, respectively) and remission (50% and 35%, respectively), again with no significant difference based on treatment with ketamine or placebo.
- Only 36.8% of participants accurately guessed their treatment group. Those who guessed they had received ketamine had higher MADRS scores than those who guessed they had received placebo or said they didn’t know (10.1 vs. 19.2 vs. 23.0).
- The ketamine group had a significantly shorter hospital stay (1.9 days) than the placebo group (4 days) (P = .02).
IN PRACTICE:
“Our primary findings differ from those of previous antidepressant trials with ketamine conducted without adequate masking, which find robust effects of ketamine,” the authors wrote, adding that “regardless of the intervention being tested, participant expectations of a positive outcome – also known as hope – may drive large decreases in depression symptoms seen in antidepressant trials.”
SOURCE:
Boris D. Heifets, MD, PhD, led the study, which was published online in Nature Mental Health. The study was funded by the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care, the National Institutes of Health, and the Stanford School of Medicine Research Office.
LIMITATIONS:
The investigators did not measure participants’ treatment expectations prior to randomization and could not determine what effect participant expectancy bias may have had on the results. In addition, there was no assessment of the blind for anesthesiologists who administered the ketamine or placebo to patients.
DISCLOSURES:
Dr. Heifets is on the scientific advisory boards of Osmind and Journey Clinical and is a consultant to Clairvoyant Therapeutics and Vine Ventures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
results of a new study suggest, contradicting prior research. Although symptoms improved in both study groups, investigators say participants’ expectations of an improvement from ketamine may be driving that result.
METHODOLOGY:
- The randomized, placebo-controlled trial included 40 patients who had previously been diagnosed with MDD and who were scheduled for elective noncardiac, nonintracranial surgery.
- Participants completed pre- and postsurgery depression screenings with the Patient Health Questionnaire–8 (inclusion score was ≥ 12) and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).
- Patients received an infusion of 0.5 mg/kg of saline (placebo group; n = 20) or ketamine (n = 20) during surgery, along with general anesthesia.
- At the end of a 14-day follow-up, patients were asked to guess whether they had received ketamine or placebo.
TAKEAWAY:
- MADRS scores dropped by around half 1 day after treatment, indicating an improvement in depressive symptoms in both the group that received ketamine (mean decrease from 25 to 12.6 points) and the group that received placebo (mean decrease from 30 to 15.3 points). There was no significant difference between the two.
- Participants in the ketamine and placebo groups also reported high rates of clinical response (60% and 50%, respectively) and remission (50% and 35%, respectively), again with no significant difference based on treatment with ketamine or placebo.
- Only 36.8% of participants accurately guessed their treatment group. Those who guessed they had received ketamine had higher MADRS scores than those who guessed they had received placebo or said they didn’t know (10.1 vs. 19.2 vs. 23.0).
- The ketamine group had a significantly shorter hospital stay (1.9 days) than the placebo group (4 days) (P = .02).
IN PRACTICE:
“Our primary findings differ from those of previous antidepressant trials with ketamine conducted without adequate masking, which find robust effects of ketamine,” the authors wrote, adding that “regardless of the intervention being tested, participant expectations of a positive outcome – also known as hope – may drive large decreases in depression symptoms seen in antidepressant trials.”
SOURCE:
Boris D. Heifets, MD, PhD, led the study, which was published online in Nature Mental Health. The study was funded by the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care, the National Institutes of Health, and the Stanford School of Medicine Research Office.
LIMITATIONS:
The investigators did not measure participants’ treatment expectations prior to randomization and could not determine what effect participant expectancy bias may have had on the results. In addition, there was no assessment of the blind for anesthesiologists who administered the ketamine or placebo to patients.
DISCLOSURES:
Dr. Heifets is on the scientific advisory boards of Osmind and Journey Clinical and is a consultant to Clairvoyant Therapeutics and Vine Ventures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
results of a new study suggest, contradicting prior research. Although symptoms improved in both study groups, investigators say participants’ expectations of an improvement from ketamine may be driving that result.
METHODOLOGY:
- The randomized, placebo-controlled trial included 40 patients who had previously been diagnosed with MDD and who were scheduled for elective noncardiac, nonintracranial surgery.
- Participants completed pre- and postsurgery depression screenings with the Patient Health Questionnaire–8 (inclusion score was ≥ 12) and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS).
- Patients received an infusion of 0.5 mg/kg of saline (placebo group; n = 20) or ketamine (n = 20) during surgery, along with general anesthesia.
- At the end of a 14-day follow-up, patients were asked to guess whether they had received ketamine or placebo.
TAKEAWAY:
- MADRS scores dropped by around half 1 day after treatment, indicating an improvement in depressive symptoms in both the group that received ketamine (mean decrease from 25 to 12.6 points) and the group that received placebo (mean decrease from 30 to 15.3 points). There was no significant difference between the two.
- Participants in the ketamine and placebo groups also reported high rates of clinical response (60% and 50%, respectively) and remission (50% and 35%, respectively), again with no significant difference based on treatment with ketamine or placebo.
- Only 36.8% of participants accurately guessed their treatment group. Those who guessed they had received ketamine had higher MADRS scores than those who guessed they had received placebo or said they didn’t know (10.1 vs. 19.2 vs. 23.0).
- The ketamine group had a significantly shorter hospital stay (1.9 days) than the placebo group (4 days) (P = .02).
IN PRACTICE:
“Our primary findings differ from those of previous antidepressant trials with ketamine conducted without adequate masking, which find robust effects of ketamine,” the authors wrote, adding that “regardless of the intervention being tested, participant expectations of a positive outcome – also known as hope – may drive large decreases in depression symptoms seen in antidepressant trials.”
SOURCE:
Boris D. Heifets, MD, PhD, led the study, which was published online in Nature Mental Health. The study was funded by the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care, the National Institutes of Health, and the Stanford School of Medicine Research Office.
LIMITATIONS:
The investigators did not measure participants’ treatment expectations prior to randomization and could not determine what effect participant expectancy bias may have had on the results. In addition, there was no assessment of the blind for anesthesiologists who administered the ketamine or placebo to patients.
DISCLOSURES:
Dr. Heifets is on the scientific advisory boards of Osmind and Journey Clinical and is a consultant to Clairvoyant Therapeutics and Vine Ventures.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Psychedelic therapy tied to reduced depression, anxiety
TOPLINE:
Perhaps most surprising to investigators, however, was that treatment was also associated with improved cognitive scores in the veterans, many of whom had traumatic brain injuries.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators reviewed clinical charts of 86 SOFVs who received psychedelic-assisted treatment at a therapeutic program in Mexico, 86% of whom sustained head injuries during deployment.
- On the first day of the study, participants received a single oral dose (10 mg/kg) of ibogaine hydrochloride in a group setting with two to five other attendees and spent the next day reflecting on their experience with program staff.
- On the third day, participants inhaled 5-MeO-DMT in three incremental doses for a total of 50 mg and were then invited to reflect on their experience both individually and with the group of peers who shared the experience.
- Follow-up surveys at 1, 3, and 6 months posttreatment between September 2019 to March 2021 measured symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, cognitive functioning, generalized anxiety disorder, depression, and quality of life.
TAKEAWAY:
- There were significant improvements in self-reported PTSD symptoms, depression, anxiety, insomnia severity, anger, and a large improvement in self-reported satisfaction with life (P < .001 for all).
- Participants reported significant increases in psychological flexibility (P < .001), cognitive functioning (P < .001), and postconcussive symptoms (P < .001).
- Treatment was also associated with a significant reduction in suicidal ideation from pretreatment to 1-month follow-up (P < .01).
IN PRACTICE:
“If consistently replicated, this could have major implications for the landscape of mental health care if people are able to experience significant and sustained healing with 3 days of intensive treatment, relative to our traditionally available interventions that require 8-12 weeks of weekly therapy (for example, gold standard talk therapies such as [prolonged exposure] or [cognitive processing therapy]), or daily use of a pharmacotherapy such as [a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor] for months to years,” study authors write.
SOURCE:
Alan Kooi Davis, PhD, of the Center for Psychedelic Drug Research and Education at Ohio State University, led the study, which was published online in the American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse.
LIMITATIONS:
Study assessments are based solely on self-report measures. Future research should implement carefully designed batteries that include both self-report and gold-standard clinician-administered measures to better capture symptom improvement and other information. The sample also lacked diversity with regard to race, religion, and socioeconomic status.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by Veterans Exploring Treatment Solutions. Dr. Davis is a board member at Source Resource Foundation and a lead trainer at Fluence. Full disclosures are included in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Perhaps most surprising to investigators, however, was that treatment was also associated with improved cognitive scores in the veterans, many of whom had traumatic brain injuries.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators reviewed clinical charts of 86 SOFVs who received psychedelic-assisted treatment at a therapeutic program in Mexico, 86% of whom sustained head injuries during deployment.
- On the first day of the study, participants received a single oral dose (10 mg/kg) of ibogaine hydrochloride in a group setting with two to five other attendees and spent the next day reflecting on their experience with program staff.
- On the third day, participants inhaled 5-MeO-DMT in three incremental doses for a total of 50 mg and were then invited to reflect on their experience both individually and with the group of peers who shared the experience.
- Follow-up surveys at 1, 3, and 6 months posttreatment between September 2019 to March 2021 measured symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, cognitive functioning, generalized anxiety disorder, depression, and quality of life.
TAKEAWAY:
- There were significant improvements in self-reported PTSD symptoms, depression, anxiety, insomnia severity, anger, and a large improvement in self-reported satisfaction with life (P < .001 for all).
- Participants reported significant increases in psychological flexibility (P < .001), cognitive functioning (P < .001), and postconcussive symptoms (P < .001).
- Treatment was also associated with a significant reduction in suicidal ideation from pretreatment to 1-month follow-up (P < .01).
IN PRACTICE:
“If consistently replicated, this could have major implications for the landscape of mental health care if people are able to experience significant and sustained healing with 3 days of intensive treatment, relative to our traditionally available interventions that require 8-12 weeks of weekly therapy (for example, gold standard talk therapies such as [prolonged exposure] or [cognitive processing therapy]), or daily use of a pharmacotherapy such as [a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor] for months to years,” study authors write.
SOURCE:
Alan Kooi Davis, PhD, of the Center for Psychedelic Drug Research and Education at Ohio State University, led the study, which was published online in the American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse.
LIMITATIONS:
Study assessments are based solely on self-report measures. Future research should implement carefully designed batteries that include both self-report and gold-standard clinician-administered measures to better capture symptom improvement and other information. The sample also lacked diversity with regard to race, religion, and socioeconomic status.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by Veterans Exploring Treatment Solutions. Dr. Davis is a board member at Source Resource Foundation and a lead trainer at Fluence. Full disclosures are included in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Perhaps most surprising to investigators, however, was that treatment was also associated with improved cognitive scores in the veterans, many of whom had traumatic brain injuries.
METHODOLOGY:
- Investigators reviewed clinical charts of 86 SOFVs who received psychedelic-assisted treatment at a therapeutic program in Mexico, 86% of whom sustained head injuries during deployment.
- On the first day of the study, participants received a single oral dose (10 mg/kg) of ibogaine hydrochloride in a group setting with two to five other attendees and spent the next day reflecting on their experience with program staff.
- On the third day, participants inhaled 5-MeO-DMT in three incremental doses for a total of 50 mg and were then invited to reflect on their experience both individually and with the group of peers who shared the experience.
- Follow-up surveys at 1, 3, and 6 months posttreatment between September 2019 to March 2021 measured symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder, cognitive functioning, generalized anxiety disorder, depression, and quality of life.
TAKEAWAY:
- There were significant improvements in self-reported PTSD symptoms, depression, anxiety, insomnia severity, anger, and a large improvement in self-reported satisfaction with life (P < .001 for all).
- Participants reported significant increases in psychological flexibility (P < .001), cognitive functioning (P < .001), and postconcussive symptoms (P < .001).
- Treatment was also associated with a significant reduction in suicidal ideation from pretreatment to 1-month follow-up (P < .01).
IN PRACTICE:
“If consistently replicated, this could have major implications for the landscape of mental health care if people are able to experience significant and sustained healing with 3 days of intensive treatment, relative to our traditionally available interventions that require 8-12 weeks of weekly therapy (for example, gold standard talk therapies such as [prolonged exposure] or [cognitive processing therapy]), or daily use of a pharmacotherapy such as [a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor] for months to years,” study authors write.
SOURCE:
Alan Kooi Davis, PhD, of the Center for Psychedelic Drug Research and Education at Ohio State University, led the study, which was published online in the American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse.
LIMITATIONS:
Study assessments are based solely on self-report measures. Future research should implement carefully designed batteries that include both self-report and gold-standard clinician-administered measures to better capture symptom improvement and other information. The sample also lacked diversity with regard to race, religion, and socioeconomic status.
DISCLOSURES:
The study was funded by Veterans Exploring Treatment Solutions. Dr. Davis is a board member at Source Resource Foundation and a lead trainer at Fluence. Full disclosures are included in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
FROM THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE
A blood test to diagnose bipolar disorder?
TOPLINE:
(MDD), new research shows. Investigators state that the test could identify up to 30% of patients with BD when used on its own and could be even more effective when combined with a standardized psychometric assessment.
METHODOLOGY:
- In the proof-of-concept study, investigators sought to identify biomarkers to accurately identify BD, which is frequently misdiagnosed as MDD because of overlapping symptoms and the lack of objective diagnostic tools.
- The study included 241 participants (70% female; mean age, 28 years) from the U.K.-based Delta Study who had been diagnosed with MDD within the past 5 years and had depressive symptoms as assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (score ≥ 5).
- Participants completed an online questionnaire that included questions from the Mood Disorder Questionnaire and the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale and were asked to return a dried blood spot (DBS) fasting blood sample.
- Investigators analyzed the DBS samples for 630 metabolites and contacted participants by phone to establish diagnoses at 6 and 12 months using the World Health Organization World Mental Health Composite International Diagnostic Interview.
TAKEAWAY:
- Investigators used a panel of 17 biomarkers to correctly identify 67 (27.8%) participants with BD who had been previously misdiagnosed with MDD. They confirmed MDD in the remaining 174 patients.
- The biomarkers used in the test were correlated primarily with lifetime manic symptoms and were validated in a separate group of 30 patients.
- The identified biomarker panel provided a mean cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.71 (P < .001), with ceramide d18:0/24:1 emerging as the strongest biomarker.
- Combining biomarker readouts with patient-reported data significantly improved the performance of diagnostic models based on extensive demographic data and information from the Patient Health Questionnaire and Mood Disorder Questionnaire (P = .03 for all).
IN PRACTICE:
“The added value of biomarkers was particularly evident in scenarios where data on psychiatric symptoms were unavailable and at intermediate diagnostic thresholds, suggesting that biomarker tests may especially benefit patients who do not report their symptoms and whose diagnoses are uncertain,” the authors write.
SOURCE:
Jakub Tomasik, PhD, of the University of Cambridge (England), led the study, which was published online in JAMA Psychiatry. Stanley Medical Research Institute and Psyomics funded the study.
LIMITATIONS:
Data on confounding factors such as diet and blood pressure were missing. In addition, investigators noted that the sample mostly comprised White Internet users and was not representative of all individuals with BD.
Dr. Tomasik has a patent pending for DBS blood biomarkers. Other disclosures are noted in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
(MDD), new research shows. Investigators state that the test could identify up to 30% of patients with BD when used on its own and could be even more effective when combined with a standardized psychometric assessment.
METHODOLOGY:
- In the proof-of-concept study, investigators sought to identify biomarkers to accurately identify BD, which is frequently misdiagnosed as MDD because of overlapping symptoms and the lack of objective diagnostic tools.
- The study included 241 participants (70% female; mean age, 28 years) from the U.K.-based Delta Study who had been diagnosed with MDD within the past 5 years and had depressive symptoms as assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (score ≥ 5).
- Participants completed an online questionnaire that included questions from the Mood Disorder Questionnaire and the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale and were asked to return a dried blood spot (DBS) fasting blood sample.
- Investigators analyzed the DBS samples for 630 metabolites and contacted participants by phone to establish diagnoses at 6 and 12 months using the World Health Organization World Mental Health Composite International Diagnostic Interview.
TAKEAWAY:
- Investigators used a panel of 17 biomarkers to correctly identify 67 (27.8%) participants with BD who had been previously misdiagnosed with MDD. They confirmed MDD in the remaining 174 patients.
- The biomarkers used in the test were correlated primarily with lifetime manic symptoms and were validated in a separate group of 30 patients.
- The identified biomarker panel provided a mean cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.71 (P < .001), with ceramide d18:0/24:1 emerging as the strongest biomarker.
- Combining biomarker readouts with patient-reported data significantly improved the performance of diagnostic models based on extensive demographic data and information from the Patient Health Questionnaire and Mood Disorder Questionnaire (P = .03 for all).
IN PRACTICE:
“The added value of biomarkers was particularly evident in scenarios where data on psychiatric symptoms were unavailable and at intermediate diagnostic thresholds, suggesting that biomarker tests may especially benefit patients who do not report their symptoms and whose diagnoses are uncertain,” the authors write.
SOURCE:
Jakub Tomasik, PhD, of the University of Cambridge (England), led the study, which was published online in JAMA Psychiatry. Stanley Medical Research Institute and Psyomics funded the study.
LIMITATIONS:
Data on confounding factors such as diet and blood pressure were missing. In addition, investigators noted that the sample mostly comprised White Internet users and was not representative of all individuals with BD.
Dr. Tomasik has a patent pending for DBS blood biomarkers. Other disclosures are noted in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
(MDD), new research shows. Investigators state that the test could identify up to 30% of patients with BD when used on its own and could be even more effective when combined with a standardized psychometric assessment.
METHODOLOGY:
- In the proof-of-concept study, investigators sought to identify biomarkers to accurately identify BD, which is frequently misdiagnosed as MDD because of overlapping symptoms and the lack of objective diagnostic tools.
- The study included 241 participants (70% female; mean age, 28 years) from the U.K.-based Delta Study who had been diagnosed with MDD within the past 5 years and had depressive symptoms as assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (score ≥ 5).
- Participants completed an online questionnaire that included questions from the Mood Disorder Questionnaire and the Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale and were asked to return a dried blood spot (DBS) fasting blood sample.
- Investigators analyzed the DBS samples for 630 metabolites and contacted participants by phone to establish diagnoses at 6 and 12 months using the World Health Organization World Mental Health Composite International Diagnostic Interview.
TAKEAWAY:
- Investigators used a panel of 17 biomarkers to correctly identify 67 (27.8%) participants with BD who had been previously misdiagnosed with MDD. They confirmed MDD in the remaining 174 patients.
- The biomarkers used in the test were correlated primarily with lifetime manic symptoms and were validated in a separate group of 30 patients.
- The identified biomarker panel provided a mean cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.71 (P < .001), with ceramide d18:0/24:1 emerging as the strongest biomarker.
- Combining biomarker readouts with patient-reported data significantly improved the performance of diagnostic models based on extensive demographic data and information from the Patient Health Questionnaire and Mood Disorder Questionnaire (P = .03 for all).
IN PRACTICE:
“The added value of biomarkers was particularly evident in scenarios where data on psychiatric symptoms were unavailable and at intermediate diagnostic thresholds, suggesting that biomarker tests may especially benefit patients who do not report their symptoms and whose diagnoses are uncertain,” the authors write.
SOURCE:
Jakub Tomasik, PhD, of the University of Cambridge (England), led the study, which was published online in JAMA Psychiatry. Stanley Medical Research Institute and Psyomics funded the study.
LIMITATIONS:
Data on confounding factors such as diet and blood pressure were missing. In addition, investigators noted that the sample mostly comprised White Internet users and was not representative of all individuals with BD.
Dr. Tomasik has a patent pending for DBS blood biomarkers. Other disclosures are noted in the original article.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
Specialized care may curb suicide risk in veterans with disabilities
TOPLINE:
Investigators speculate that veteran status may mitigate suicide risk given increased provision of disability-related care through the Department of Veterans Affairs, but they acknowledge that more research is needed to confirm this theory.
METHODOLOGY:
- The study includes analysis of self-reported data collected from 2015 to 2020 from 231,000 NSDUH respondents, 9% of whom were veterans; 20% reported at least one disability.
- Respondents were asked questions about suicide, veteran status, and the number and type of disability they had, if applicable.
- Disabilities included those related to hearing, sight, and concentration, memory, decision-making, ambulation, or functional status (at home or outside the home).
TAKEAWAY:
- Overall, 4.4% of the sample reported suicide ideation, planning, or attempt.
- Among participants with one disability, being a veteran was associated with a 43% lower risk of suicide planning (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57; P = .03).
- Among those with two disabilities, veterans had a 54% lower likelihood of having a history of suicide attempt, compared with nonveterans (aOR, 0.46; P = .02).
- Compared with U.S. veterans reporting 1, 2, and ≥ 3 disabilities, U.S. veterans with no disabilities were 50%, 160%, and 127% more likely, respectively, to report suicidal ideation.
IN PRACTICE:
“The observed buffering effect of veteran status among people with a disability may be reflective of characteristics of disability-related care offered through the Department of Veterans Affairs,” the authors write. “It is possible that VA services could act as a protective factor for suicide-related outcomes for veterans with disabilities by improving access, quality of care, and understanding of their disability context.”
SOURCE:
Rebecca K. Blais, PhD, of Arizona State University, Tempe, led the study, which was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
Assessments were based on self-reported information and there was no information about disability severity, which may have influenced suicide risk among veterans and nonveterans.
DISCLOSURES:
Coauthor Anne Kirby, PhD, received grants from the National Institute of Mental Health during the conduct of the study as well as grants from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and personal fees from University of Pittsburgh outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Investigators speculate that veteran status may mitigate suicide risk given increased provision of disability-related care through the Department of Veterans Affairs, but they acknowledge that more research is needed to confirm this theory.
METHODOLOGY:
- The study includes analysis of self-reported data collected from 2015 to 2020 from 231,000 NSDUH respondents, 9% of whom were veterans; 20% reported at least one disability.
- Respondents were asked questions about suicide, veteran status, and the number and type of disability they had, if applicable.
- Disabilities included those related to hearing, sight, and concentration, memory, decision-making, ambulation, or functional status (at home or outside the home).
TAKEAWAY:
- Overall, 4.4% of the sample reported suicide ideation, planning, or attempt.
- Among participants with one disability, being a veteran was associated with a 43% lower risk of suicide planning (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57; P = .03).
- Among those with two disabilities, veterans had a 54% lower likelihood of having a history of suicide attempt, compared with nonveterans (aOR, 0.46; P = .02).
- Compared with U.S. veterans reporting 1, 2, and ≥ 3 disabilities, U.S. veterans with no disabilities were 50%, 160%, and 127% more likely, respectively, to report suicidal ideation.
IN PRACTICE:
“The observed buffering effect of veteran status among people with a disability may be reflective of characteristics of disability-related care offered through the Department of Veterans Affairs,” the authors write. “It is possible that VA services could act as a protective factor for suicide-related outcomes for veterans with disabilities by improving access, quality of care, and understanding of their disability context.”
SOURCE:
Rebecca K. Blais, PhD, of Arizona State University, Tempe, led the study, which was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
Assessments were based on self-reported information and there was no information about disability severity, which may have influenced suicide risk among veterans and nonveterans.
DISCLOSURES:
Coauthor Anne Kirby, PhD, received grants from the National Institute of Mental Health during the conduct of the study as well as grants from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and personal fees from University of Pittsburgh outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
TOPLINE:
Investigators speculate that veteran status may mitigate suicide risk given increased provision of disability-related care through the Department of Veterans Affairs, but they acknowledge that more research is needed to confirm this theory.
METHODOLOGY:
- The study includes analysis of self-reported data collected from 2015 to 2020 from 231,000 NSDUH respondents, 9% of whom were veterans; 20% reported at least one disability.
- Respondents were asked questions about suicide, veteran status, and the number and type of disability they had, if applicable.
- Disabilities included those related to hearing, sight, and concentration, memory, decision-making, ambulation, or functional status (at home or outside the home).
TAKEAWAY:
- Overall, 4.4% of the sample reported suicide ideation, planning, or attempt.
- Among participants with one disability, being a veteran was associated with a 43% lower risk of suicide planning (adjusted odds ratio, 0.57; P = .03).
- Among those with two disabilities, veterans had a 54% lower likelihood of having a history of suicide attempt, compared with nonveterans (aOR, 0.46; P = .02).
- Compared with U.S. veterans reporting 1, 2, and ≥ 3 disabilities, U.S. veterans with no disabilities were 50%, 160%, and 127% more likely, respectively, to report suicidal ideation.
IN PRACTICE:
“The observed buffering effect of veteran status among people with a disability may be reflective of characteristics of disability-related care offered through the Department of Veterans Affairs,” the authors write. “It is possible that VA services could act as a protective factor for suicide-related outcomes for veterans with disabilities by improving access, quality of care, and understanding of their disability context.”
SOURCE:
Rebecca K. Blais, PhD, of Arizona State University, Tempe, led the study, which was published online in JAMA Network Open.
LIMITATIONS:
Assessments were based on self-reported information and there was no information about disability severity, which may have influenced suicide risk among veterans and nonveterans.
DISCLOSURES:
Coauthor Anne Kirby, PhD, received grants from the National Institute of Mental Health during the conduct of the study as well as grants from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and personal fees from University of Pittsburgh outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.