A three-country comparison of psychotropic medication prevalence in youth

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The study aims to compare cross-national prevalence of psychotropic medication use in youth.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A population-based analysis of psychotropic medication use based on administrative claims data for the year 2000 was undertaken for insured enrollees from 3 countries in relation to age group (0–4, 5–9, 10–14, and 15–19), gender, drug subclass pattern and concomitant use. The data include insured youth aged 0–19 in the year 2000 from the Netherlands (n = 110,944), Germany (n = 356,520) and the United States (n = 127,157).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The annual prevalence of any psychotropic medication in youth was significantly greater in the US (6.7%) than in the Netherlands (2.9%) and in Germany (2.0%). Antidepressant and stimulant prevalence were 3 or more times greater in the US than in the Netherlands and Germany, while antipsychotic prevalence was 1.5–2.2 times greater. The atypical antipsychotic subclass represented only 5% of antipsychotic use in Germany, but 48% in the Netherlands and 66% in the US. The less commonly used drugs e.g. alpha agonists, lithium and antiparkinsonian agents generally followed the ranking of US>Dutch>German youth with very rare (less than 0.05%) use in Dutch and German youth. Though rarely used, anxiolytics were twice as common in Dutch as in US and German youth. Prescription hypnotics were half as common as anxiolytics in Dutch and US youth and were very uncommon in German youth. Concomitant drug use applied to 19.2% of US youth which was more than double the Dutch use and three times that of German youth.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Prominent differences in psychotropic medication treatment patterns exist between youth in the US and Western Europe and within Western Europe. Differences in policies regarding direct to consumer drug advertising, government regulatory restrictions, reimbursement policies, diagnostic classification systems, and cultural beliefs regarding the role of medication for emotional and behavioral treatment are likely to account for these differences.</p

Diazepam actions in the VTA enhance social dominance and mitochondrial function in the nucleus accumbens by activation of dopamine D1 receptors.

Benzodiazepines can ameliorate social disturbances and increase social competition, particularly in high-anxious individuals. However, the neural circuits and mechanisms underlying benzodiazepines' effects in social competition are not understood. Converging evidence points to the mesolimbic system as a potential site of action for at least some benzodiazepine-mediated effects. Furthermore, mitochondrial function in the nucleus accumbens (NAc) has been causally implicated in the link between anxiety and social competitiveness. Here, we show that diazepam facilitates social dominance, ameliorating both the competitive disadvantage and low NAc mitochondrial function displayed by high-anxious rats, and identify the ventral tegmental area (VTA) as a key site of action for direct diazepam effects. We also show that intra-VTA diazepam infusion increases accumbal dopamine and DOPAC, as well as activity of dopamine D1- but not D2-containing cells. In addition, intra-NAc infusion of a D1-, but not D2, receptor agonist facilitates social dominance and mitochondrial respiration. Conversely, intra-VTA diazepam actions on social dominance and NAc mitochondrial respiration are blocked by pharmacological NAc micro-infusion of a mitochondrial complex I inhibitor or an antagonist of D1 receptors. Our data support the view that diazepam disinhibits VTA dopaminergic neurons, leading to the release of dopamine into the NAc where activation of D1-signaling transiently facilitates mitochondrial function, that is, increased respiration and enhanced ATP levels, which ultimately enhances social competitive behavior. Therefore, our findings critically involve the mesolimbic system in the facilitating effects of diazepam on social competition and highlight mitochondrial function as a potential therapeutic target for anxiety-related social dysfunctions

General practitioners’ views on (long-term) prescription and use of problematic and potentially inappropriate medication for oldest-old patients—A qualitative interview study with GPs (CIM-TRIAD study)

Background: Potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) is defined as medication with uncertain therapeutic effects and/ or potential adverse drug reactions outweighing the clinical benefits. The prescription rate of PIM for oldest- old patients is high despite the existence of lists of PIM (e. g. the PRISCUS list) and efforts to raise awareness. This study aims at identifying general practitioners' views on PIM and aspects affecting the (long- term) use of PIM. Methods: As part of the CIM- TRIAD study, we conducted semi- structured, qualitative interviews with 47 general practitioners, discussing 25 patients with and 22 without PIM (according to the PRISCUS list). The interview guideline included generic and patient- specific questions. Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. We content analyzed the interviews using deductive and inductive category development. Results: The majority of the general practitioners were not aware of the PRISCUS list. Agents deemed potentially inappropriate from the general practitioners' point of view and the PRISCUS list are not completely superimposable. General practitioners named their criteria to identify appropriate medication for elderly patients (e. g. renal function, cognitive state) and emphasized the importance of monitoring. We identified prescription- (e. g. benzodiazepines on alternative private prescription), medication- (e. g. subjective perception that PIM has no alternative), general practitioner- (e. g. general practitioner relies on specialists), patient( e. g. demanding high- user, positive subjective benefit- risk- ratio) and system- related aspects (e. g. specialists lacking holistic view, interface problems) related to the (long term) use of PIM. Conclusions: While the PRISCUS list does not seem to play a decisive role in general practice, general practitioners are well aware of risks associated with PIM. Our study identifies some starting points for a safer handling of PIM, e. g. stronger dissemination of the PRISCUS list, better compensation of medication reviews, positive lists, adequate patient information, multifaceted interventions and improved communication between general practitioners and specialists

The relevance of urodynamic studies for urge syndrome and dysfunctional voiding:A multicenter controlled trial in children

Purpose: The objective of this study was to compare prospectively, in urge syndrome and dysfunctional voiding, clinical patterns with urodynamic patterns, to assess changes in urodynamic patterns after treatment, and to correlate urodynamic patterns and parameters with treatment outcome. Materials and Methods: In the European Bladder Dysfunction Study 97 children with clinically diagnosed urge syndrome received standard treatment, to which was randomly added placebo, oxybutynin or bladder training with online feedback. In a separate branch 105 children with clinically diagnosed dysfunctional voiding were randomly allocated to standard treatment or standard treatment plus pelvic floor training with online feedback. In all children urodynamic studies were performed before and immediately after treatment. Results: In urge syndrome detrusor overactivity was present in 33% of cases before and 27% after treatment (of which 65% were de novo). Detrusor overactivity did not correlate with treatment outcome. In dysfunctional voiding increased pelvic floor activity during voiding, which was present in 67% of cases before and 56% after treatment (of which 45% were de novo), did not correlate with treatment outcome. In urge syndrome as well as in dysfunctional voiding neither maximum detrusor pressure during voiding, cystometric bladder capacity, bladder compliance nor free flow patterns correlated with treatment outcome. Conclusions: Neither detrusor overactivity nor increased pelvic floor activity during voiding correlated with treatment outcome. Standard treatment could be the first choice in urge syndrome as well as in dysfunctional voiding, reserving urodynamic studies for patients in whom this first approach fails