TBD Meeting (5395-19)

SAN DIEGO – Not long before his presentation at Psych Congress 2019, psychiatrist Rakesh Jain, MD, MPH, chatted with a fellow attendee, a nurse practitioner from Tyler, Tex. As Dr. Jain recalled later, his fellow Texan told him that “it’s not unusual to see patients on three benzodiazepines.”

The nurse practitioner “talks to them about how they need to do things differently, and they forget,” Dr. Jain said. “He’s very worried about them.”

Dr. Jain is familiar with the feeling. Like many mental health professionals, he worries about the role of benzodiazepines, which seem to be both widely used and misused. Figuring out their proper place in psychiatry “may require us to raise our game,” said Dr. Jain, of Texas Tech University in Midland.

What to do? Dr. Jain and a colleague offered the same answer – tread carefully, but do not eliminate them as an option – in two separate sessions at the annual Psych Congress.

As Dr. Jain noted, benzodiazepines are popular, and for good reason. “There are many patients, perhaps hundreds of thousands, who are using benzodiazepines chronically, and they’re doing it right. There’s not a CVS in America where benzodiazepines aren’t well stocked. They’re very inexpensive, and the most costly benzodiazepine is still cheaper than Motrin.”

On the other hand, he said, the medications are linked to addiction and physical dependence. “Thirty percent of those who die of opioid overdoses may not have died if they didn’t have benzodiazepines [in their systems].”

Be very cautious about prescribing as needed

“It’s rarely indicated to prescribe benzodiazepine [as needed] when you’re treating people with anxiety,” he said. “The main reason is patients don’t know when they need it. They take their pills either when they’re so anxious that they’ve already been freaking out for a long time, or they take it when they’re first starting to feel at least a bit anxious. That leads to taking it to prevent being anxious.”

Allow an as-needed approach in certain situations

It can be appropriate to prescribe benzodiazepines for specific short-term anxiety-provoking situations, such as speaking in public, Dr. Stein said.

However, he said, advise patients to try the medication beforehand so they understand its effects. “I’ve had one occasion where I thought we had a dose worked out well. Somebody had to do a work presentation, and he took the medicine and got up in front of the group. He wasn’t anxious at all. But he couldn’t remember a single thing.”
 

Don’t use them as patients start SSRIs

Patients can get anxious as they start SSRIs, especially for panic disorders, Dr. Stein said. So it might seem reasonable, as some psychiatrists believe, to add benzodiazepines on a short-term basis.

But Dr. Stein said he is not a fan of this approach. As he noted, benzodiazepines are hard to stop. He prefers to help patients understand possible side effects of SSRIs instead, and he emphasized the importance of being available to help patients get through them.

Dr. Jain and Dr. Stein each reported multiple relationships with industry.

SAN DIEGO – Not long before his presentation at Psych Congress 2019, psychiatrist Rakesh Jain, MD, MPH, chatted with a fellow attendee, a nurse practitioner from Tyler, Tex. As Dr. Jain recalled later, his fellow Texan told him that “it’s not unusual to see patients on three benzodiazepines.”

The nurse practitioner “talks to them about how they need to do things differently, and they forget,” Dr. Jain said. “He’s very worried about them.”

Dr. Jain is familiar with the feeling. Like many mental health professionals, he worries about the role of benzodiazepines, which seem to be both widely used and misused. Figuring out their proper place in psychiatry “may require us to raise our game,” said Dr. Jain, of Texas Tech University in Midland.

What to do? Dr. Jain and a colleague offered the same answer – tread carefully, but do not eliminate them as an option – in two separate sessions at the annual Psych Congress.

As Dr. Jain noted, benzodiazepines are popular, and for good reason. “There are many patients, perhaps hundreds of thousands, who are using benzodiazepines chronically, and they’re doing it right. There’s not a CVS in America where benzodiazepines aren’t well stocked. They’re very inexpensive, and the most costly benzodiazepine is still cheaper than Motrin.”

On the other hand, he said, the medications are linked to addiction and physical dependence. “Thirty percent of those who die of opioid overdoses may not have died if they didn’t have benzodiazepines [in their systems].”

Be very cautious about prescribing as needed

“It’s rarely indicated to prescribe benzodiazepine [as needed] when you’re treating people with anxiety,” he said. “The main reason is patients don’t know when they need it. They take their pills either when they’re so anxious that they’ve already been freaking out for a long time, or they take it when they’re first starting to feel at least a bit anxious. That leads to taking it to prevent being anxious.”

Allow an as-needed approach in certain situations

It can be appropriate to prescribe benzodiazepines for specific short-term anxiety-provoking situations, such as speaking in public, Dr. Stein said.

However, he said, advise patients to try the medication beforehand so they understand its effects. “I’ve had one occasion where I thought we had a dose worked out well. Somebody had to do a work presentation, and he took the medicine and got up in front of the group. He wasn’t anxious at all. But he couldn’t remember a single thing.”
 

Don’t use them as patients start SSRIs

Patients can get anxious as they start SSRIs, especially for panic disorders, Dr. Stein said. So it might seem reasonable, as some psychiatrists believe, to add benzodiazepines on a short-term basis.

But Dr. Stein said he is not a fan of this approach. As he noted, benzodiazepines are hard to stop. He prefers to help patients understand possible side effects of SSRIs instead, and he emphasized the importance of being available to help patients get through them.

Dr. Jain and Dr. Stein each reported multiple relationships with industry.

SAN DIEGO – Not long before his presentation at Psych Congress 2019, psychiatrist Rakesh Jain, MD, MPH, chatted with a fellow attendee, a nurse practitioner from Tyler, Tex. As Dr. Jain recalled later, his fellow Texan told him that “it’s not unusual to see patients on three benzodiazepines.”

The nurse practitioner “talks to them about how they need to do things differently, and they forget,” Dr. Jain said. “He’s very worried about them.”

Dr. Jain is familiar with the feeling. Like many mental health professionals, he worries about the role of benzodiazepines, which seem to be both widely used and misused. Figuring out their proper place in psychiatry “may require us to raise our game,” said Dr. Jain, of Texas Tech University in Midland.

What to do? Dr. Jain and a colleague offered the same answer – tread carefully, but do not eliminate them as an option – in two separate sessions at the annual Psych Congress.

As Dr. Jain noted, benzodiazepines are popular, and for good reason. “There are many patients, perhaps hundreds of thousands, who are using benzodiazepines chronically, and they’re doing it right. There’s not a CVS in America where benzodiazepines aren’t well stocked. They’re very inexpensive, and the most costly benzodiazepine is still cheaper than Motrin.”

On the other hand, he said, the medications are linked to addiction and physical dependence. “Thirty percent of those who die of opioid overdoses may not have died if they didn’t have benzodiazepines [in their systems].”

Be very cautious about prescribing as needed

“It’s rarely indicated to prescribe benzodiazepine [as needed] when you’re treating people with anxiety,” he said. “The main reason is patients don’t know when they need it. They take their pills either when they’re so anxious that they’ve already been freaking out for a long time, or they take it when they’re first starting to feel at least a bit anxious. That leads to taking it to prevent being anxious.”

Allow an as-needed approach in certain situations

It can be appropriate to prescribe benzodiazepines for specific short-term anxiety-provoking situations, such as speaking in public, Dr. Stein said.

However, he said, advise patients to try the medication beforehand so they understand its effects. “I’ve had one occasion where I thought we had a dose worked out well. Somebody had to do a work presentation, and he took the medicine and got up in front of the group. He wasn’t anxious at all. But he couldn’t remember a single thing.”
 

Don’t use them as patients start SSRIs

Patients can get anxious as they start SSRIs, especially for panic disorders, Dr. Stein said. So it might seem reasonable, as some psychiatrists believe, to add benzodiazepines on a short-term basis.

But Dr. Stein said he is not a fan of this approach. As he noted, benzodiazepines are hard to stop. He prefers to help patients understand possible side effects of SSRIs instead, and he emphasized the importance of being available to help patients get through them.

Dr. Jain and Dr. Stein each reported multiple relationships with industry.

SAN DIEGO – Research suggests that as many as 23% of patients with substance use disorder (SUD) also have ADHD, adding an extra layer of complexity to a difficult-to-treat condition. What to do?

“Treating the ADHD can be useful in reducing the severity of symptoms without worsening the substance use disorder. It shouldn’t be avoided,” said psychiatrist Larissa J. Mooney, MD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, in a presentation at the annual Psych Congress.

When ADHD is on board, “it’s a more complicated and challenging clinical course,” Dr. Mooney said. The duo of disorders is linked to higher rates of polysubstance abuse and other psychiatric conditions, such as anxiety, bipolar disorder, posttraumatic stress, and antisocial/borderline conditions (Eur Addict Res. 2018;24[1]:43-51).

“These individuals typically have more difficulty with [drug] abstinence, more health consequences, and reduced quality of life, and social and professional consequences,” she said. “Some studies have suggested that they may not respond to lower doses of medication for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and may require doses in the higher range.”

Research has hinted that several drugs that might prove helpful in these patients by improving both conditions, Dr. Mooney said. These include up to 180 mg/day of methylphenidate (Ritalin), 60- and 80-mg doses of mixed amphetamine salts/extended release, atomoxetine (Strattera), and bupropion.

In regard to bupropion, she said, “I find it to be a good choice in my substance use disorder patients for their depression and concentration problems. I have a greater number of individuals at 450 milligrams per day and the XL formulation.”

Early research has suggested that guanfacine XR (Intuniv), which is used to treat children with ADHD, also might be helpful in adults, including those with SUD. “We need more research to show if this is helpful,” she said. “It’s a reasonable choice in terms of weighing pros and cons, because it’s not [a controlled substance].”

Still, some of those medications are stimulants, Dr. Mooney said, and their use in patients with SUD is controversial. There are concerns about misuse and diversion.

“We want to have some flexibility,” she said, but it’s important to think about risks and priorities. In certain cases, ADHD may be a secondary concern.

“Some patients have a severe substance use disorder that keeps landing them in the emergency room or causing them to be hospitalized,” she said. “I’m more worried about that than the impairment function from ADHD.”

If you do consider stimulants, she said, longer-acting formulations can be less risky because there’s less potential for diversion. “Also, think about their treatment plan: Is their functioning improving? Are they or showing up for appointments? These are factors that will say: ‘Oh, I’m on the right path with this medication.’ ”

Behavioral treatment also can be helpful in these patients, she said, although “some may not be willing or motivated to put in the time that it takes to do the behavioral work.”

Dr. Mooney disclosed an advisory board relationship with Alkermes and grant/research support from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

SAN DIEGO – Research suggests that as many as 23% of patients with substance use disorder (SUD) also have ADHD, adding an extra layer of complexity to a difficult-to-treat condition. What to do?

“Treating the ADHD can be useful in reducing the severity of symptoms without worsening the substance use disorder. It shouldn’t be avoided,” said psychiatrist Larissa J. Mooney, MD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, in a presentation at the annual Psych Congress.

When ADHD is on board, “it’s a more complicated and challenging clinical course,” Dr. Mooney said. The duo of disorders is linked to higher rates of polysubstance abuse and other psychiatric conditions, such as anxiety, bipolar disorder, posttraumatic stress, and antisocial/borderline conditions (Eur Addict Res. 2018;24[1]:43-51).

“These individuals typically have more difficulty with [drug] abstinence, more health consequences, and reduced quality of life, and social and professional consequences,” she said. “Some studies have suggested that they may not respond to lower doses of medication for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and may require doses in the higher range.”

Research has hinted that several drugs that might prove helpful in these patients by improving both conditions, Dr. Mooney said. These include up to 180 mg/day of methylphenidate (Ritalin), 60- and 80-mg doses of mixed amphetamine salts/extended release, atomoxetine (Strattera), and bupropion.

In regard to bupropion, she said, “I find it to be a good choice in my substance use disorder patients for their depression and concentration problems. I have a greater number of individuals at 450 milligrams per day and the XL formulation.”

Early research has suggested that guanfacine XR (Intuniv), which is used to treat children with ADHD, also might be helpful in adults, including those with SUD. “We need more research to show if this is helpful,” she said. “It’s a reasonable choice in terms of weighing pros and cons, because it’s not [a controlled substance].”

Still, some of those medications are stimulants, Dr. Mooney said, and their use in patients with SUD is controversial. There are concerns about misuse and diversion.

“We want to have some flexibility,” she said, but it’s important to think about risks and priorities. In certain cases, ADHD may be a secondary concern.

“Some patients have a severe substance use disorder that keeps landing them in the emergency room or causing them to be hospitalized,” she said. “I’m more worried about that than the impairment function from ADHD.”

If you do consider stimulants, she said, longer-acting formulations can be less risky because there’s less potential for diversion. “Also, think about their treatment plan: Is their functioning improving? Are they or showing up for appointments? These are factors that will say: ‘Oh, I’m on the right path with this medication.’ ”

Behavioral treatment also can be helpful in these patients, she said, although “some may not be willing or motivated to put in the time that it takes to do the behavioral work.”

Dr. Mooney disclosed an advisory board relationship with Alkermes and grant/research support from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

SAN DIEGO – Research suggests that as many as 23% of patients with substance use disorder (SUD) also have ADHD, adding an extra layer of complexity to a difficult-to-treat condition. What to do?

“Treating the ADHD can be useful in reducing the severity of symptoms without worsening the substance use disorder. It shouldn’t be avoided,” said psychiatrist Larissa J. Mooney, MD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, in a presentation at the annual Psych Congress.

When ADHD is on board, “it’s a more complicated and challenging clinical course,” Dr. Mooney said. The duo of disorders is linked to higher rates of polysubstance abuse and other psychiatric conditions, such as anxiety, bipolar disorder, posttraumatic stress, and antisocial/borderline conditions (Eur Addict Res. 2018;24[1]:43-51).

“These individuals typically have more difficulty with [drug] abstinence, more health consequences, and reduced quality of life, and social and professional consequences,” she said. “Some studies have suggested that they may not respond to lower doses of medication for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and may require doses in the higher range.”

Research has hinted that several drugs that might prove helpful in these patients by improving both conditions, Dr. Mooney said. These include up to 180 mg/day of methylphenidate (Ritalin), 60- and 80-mg doses of mixed amphetamine salts/extended release, atomoxetine (Strattera), and bupropion.

In regard to bupropion, she said, “I find it to be a good choice in my substance use disorder patients for their depression and concentration problems. I have a greater number of individuals at 450 milligrams per day and the XL formulation.”

Early research has suggested that guanfacine XR (Intuniv), which is used to treat children with ADHD, also might be helpful in adults, including those with SUD. “We need more research to show if this is helpful,” she said. “It’s a reasonable choice in terms of weighing pros and cons, because it’s not [a controlled substance].”

Still, some of those medications are stimulants, Dr. Mooney said, and their use in patients with SUD is controversial. There are concerns about misuse and diversion.

“We want to have some flexibility,” she said, but it’s important to think about risks and priorities. In certain cases, ADHD may be a secondary concern.

“Some patients have a severe substance use disorder that keeps landing them in the emergency room or causing them to be hospitalized,” she said. “I’m more worried about that than the impairment function from ADHD.”

If you do consider stimulants, she said, longer-acting formulations can be less risky because there’s less potential for diversion. “Also, think about their treatment plan: Is their functioning improving? Are they or showing up for appointments? These are factors that will say: ‘Oh, I’m on the right path with this medication.’ ”

Behavioral treatment also can be helpful in these patients, she said, although “some may not be willing or motivated to put in the time that it takes to do the behavioral work.”

Dr. Mooney disclosed an advisory board relationship with Alkermes and grant/research support from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

SAN DIEGO – Even if a P value hints at statistical significance by dipping under .05, it might not tell you anything worthwhile. Effect sizes are hugely important – as long as accompanying P values measure up. And pharmaceutical companies often keep revealing numbers under wraps unless you know what – and whom – to ask.

Those lessons come courtesy of Leslie Citrome, MD, MPH, who spoke to colleagues about study numbers at Psych Congress 2019.

Dr. Citrome, clinical professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at New York Medical College, Valhalla, offered several tips about interpreting medical statistics as you make clinical decisions.

Don’t get hung up on the P value.

The P value helps you understand how likely it is that a difference in a study is statistically significant. In medical research, P values under .05 are considered especially desirable. They suggest that an outcome – drug A performed better than drug B, for example – didn’t happen purely by chance.

Here’s the hitch: The P value might not matter at all. “Clinicians often assume that if the P value is less than.05, the result must be important. But even a P value of less than .05 is meaningless outside of the context of how big the treatment effect is,” Dr. Citrome said. “If a clinical trial result shows us a small effect size, then who cares?”

Understand what effect sizes tell you.

Effect size measurements evaluate clinical impact and include number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH). NNT refers to the number of patients needed to treat with an intervention in order to get a positive effect in one additional patient; NNH is the reverse and examines negative effects that can range from the minor (mild dry mouth) to the devastating (death).

What’s a good size for an NNT? “I respect any NNT versus placebo of less than 10,” Dr. Citrome said. “It’s something I’ll probably consider in day-to-day practice.” Double-digit and triple-digit NNTs “are usually irrelevant unless we’re dealing with very specific outcomes that have long-term consequences.”

As for the opposite side of the picture – NNH – values higher than 10 are ideal.

He cautioned that NNT and NNH, like P values, cannot stand alone. In fact, they work together. In order to have value, NNT or NNH must be statistically significant, and P values provide this crucial insight.

Consider Dr. Citrome’s blood pressure.

As Dr. Citrome noted, research suggests that, among patients with diastolic BP from 90 to 109 mm Hg, 1 additional person will avoid death, stroke, or heart attack for every 141 people who take an antihypertensive medication, compared to those who do not, over a 5-year period. That’s a lot of people taking medication for a long time, with potential side effects, for a fairly small effect size. However, the outcomes are dire, so it is still worth it. 

Then there’s Dr. Citrome himself, who has had diastolic BP in the range of 115 to 129 mm Hg. The NNT is 3. For every 3 people who take an antihypertensive vs. not over a 5-year period, 1 additional person will avoid a potentially catastrophic cardiovascular event.

“Guess who’s pretty adherent to taking his antihypertensive medication?” he asked. “I am.”

Ask for effect sizes if you don’t see them.

It’s not unusual for pharmaceutical representatives to avoid providing information about medication effect sizes. “The sales representatives as well as speakers at [Food and Drug Administration]–regulated promotional speaking events can only speak to basically what’s on the label. NNT and NNH are not currently found on product labels. But they are very relevant, and we need to know this information.”

What to do? “There is a workaround here,” he said. “Ask the sales rep to talk to a medical science liaison, who is free to come to your office and talk about all the data that they have.”

Dr. Citrome reported multiple disclosures, including various relationships with pharmaceutical companies.

SAN DIEGO – Even if a P value hints at statistical significance by dipping under .05, it might not tell you anything worthwhile. Effect sizes are hugely important – as long as accompanying P values measure up. And pharmaceutical companies often keep revealing numbers under wraps unless you know what – and whom – to ask.

Those lessons come courtesy of Leslie Citrome, MD, MPH, who spoke to colleagues about study numbers at Psych Congress 2019.

Dr. Citrome, clinical professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at New York Medical College, Valhalla, offered several tips about interpreting medical statistics as you make clinical decisions.

Don’t get hung up on the P value.

The P value helps you understand how likely it is that a difference in a study is statistically significant. In medical research, P values under .05 are considered especially desirable. They suggest that an outcome – drug A performed better than drug B, for example – didn’t happen purely by chance.

Here’s the hitch: The P value might not matter at all. “Clinicians often assume that if the P value is less than.05, the result must be important. But even a P value of less than .05 is meaningless outside of the context of how big the treatment effect is,” Dr. Citrome said. “If a clinical trial result shows us a small effect size, then who cares?”

Understand what effect sizes tell you.

Effect size measurements evaluate clinical impact and include number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH). NNT refers to the number of patients needed to treat with an intervention in order to get a positive effect in one additional patient; NNH is the reverse and examines negative effects that can range from the minor (mild dry mouth) to the devastating (death).

What’s a good size for an NNT? “I respect any NNT versus placebo of less than 10,” Dr. Citrome said. “It’s something I’ll probably consider in day-to-day practice.” Double-digit and triple-digit NNTs “are usually irrelevant unless we’re dealing with very specific outcomes that have long-term consequences.”

As for the opposite side of the picture – NNH – values higher than 10 are ideal.

He cautioned that NNT and NNH, like P values, cannot stand alone. In fact, they work together. In order to have value, NNT or NNH must be statistically significant, and P values provide this crucial insight.

Consider Dr. Citrome’s blood pressure.

As Dr. Citrome noted, research suggests that, among patients with diastolic BP from 90 to 109 mm Hg, 1 additional person will avoid death, stroke, or heart attack for every 141 people who take an antihypertensive medication, compared to those who do not, over a 5-year period. That’s a lot of people taking medication for a long time, with potential side effects, for a fairly small effect size. However, the outcomes are dire, so it is still worth it. 

Then there’s Dr. Citrome himself, who has had diastolic BP in the range of 115 to 129 mm Hg. The NNT is 3. For every 3 people who take an antihypertensive vs. not over a 5-year period, 1 additional person will avoid a potentially catastrophic cardiovascular event.

“Guess who’s pretty adherent to taking his antihypertensive medication?” he asked. “I am.”

Ask for effect sizes if you don’t see them.

It’s not unusual for pharmaceutical representatives to avoid providing information about medication effect sizes. “The sales representatives as well as speakers at [Food and Drug Administration]–regulated promotional speaking events can only speak to basically what’s on the label. NNT and NNH are not currently found on product labels. But they are very relevant, and we need to know this information.”

What to do? “There is a workaround here,” he said. “Ask the sales rep to talk to a medical science liaison, who is free to come to your office and talk about all the data that they have.”

Dr. Citrome reported multiple disclosures, including various relationships with pharmaceutical companies.

SAN DIEGO – Even if a P value hints at statistical significance by dipping under .05, it might not tell you anything worthwhile. Effect sizes are hugely important – as long as accompanying P values measure up. And pharmaceutical companies often keep revealing numbers under wraps unless you know what – and whom – to ask.

Those lessons come courtesy of Leslie Citrome, MD, MPH, who spoke to colleagues about study numbers at Psych Congress 2019.

Dr. Citrome, clinical professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at New York Medical College, Valhalla, offered several tips about interpreting medical statistics as you make clinical decisions.

Don’t get hung up on the P value.

The P value helps you understand how likely it is that a difference in a study is statistically significant. In medical research, P values under .05 are considered especially desirable. They suggest that an outcome – drug A performed better than drug B, for example – didn’t happen purely by chance.

Here’s the hitch: The P value might not matter at all. “Clinicians often assume that if the P value is less than.05, the result must be important. But even a P value of less than .05 is meaningless outside of the context of how big the treatment effect is,” Dr. Citrome said. “If a clinical trial result shows us a small effect size, then who cares?”

Understand what effect sizes tell you.

Effect size measurements evaluate clinical impact and include number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH). NNT refers to the number of patients needed to treat with an intervention in order to get a positive effect in one additional patient; NNH is the reverse and examines negative effects that can range from the minor (mild dry mouth) to the devastating (death).

What’s a good size for an NNT? “I respect any NNT versus placebo of less than 10,” Dr. Citrome said. “It’s something I’ll probably consider in day-to-day practice.” Double-digit and triple-digit NNTs “are usually irrelevant unless we’re dealing with very specific outcomes that have long-term consequences.”

As for the opposite side of the picture – NNH – values higher than 10 are ideal.

He cautioned that NNT and NNH, like P values, cannot stand alone. In fact, they work together. In order to have value, NNT or NNH must be statistically significant, and P values provide this crucial insight.

Consider Dr. Citrome’s blood pressure.

As Dr. Citrome noted, research suggests that, among patients with diastolic BP from 90 to 109 mm Hg, 1 additional person will avoid death, stroke, or heart attack for every 141 people who take an antihypertensive medication, compared to those who do not, over a 5-year period. That’s a lot of people taking medication for a long time, with potential side effects, for a fairly small effect size. However, the outcomes are dire, so it is still worth it. 

Then there’s Dr. Citrome himself, who has had diastolic BP in the range of 115 to 129 mm Hg. The NNT is 3. For every 3 people who take an antihypertensive vs. not over a 5-year period, 1 additional person will avoid a potentially catastrophic cardiovascular event.

“Guess who’s pretty adherent to taking his antihypertensive medication?” he asked. “I am.”

Ask for effect sizes if you don’t see them.

It’s not unusual for pharmaceutical representatives to avoid providing information about medication effect sizes. “The sales representatives as well as speakers at [Food and Drug Administration]–regulated promotional speaking events can only speak to basically what’s on the label. NNT and NNH are not currently found on product labels. But they are very relevant, and we need to know this information.”

What to do? “There is a workaround here,” he said. “Ask the sales rep to talk to a medical science liaison, who is free to come to your office and talk about all the data that they have.”

Dr. Citrome reported multiple disclosures, including various relationships with pharmaceutical companies.

SAN DIEGO – Physician suicide is “a public health crisis because of the sheer volume of people who are dying,” and many medical authorities are contributing to stigma through “invasive” questionnaires, a prevention advocate said at the annual Psych Congress.

“Physicians fear sharing their mental health struggles with the state medical health board,” said Pamela Wible, MD, a family physician who practices in Eugene, Ore., at the meeting. They “pretend, deny, and lie,” she said, and sometimes they seek care and medication hours away in order to avoid detection.

One solution, she said, is to highlight state medical boards that do it right and state medical boards that do it wrong, including the “very worst,” which is that of Alaska.

Dr. Wible, who speaks of suffering from suicidal feelings herself as physician in 2004, is a leading advocate for suicide prevention in the medical profession.

She told colleagues at the Psych Congress that anesthesiologists face the highest risk of suicide, followed by surgeons, ob.gyns., and psychiatrists.

“They end their lives not because they want to die but because they want to stop the pain and they can’t find any other way,” she said. “They have a great work ethic until the end: They’re smiling, doing complex surgeries, and cracking jokes to the surgical team, then they shoot themselves in the closet.”

Colleagues are often shocked, she said: “ ‘Wait a minute. He was just joking with me yesterday. What do you mean he hung himself in his office?’ ‘She just had a newborn baby and she was so happy!’ If you see the smile, you don’t see the pain.”

In 2018, she wrote a Washington Post commentary titled “What I’ve learned from my tally of 757 doctor suicides” that was based on her registry of physician suicides. In the United States, she wrote, 1 million patients lose a physician to suicide each year. Factors contributing to suicides include patient deaths, malpractice suits, “academic distress,” and overwork. “Doctors who need help don’t seek it because they fear mental health care won’t remain confidential,” she wrote. “So they drive out of town, pay cash, and use fake names to hide from state medical boards, hospitals, and insurance plans out of fear that they will lose state licensure, hospital privileges, and health plan participation.”

Dr. Wible oversaw a 2019 research project that analyzed state medical board applications. The goal was to grade the state boards by how intrusively their application questions grill applicants about their mental health history. “Physicians fear sharing their mental health struggles with the state medical health board and with each other,” she said. Some lie, and others – “the really honest physicians” – are so dedicated to telling the truth that “they’ll withhold getting care because they want to correctly check the ‘no’ box.”

Seven states – Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Florida, Mississippi, Rhode Island, and Washington –received “F” grades for “highly invasive mental health questions unlinked to current impairment that contain confusing, punitive, or adversarial language.”

Roke~commonswiki

Alaska, Dr. Wible said, asks multiple 25 yes-or-no questions about mental health. One question lists 14 conditions, almost all related to mental health – including depression, “any organic mental disorder,” and “any condition requiring chronic medical or behavioral treatment” – and asks, “Have you ever been diagnosed with, treated for, or do you currently have” any of them. This is “the most invasive mental health question we found on any application,” Dr. Wible wrote on her website.

States also hurt applicants by asking peers of applicants about their mental health, she said. “I’m not against getting peer references, but can we stop getting into everyone’s business with their psych history? What we really want to know is: ‘Are you are safe with patients today?’ ”

Dr. Wible also criticizes state medical boards for asking about mental health impairment over the last 5 years: They don’t get higher than a “C.”

The 13 states with “A” grades either don’t ask about mental health or simply ask about general impairment: Connecticut, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, New Jersey, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming.

Massachusetts, for example, asks, “Do you have a medical or physical condition that currently impairs your ability to practice medicine?”

“That is a question anyone can understand,” Dr. Wible said. “I think that’s good wording.”

Going forward, she said, “we’ve got to remove these mental health questions. If we could do this, our profession would be so much better, and we’d lose so many fewer people.”

And, she added, “what we really need to do is share our stories. It’s therapeutic for you and your colleagues, it creates collegial trust and bonding, and it destigmatizes physician mental health.”

Dr. Wible reported no relevant disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – Physician suicide is “a public health crisis because of the sheer volume of people who are dying,” and many medical authorities are contributing to stigma through “invasive” questionnaires, a prevention advocate said at the annual Psych Congress.

“Physicians fear sharing their mental health struggles with the state medical health board,” said Pamela Wible, MD, a family physician who practices in Eugene, Ore., at the meeting. They “pretend, deny, and lie,” she said, and sometimes they seek care and medication hours away in order to avoid detection.

One solution, she said, is to highlight state medical boards that do it right and state medical boards that do it wrong, including the “very worst,” which is that of Alaska.

Dr. Wible, who speaks of suffering from suicidal feelings herself as physician in 2004, is a leading advocate for suicide prevention in the medical profession.

She told colleagues at the Psych Congress that anesthesiologists face the highest risk of suicide, followed by surgeons, ob.gyns., and psychiatrists.

“They end their lives not because they want to die but because they want to stop the pain and they can’t find any other way,” she said. “They have a great work ethic until the end: They’re smiling, doing complex surgeries, and cracking jokes to the surgical team, then they shoot themselves in the closet.”

Colleagues are often shocked, she said: “ ‘Wait a minute. He was just joking with me yesterday. What do you mean he hung himself in his office?’ ‘She just had a newborn baby and she was so happy!’ If you see the smile, you don’t see the pain.”

In 2018, she wrote a Washington Post commentary titled “What I’ve learned from my tally of 757 doctor suicides” that was based on her registry of physician suicides. In the United States, she wrote, 1 million patients lose a physician to suicide each year. Factors contributing to suicides include patient deaths, malpractice suits, “academic distress,” and overwork. “Doctors who need help don’t seek it because they fear mental health care won’t remain confidential,” she wrote. “So they drive out of town, pay cash, and use fake names to hide from state medical boards, hospitals, and insurance plans out of fear that they will lose state licensure, hospital privileges, and health plan participation.”

Dr. Wible oversaw a 2019 research project that analyzed state medical board applications. The goal was to grade the state boards by how intrusively their application questions grill applicants about their mental health history. “Physicians fear sharing their mental health struggles with the state medical health board and with each other,” she said. Some lie, and others – “the really honest physicians” – are so dedicated to telling the truth that “they’ll withhold getting care because they want to correctly check the ‘no’ box.”

Seven states – Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Florida, Mississippi, Rhode Island, and Washington –received “F” grades for “highly invasive mental health questions unlinked to current impairment that contain confusing, punitive, or adversarial language.”

Roke~commonswiki

Alaska, Dr. Wible said, asks multiple 25 yes-or-no questions about mental health. One question lists 14 conditions, almost all related to mental health – including depression, “any organic mental disorder,” and “any condition requiring chronic medical or behavioral treatment” – and asks, “Have you ever been diagnosed with, treated for, or do you currently have” any of them. This is “the most invasive mental health question we found on any application,” Dr. Wible wrote on her website.

States also hurt applicants by asking peers of applicants about their mental health, she said. “I’m not against getting peer references, but can we stop getting into everyone’s business with their psych history? What we really want to know is: ‘Are you are safe with patients today?’ ”

Dr. Wible also criticizes state medical boards for asking about mental health impairment over the last 5 years: They don’t get higher than a “C.”

The 13 states with “A” grades either don’t ask about mental health or simply ask about general impairment: Connecticut, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, New Jersey, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming.

Massachusetts, for example, asks, “Do you have a medical or physical condition that currently impairs your ability to practice medicine?”

“That is a question anyone can understand,” Dr. Wible said. “I think that’s good wording.”

Going forward, she said, “we’ve got to remove these mental health questions. If we could do this, our profession would be so much better, and we’d lose so many fewer people.”

And, she added, “what we really need to do is share our stories. It’s therapeutic for you and your colleagues, it creates collegial trust and bonding, and it destigmatizes physician mental health.”

Dr. Wible reported no relevant disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – Physician suicide is “a public health crisis because of the sheer volume of people who are dying,” and many medical authorities are contributing to stigma through “invasive” questionnaires, a prevention advocate said at the annual Psych Congress.

“Physicians fear sharing their mental health struggles with the state medical health board,” said Pamela Wible, MD, a family physician who practices in Eugene, Ore., at the meeting. They “pretend, deny, and lie,” she said, and sometimes they seek care and medication hours away in order to avoid detection.

One solution, she said, is to highlight state medical boards that do it right and state medical boards that do it wrong, including the “very worst,” which is that of Alaska.

Dr. Wible, who speaks of suffering from suicidal feelings herself as physician in 2004, is a leading advocate for suicide prevention in the medical profession.

She told colleagues at the Psych Congress that anesthesiologists face the highest risk of suicide, followed by surgeons, ob.gyns., and psychiatrists.

“They end their lives not because they want to die but because they want to stop the pain and they can’t find any other way,” she said. “They have a great work ethic until the end: They’re smiling, doing complex surgeries, and cracking jokes to the surgical team, then they shoot themselves in the closet.”

Colleagues are often shocked, she said: “ ‘Wait a minute. He was just joking with me yesterday. What do you mean he hung himself in his office?’ ‘She just had a newborn baby and she was so happy!’ If you see the smile, you don’t see the pain.”

In 2018, she wrote a Washington Post commentary titled “What I’ve learned from my tally of 757 doctor suicides” that was based on her registry of physician suicides. In the United States, she wrote, 1 million patients lose a physician to suicide each year. Factors contributing to suicides include patient deaths, malpractice suits, “academic distress,” and overwork. “Doctors who need help don’t seek it because they fear mental health care won’t remain confidential,” she wrote. “So they drive out of town, pay cash, and use fake names to hide from state medical boards, hospitals, and insurance plans out of fear that they will lose state licensure, hospital privileges, and health plan participation.”

Dr. Wible oversaw a 2019 research project that analyzed state medical board applications. The goal was to grade the state boards by how intrusively their application questions grill applicants about their mental health history. “Physicians fear sharing their mental health struggles with the state medical health board and with each other,” she said. Some lie, and others – “the really honest physicians” – are so dedicated to telling the truth that “they’ll withhold getting care because they want to correctly check the ‘no’ box.”

Seven states – Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, Florida, Mississippi, Rhode Island, and Washington –received “F” grades for “highly invasive mental health questions unlinked to current impairment that contain confusing, punitive, or adversarial language.”

Roke~commonswiki

Alaska, Dr. Wible said, asks multiple 25 yes-or-no questions about mental health. One question lists 14 conditions, almost all related to mental health – including depression, “any organic mental disorder,” and “any condition requiring chronic medical or behavioral treatment” – and asks, “Have you ever been diagnosed with, treated for, or do you currently have” any of them. This is “the most invasive mental health question we found on any application,” Dr. Wible wrote on her website.

States also hurt applicants by asking peers of applicants about their mental health, she said. “I’m not against getting peer references, but can we stop getting into everyone’s business with their psych history? What we really want to know is: ‘Are you are safe with patients today?’ ”

Dr. Wible also criticizes state medical boards for asking about mental health impairment over the last 5 years: They don’t get higher than a “C.”

The 13 states with “A” grades either don’t ask about mental health or simply ask about general impairment: Connecticut, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, New Jersey, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, New York, Pennsylvania, and Wyoming.

Massachusetts, for example, asks, “Do you have a medical or physical condition that currently impairs your ability to practice medicine?”

“That is a question anyone can understand,” Dr. Wible said. “I think that’s good wording.”

Going forward, she said, “we’ve got to remove these mental health questions. If we could do this, our profession would be so much better, and we’d lose so many fewer people.”

And, she added, “what we really need to do is share our stories. It’s therapeutic for you and your colleagues, it creates collegial trust and bonding, and it destigmatizes physician mental health.”

Dr. Wible reported no relevant disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – The Food and Drug Administration has not approved a drug to treat agitation in dementia, and the absence of medication candidates is only part of the picture. As a geriatric psychiatrist explained to colleagues, the FDA has not taken the step of recognizing that the condition exists. But there are still options to treat this dangerous disorder – although none is ideal.

Research into efficacy of potential treatments for agitation is limited, variable, and “have high placebo effects,” said Marc E. Agronin, MD, of the MIND Institute and Miami Jewish Health, at the annual Psych Congress. “There is no one single magic bullet, especially since there are so many manifestations of agitation, and there are side effects of medication. This is a tough area to focus on.”

What can clinicians do? Dr. Agronin recommended starting with the steps in the DICE algorithm.

• Describe: Learn about the aspects of agitation by talking to caregivers and understanding the circumstances when symptoms develop.
• Investigate: Identify contributing factors, such as those related to illness, medication, and the environment.
• Create: Come up with a team strategy to address the contributing factors. Address the most urgent risks first, such as danger to self or others, which can require quick action – such as medication adjustment, an ED visit, or psychiatric hospitalization. Delirium is especially dangerous since it can lead to injury and subacute cognitive decline. And keep in mind, Dr. Agorin said, that it may be risky to do nothing or undertreat.
• Evaluate: Track the results of the strategy while realizing that there’s “not always a quick fix.” Research suggests that therapeutic approaches such as music, aromatherapy, exercise, group activities, hand massage, and thermal baths can be helpful, Dr. Agronin said.

As for medications, he advised starting with lower doses, perhaps 50%, because older people are less tolerant of medication. And beware of oversedation, dizziness, and lowered blood pressure, which can lead to falls. A hip fracture can “spiral down to someone’s demise very quickly,” he said.

Here’s a closer look at Dr. Agronin’s comments regarding specific medications.

• Antipsychotics: “Every antipsychotic has been used for agitation,” he said, “and they probably have the best efficacy,” compared with other drugs. But the risk of side effects is moderate to high, and atypical antipsychotics have a black-box warning about their use in dementia-related psychosis in elderly patients. Also, discontinuation of antipsychotics can trigger worsening symptoms in some patients. There has been tremendous controversy in recent years over the use of antipsychotics in older patients, but other drugs might be less effective than antipsychotics while still having similar side effect profiles, he said. And clinicians might be too cautious about doses even when they do use these drugs.
• Benzodiazepines: They can work quickly but come with a risk of sedation. Trazodone is an “excellent” alternative to reduce agitation in the short-term, he said.
• Antidepressants: These drugs can address underlying depression. Study results have been mixed.
• Mood stabilizers: Study results are mixed. “Unfortunately, in many situations [clinicians] get scared away from antipsychotics and use mood stabilizers, but there is less data for them in terms of efficacy, and there are a lot of side effects that have to be monitored,” he said.

Dr. Agronin is the author of “How We Age” (Da Capo Lifelong Books, 2012) and “The End of Old Age” (Da Capo Lifelong Books, 2018). He has no relevant disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – The Food and Drug Administration has not approved a drug to treat agitation in dementia, and the absence of medication candidates is only part of the picture. As a geriatric psychiatrist explained to colleagues, the FDA has not taken the step of recognizing that the condition exists. But there are still options to treat this dangerous disorder – although none is ideal.

Research into efficacy of potential treatments for agitation is limited, variable, and “have high placebo effects,” said Marc E. Agronin, MD, of the MIND Institute and Miami Jewish Health, at the annual Psych Congress. “There is no one single magic bullet, especially since there are so many manifestations of agitation, and there are side effects of medication. This is a tough area to focus on.”

What can clinicians do? Dr. Agronin recommended starting with the steps in the DICE algorithm.

• Describe: Learn about the aspects of agitation by talking to caregivers and understanding the circumstances when symptoms develop.
• Investigate: Identify contributing factors, such as those related to illness, medication, and the environment.
• Create: Come up with a team strategy to address the contributing factors. Address the most urgent risks first, such as danger to self or others, which can require quick action – such as medication adjustment, an ED visit, or psychiatric hospitalization. Delirium is especially dangerous since it can lead to injury and subacute cognitive decline. And keep in mind, Dr. Agorin said, that it may be risky to do nothing or undertreat.
• Evaluate: Track the results of the strategy while realizing that there’s “not always a quick fix.” Research suggests that therapeutic approaches such as music, aromatherapy, exercise, group activities, hand massage, and thermal baths can be helpful, Dr. Agronin said.

As for medications, he advised starting with lower doses, perhaps 50%, because older people are less tolerant of medication. And beware of oversedation, dizziness, and lowered blood pressure, which can lead to falls. A hip fracture can “spiral down to someone’s demise very quickly,” he said.

Here’s a closer look at Dr. Agronin’s comments regarding specific medications.

• Antipsychotics: “Every antipsychotic has been used for agitation,” he said, “and they probably have the best efficacy,” compared with other drugs. But the risk of side effects is moderate to high, and atypical antipsychotics have a black-box warning about their use in dementia-related psychosis in elderly patients. Also, discontinuation of antipsychotics can trigger worsening symptoms in some patients. There has been tremendous controversy in recent years over the use of antipsychotics in older patients, but other drugs might be less effective than antipsychotics while still having similar side effect profiles, he said. And clinicians might be too cautious about doses even when they do use these drugs.
• Benzodiazepines: They can work quickly but come with a risk of sedation. Trazodone is an “excellent” alternative to reduce agitation in the short-term, he said.
• Antidepressants: These drugs can address underlying depression. Study results have been mixed.
• Mood stabilizers: Study results are mixed. “Unfortunately, in many situations [clinicians] get scared away from antipsychotics and use mood stabilizers, but there is less data for them in terms of efficacy, and there are a lot of side effects that have to be monitored,” he said.

Dr. Agronin is the author of “How We Age” (Da Capo Lifelong Books, 2012) and “The End of Old Age” (Da Capo Lifelong Books, 2018). He has no relevant disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – The Food and Drug Administration has not approved a drug to treat agitation in dementia, and the absence of medication candidates is only part of the picture. As a geriatric psychiatrist explained to colleagues, the FDA has not taken the step of recognizing that the condition exists. But there are still options to treat this dangerous disorder – although none is ideal.

Research into efficacy of potential treatments for agitation is limited, variable, and “have high placebo effects,” said Marc E. Agronin, MD, of the MIND Institute and Miami Jewish Health, at the annual Psych Congress. “There is no one single magic bullet, especially since there are so many manifestations of agitation, and there are side effects of medication. This is a tough area to focus on.”

What can clinicians do? Dr. Agronin recommended starting with the steps in the DICE algorithm.

• Describe: Learn about the aspects of agitation by talking to caregivers and understanding the circumstances when symptoms develop.
• Investigate: Identify contributing factors, such as those related to illness, medication, and the environment.
• Create: Come up with a team strategy to address the contributing factors. Address the most urgent risks first, such as danger to self or others, which can require quick action – such as medication adjustment, an ED visit, or psychiatric hospitalization. Delirium is especially dangerous since it can lead to injury and subacute cognitive decline. And keep in mind, Dr. Agorin said, that it may be risky to do nothing or undertreat.
• Evaluate: Track the results of the strategy while realizing that there’s “not always a quick fix.” Research suggests that therapeutic approaches such as music, aromatherapy, exercise, group activities, hand massage, and thermal baths can be helpful, Dr. Agronin said.

As for medications, he advised starting with lower doses, perhaps 50%, because older people are less tolerant of medication. And beware of oversedation, dizziness, and lowered blood pressure, which can lead to falls. A hip fracture can “spiral down to someone’s demise very quickly,” he said.

Here’s a closer look at Dr. Agronin’s comments regarding specific medications.

• Antipsychotics: “Every antipsychotic has been used for agitation,” he said, “and they probably have the best efficacy,” compared with other drugs. But the risk of side effects is moderate to high, and atypical antipsychotics have a black-box warning about their use in dementia-related psychosis in elderly patients. Also, discontinuation of antipsychotics can trigger worsening symptoms in some patients. There has been tremendous controversy in recent years over the use of antipsychotics in older patients, but other drugs might be less effective than antipsychotics while still having similar side effect profiles, he said. And clinicians might be too cautious about doses even when they do use these drugs.
• Benzodiazepines: They can work quickly but come with a risk of sedation. Trazodone is an “excellent” alternative to reduce agitation in the short-term, he said.
• Antidepressants: These drugs can address underlying depression. Study results have been mixed.
• Mood stabilizers: Study results are mixed. “Unfortunately, in many situations [clinicians] get scared away from antipsychotics and use mood stabilizers, but there is less data for them in terms of efficacy, and there are a lot of side effects that have to be monitored,” he said.

Dr. Agronin is the author of “How We Age” (Da Capo Lifelong Books, 2012) and “The End of Old Age” (Da Capo Lifelong Books, 2018). He has no relevant disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – Its toll is obscured by the opioid crisis, but methamphetamine use is on the rise in the United States. There are no approved treatments for methamphetamine use, but a psychiatrist told colleagues that several off-label medications might prove helpful.

However, the evidence supporting the use of these medications for patients taking methamphetamine is not robust, “and none are even close to [Food and Drug Administration] approval,” said Larissa J. Mooney, MD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System. “But if I use something that’s approved for depression or might be helpful for anxiety symptoms, maybe it would also help reduce their likelihood of relapse in conjunction with an evidence-based behavioral program or treatment with a therapist.”

Dr. Mooney, who spoke at the annual Psych Congress, highlighted a federal report estimating that 0.4% of people aged 18-25 in 2017 used the drug within the past month, compared with 0.3% of those aged 26 and higher.

There were about 758,000 current adult users of methamphetamine in 2017, the report found.

Meanwhile, concurrent use of methamphetamine among patients who use opioids chronically has almost doubled, to 34% in 2017, from 19% in 2011 (Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018 Dec 1;193:14-20). And, Dr. Mooney said, deaths from stimulants are rising, even independent of opioid deaths.

Stimulant users typically have other psychiatric conditions, such as depression, anxiety, and concentration problems, Dr. Mooney said. In those cases, she said, treating those conditions might help with the substance use, too.

For methamphetamine use disorder, she highlighted some medications that might be helpful, although, again, she cautioned that evidence is not strong:

• Bupropion (Wellbutrin). Research suggests that this drug is more effective in patients with less severe methamphetamine use disorder, Dr. Mooney said. “It’s a more stimulating antidepressant, and can be helpful with concentration and attention.”
• Mirtazapine (Remeron). “I keep it in my list of options for some [who are] really anxious and not sleeping well,” she said. “It might be beneficial.”
• Naltrexone (ReVia, Depade, Vivitrol). “There are some early signs of efficacy,” she said, and a randomized, controlled trial is in progress.
• Methylphenidate (Ritalin, Concerta) and topiramate (Topamax). There’s “low-strength” evidence that the drugs can be helpful and lower use of methamphetamine, she said. However, methylphenidate is a stimulant. There’s controversy over the use of stimulants to treat patients with substance use disorders, Dr. Mooney said, and she tends to be conservative about their use in this population.

Why not use them to treat methamphetamine users in the same way that opioids such as methadone are used to treat opioid use addiction? “We don’t have an equivalent stimulant that works in the same way,” she said. “They don’t stay in the system for 24 hours. If you take a prescription stimulant, by the end of the day it wears off. It won’t stay in the same way as agonist treatments for opioid disorder.”

Even so, she said, “it makes sense that stimulants might be helpful.”

Dr. Mooney disclosed an advisory board relationship with Alkermes and grant/research support from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

SAN DIEGO – Its toll is obscured by the opioid crisis, but methamphetamine use is on the rise in the United States. There are no approved treatments for methamphetamine use, but a psychiatrist told colleagues that several off-label medications might prove helpful.

However, the evidence supporting the use of these medications for patients taking methamphetamine is not robust, “and none are even close to [Food and Drug Administration] approval,” said Larissa J. Mooney, MD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System. “But if I use something that’s approved for depression or might be helpful for anxiety symptoms, maybe it would also help reduce their likelihood of relapse in conjunction with an evidence-based behavioral program or treatment with a therapist.”

Dr. Mooney, who spoke at the annual Psych Congress, highlighted a federal report estimating that 0.4% of people aged 18-25 in 2017 used the drug within the past month, compared with 0.3% of those aged 26 and higher.

There were about 758,000 current adult users of methamphetamine in 2017, the report found.

Meanwhile, concurrent use of methamphetamine among patients who use opioids chronically has almost doubled, to 34% in 2017, from 19% in 2011 (Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018 Dec 1;193:14-20). And, Dr. Mooney said, deaths from stimulants are rising, even independent of opioid deaths.

Stimulant users typically have other psychiatric conditions, such as depression, anxiety, and concentration problems, Dr. Mooney said. In those cases, she said, treating those conditions might help with the substance use, too.

For methamphetamine use disorder, she highlighted some medications that might be helpful, although, again, she cautioned that evidence is not strong:

• Bupropion (Wellbutrin). Research suggests that this drug is more effective in patients with less severe methamphetamine use disorder, Dr. Mooney said. “It’s a more stimulating antidepressant, and can be helpful with concentration and attention.”
• Mirtazapine (Remeron). “I keep it in my list of options for some [who are] really anxious and not sleeping well,” she said. “It might be beneficial.”
• Naltrexone (ReVia, Depade, Vivitrol). “There are some early signs of efficacy,” she said, and a randomized, controlled trial is in progress.
• Methylphenidate (Ritalin, Concerta) and topiramate (Topamax). There’s “low-strength” evidence that the drugs can be helpful and lower use of methamphetamine, she said. However, methylphenidate is a stimulant. There’s controversy over the use of stimulants to treat patients with substance use disorders, Dr. Mooney said, and she tends to be conservative about their use in this population.

Why not use them to treat methamphetamine users in the same way that opioids such as methadone are used to treat opioid use addiction? “We don’t have an equivalent stimulant that works in the same way,” she said. “They don’t stay in the system for 24 hours. If you take a prescription stimulant, by the end of the day it wears off. It won’t stay in the same way as agonist treatments for opioid disorder.”

Even so, she said, “it makes sense that stimulants might be helpful.”

Dr. Mooney disclosed an advisory board relationship with Alkermes and grant/research support from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

SAN DIEGO – Its toll is obscured by the opioid crisis, but methamphetamine use is on the rise in the United States. There are no approved treatments for methamphetamine use, but a psychiatrist told colleagues that several off-label medications might prove helpful.

However, the evidence supporting the use of these medications for patients taking methamphetamine is not robust, “and none are even close to [Food and Drug Administration] approval,” said Larissa J. Mooney, MD, of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System. “But if I use something that’s approved for depression or might be helpful for anxiety symptoms, maybe it would also help reduce their likelihood of relapse in conjunction with an evidence-based behavioral program or treatment with a therapist.”

Dr. Mooney, who spoke at the annual Psych Congress, highlighted a federal report estimating that 0.4% of people aged 18-25 in 2017 used the drug within the past month, compared with 0.3% of those aged 26 and higher.

There were about 758,000 current adult users of methamphetamine in 2017, the report found.

Meanwhile, concurrent use of methamphetamine among patients who use opioids chronically has almost doubled, to 34% in 2017, from 19% in 2011 (Drug Alcohol Depend. 2018 Dec 1;193:14-20). And, Dr. Mooney said, deaths from stimulants are rising, even independent of opioid deaths.

Stimulant users typically have other psychiatric conditions, such as depression, anxiety, and concentration problems, Dr. Mooney said. In those cases, she said, treating those conditions might help with the substance use, too.

For methamphetamine use disorder, she highlighted some medications that might be helpful, although, again, she cautioned that evidence is not strong:

• Bupropion (Wellbutrin). Research suggests that this drug is more effective in patients with less severe methamphetamine use disorder, Dr. Mooney said. “It’s a more stimulating antidepressant, and can be helpful with concentration and attention.”
• Mirtazapine (Remeron). “I keep it in my list of options for some [who are] really anxious and not sleeping well,” she said. “It might be beneficial.”
• Naltrexone (ReVia, Depade, Vivitrol). “There are some early signs of efficacy,” she said, and a randomized, controlled trial is in progress.
• Methylphenidate (Ritalin, Concerta) and topiramate (Topamax). There’s “low-strength” evidence that the drugs can be helpful and lower use of methamphetamine, she said. However, methylphenidate is a stimulant. There’s controversy over the use of stimulants to treat patients with substance use disorders, Dr. Mooney said, and she tends to be conservative about their use in this population.

Why not use them to treat methamphetamine users in the same way that opioids such as methadone are used to treat opioid use addiction? “We don’t have an equivalent stimulant that works in the same way,” she said. “They don’t stay in the system for 24 hours. If you take a prescription stimulant, by the end of the day it wears off. It won’t stay in the same way as agonist treatments for opioid disorder.”

Even so, she said, “it makes sense that stimulants might be helpful.”

Dr. Mooney disclosed an advisory board relationship with Alkermes and grant/research support from the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

SAN DIEGO – Mental health professionals can lower the risk of legal exposure from patients filing malpractice suits through proper assessment and proper documentation, a psychiatrist said at the annual Psych Congress.

“You don’t have to have a perfect performance, but you do have to gather relevant data. And you’ll be judged on whether you took reasonable precautions once you identified the risk,” said Phillip J. Resnick, MD, professor of psychiatry at Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.

Research suggests that 35% of malpractice claims involve incorrect treatment and 19% involve medication problems. More than half of all U.S. physicians reportedly have been sued, and psychiatrists are named in lawsuits less often than other medical specialists.

What’s “reasonable” in terms of assessment and precautions? In the past, courts may have held to a community standard: Did you provide the usual care that others in your region would provide? This approach allowed physicians to avoid responsibility if “you could prove that the majority of [local] doctors do what you did,” Dr. Resnick said, even if they’re “sloppy and bad.”

A newer, “reasonably prudent practitioner” standard expects medical professionals to do the right thing no matter where they live. “You have to do what a prudent practitioner would do whether others in your community are doing it or not,” said Dr. Resnick, who has consulted on numerous well-known cases, including that of Jeffrey Dahmer, Susan Smith, Timothy McVey, and Theodore Kaczynski.

Psychiatrists can be vulnerable legally if they refuse to respond to concerns from family members, Dr. Resnick said. The best approach is to listen. “You don’t need permission to listen – only to release information. You can always listen.”

Dr. Resnick is a former president of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. He has no disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – Mental health professionals can lower the risk of legal exposure from patients filing malpractice suits through proper assessment and proper documentation, a psychiatrist said at the annual Psych Congress.

“You don’t have to have a perfect performance, but you do have to gather relevant data. And you’ll be judged on whether you took reasonable precautions once you identified the risk,” said Phillip J. Resnick, MD, professor of psychiatry at Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.

Research suggests that 35% of malpractice claims involve incorrect treatment and 19% involve medication problems. More than half of all U.S. physicians reportedly have been sued, and psychiatrists are named in lawsuits less often than other medical specialists.

What’s “reasonable” in terms of assessment and precautions? In the past, courts may have held to a community standard: Did you provide the usual care that others in your region would provide? This approach allowed physicians to avoid responsibility if “you could prove that the majority of [local] doctors do what you did,” Dr. Resnick said, even if they’re “sloppy and bad.”

A newer, “reasonably prudent practitioner” standard expects medical professionals to do the right thing no matter where they live. “You have to do what a prudent practitioner would do whether others in your community are doing it or not,” said Dr. Resnick, who has consulted on numerous well-known cases, including that of Jeffrey Dahmer, Susan Smith, Timothy McVey, and Theodore Kaczynski.

Psychiatrists can be vulnerable legally if they refuse to respond to concerns from family members, Dr. Resnick said. The best approach is to listen. “You don’t need permission to listen – only to release information. You can always listen.”

Dr. Resnick is a former president of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. He has no disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – Mental health professionals can lower the risk of legal exposure from patients filing malpractice suits through proper assessment and proper documentation, a psychiatrist said at the annual Psych Congress.

“You don’t have to have a perfect performance, but you do have to gather relevant data. And you’ll be judged on whether you took reasonable precautions once you identified the risk,” said Phillip J. Resnick, MD, professor of psychiatry at Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland.

Research suggests that 35% of malpractice claims involve incorrect treatment and 19% involve medication problems. More than half of all U.S. physicians reportedly have been sued, and psychiatrists are named in lawsuits less often than other medical specialists.

What’s “reasonable” in terms of assessment and precautions? In the past, courts may have held to a community standard: Did you provide the usual care that others in your region would provide? This approach allowed physicians to avoid responsibility if “you could prove that the majority of [local] doctors do what you did,” Dr. Resnick said, even if they’re “sloppy and bad.”

A newer, “reasonably prudent practitioner” standard expects medical professionals to do the right thing no matter where they live. “You have to do what a prudent practitioner would do whether others in your community are doing it or not,” said Dr. Resnick, who has consulted on numerous well-known cases, including that of Jeffrey Dahmer, Susan Smith, Timothy McVey, and Theodore Kaczynski.

Psychiatrists can be vulnerable legally if they refuse to respond to concerns from family members, Dr. Resnick said. The best approach is to listen. “You don’t need permission to listen – only to release information. You can always listen.”

Dr. Resnick is a former president of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. He has no disclosures.

SAN DIEGO – Substance use disorders rarely ride alone, a psychiatrist told colleagues, and it’s crucial to treat the accompanying mental illness that is almost always present.

“If you’re really depressed and you’re smoking marijuana, the smoking could have made it worse, but you were probably depressed before,” said Timothy E. Wilens, MD, of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, both in Boston. Dr. Wilens spoke at the annual Psych Congress.

He pointed to numbers supporting the link between substance use and mental illness. He also offered several tips about treating substance use disorder (SUD).

In ADHD, consider the big picture. If a person has both ADHD and SUD, treat both if the level of substance abuse is lower. But focus on the SUD in more severe cases, he said, and realize that “most likely your treatment for ADHD isn’t going to work as well.”

Be prepared to give high doses. “When you’re using stimulants in people with use disorders, you have to use high doses. You have to be brave,” he said. The same goes for the anxiolytic buspirone (Buspar) in patients with depression and SUD.

Consider N-acetyl cysteine in cannabis use disorder. N-acetyl cysteine, a nutraceutical used as an asthma medication, has shown promise in trials as a treatment for cannabis use disorder, Dr. Wilens said. It helps patients avoid the temptation to smoke. “They won’t say they’ve lost all their cravings, but you’ll hear, ‘I just didn’t need to do it; I’m not smoking as much.’ If you hear that from your patients, you know it’s working. It’s a subtle effect, but it can help.”

Scamming’ drugs shouldn’t be your main worry. Substance use research suggests that users of pharmaceutical drugs for nonmedical uses rarely get them directly from practitioners (7%), but instead mainly get them through friends, Dr. Wilens said. “If you work with this population and treat ADHD or anxiety, you’re paranoid that everyone coming in wants to scam medicines. Be more concerned about oversupplying them with immediate-release medications and not [taking] them to task about keeping the medication safely stored.”

Interventions such as Alcoholics Anonymous are as “effective as any other treatment for substance abuse, and it’s not costly,” Dr. Wilens said. He added that the Rational Recovery program, an alternative to Alcoholics Anonymous, also seems to work well. The approaches to ending substance use differ in that Alcoholics Anonymous’s orientation is spiritual and Rational Recovery’s is cognitive.

Dr. Wilens reported various disclosures, including consulting relationships with Ironshore Pharmaceuticals, KemPharm, and Neurovance/Otsuka.

SAN DIEGO – Substance use disorders rarely ride alone, a psychiatrist told colleagues, and it’s crucial to treat the accompanying mental illness that is almost always present.

“If you’re really depressed and you’re smoking marijuana, the smoking could have made it worse, but you were probably depressed before,” said Timothy E. Wilens, MD, of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, both in Boston. Dr. Wilens spoke at the annual Psych Congress.

He pointed to numbers supporting the link between substance use and mental illness. He also offered several tips about treating substance use disorder (SUD).

In ADHD, consider the big picture. If a person has both ADHD and SUD, treat both if the level of substance abuse is lower. But focus on the SUD in more severe cases, he said, and realize that “most likely your treatment for ADHD isn’t going to work as well.”

Be prepared to give high doses. “When you’re using stimulants in people with use disorders, you have to use high doses. You have to be brave,” he said. The same goes for the anxiolytic buspirone (Buspar) in patients with depression and SUD.

Consider N-acetyl cysteine in cannabis use disorder. N-acetyl cysteine, a nutraceutical used as an asthma medication, has shown promise in trials as a treatment for cannabis use disorder, Dr. Wilens said. It helps patients avoid the temptation to smoke. “They won’t say they’ve lost all their cravings, but you’ll hear, ‘I just didn’t need to do it; I’m not smoking as much.’ If you hear that from your patients, you know it’s working. It’s a subtle effect, but it can help.”

Scamming’ drugs shouldn’t be your main worry. Substance use research suggests that users of pharmaceutical drugs for nonmedical uses rarely get them directly from practitioners (7%), but instead mainly get them through friends, Dr. Wilens said. “If you work with this population and treat ADHD or anxiety, you’re paranoid that everyone coming in wants to scam medicines. Be more concerned about oversupplying them with immediate-release medications and not [taking] them to task about keeping the medication safely stored.”

Interventions such as Alcoholics Anonymous are as “effective as any other treatment for substance abuse, and it’s not costly,” Dr. Wilens said. He added that the Rational Recovery program, an alternative to Alcoholics Anonymous, also seems to work well. The approaches to ending substance use differ in that Alcoholics Anonymous’s orientation is spiritual and Rational Recovery’s is cognitive.

Dr. Wilens reported various disclosures, including consulting relationships with Ironshore Pharmaceuticals, KemPharm, and Neurovance/Otsuka.

SAN DIEGO – Substance use disorders rarely ride alone, a psychiatrist told colleagues, and it’s crucial to treat the accompanying mental illness that is almost always present.

“If you’re really depressed and you’re smoking marijuana, the smoking could have made it worse, but you were probably depressed before,” said Timothy E. Wilens, MD, of Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital, both in Boston. Dr. Wilens spoke at the annual Psych Congress.

He pointed to numbers supporting the link between substance use and mental illness. He also offered several tips about treating substance use disorder (SUD).

In ADHD, consider the big picture. If a person has both ADHD and SUD, treat both if the level of substance abuse is lower. But focus on the SUD in more severe cases, he said, and realize that “most likely your treatment for ADHD isn’t going to work as well.”

Be prepared to give high doses. “When you’re using stimulants in people with use disorders, you have to use high doses. You have to be brave,” he said. The same goes for the anxiolytic buspirone (Buspar) in patients with depression and SUD.

Consider N-acetyl cysteine in cannabis use disorder. N-acetyl cysteine, a nutraceutical used as an asthma medication, has shown promise in trials as a treatment for cannabis use disorder, Dr. Wilens said. It helps patients avoid the temptation to smoke. “They won’t say they’ve lost all their cravings, but you’ll hear, ‘I just didn’t need to do it; I’m not smoking as much.’ If you hear that from your patients, you know it’s working. It’s a subtle effect, but it can help.”

Scamming’ drugs shouldn’t be your main worry. Substance use research suggests that users of pharmaceutical drugs for nonmedical uses rarely get them directly from practitioners (7%), but instead mainly get them through friends, Dr. Wilens said. “If you work with this population and treat ADHD or anxiety, you’re paranoid that everyone coming in wants to scam medicines. Be more concerned about oversupplying them with immediate-release medications and not [taking] them to task about keeping the medication safely stored.”

Interventions such as Alcoholics Anonymous are as “effective as any other treatment for substance abuse, and it’s not costly,” Dr. Wilens said. He added that the Rational Recovery program, an alternative to Alcoholics Anonymous, also seems to work well. The approaches to ending substance use differ in that Alcoholics Anonymous’s orientation is spiritual and Rational Recovery’s is cognitive.

Dr. Wilens reported various disclosures, including consulting relationships with Ironshore Pharmaceuticals, KemPharm, and Neurovance/Otsuka.

SAN DIEGO – A relatively new treatment approach called good psychiatric management (GPM) is available for patients with borderline personality disorder.

It’s a solid option for “environments where people may not have many resources and might not be able to deliver treatments that are more resource intensive, like dialectical behavioral therapy,” the standard intervention, said James Jenkins, MD, a psychiatrist affiliated with Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, in a video interview at the annual Psych Congress.

“GPM is a treatment, not a psychotherapy, that’s maybe a little bit more easily adaptable to a variety of different contexts and situations,” he said.

It’s an atheoretical, pragmatic approach that focuses on helping people establish a life outside of therapy. Clinicians actively engage with patients, encouraging them to start working and building successful relationships with other people. The model emphasizes the value of educating people about the condition and giving them hope. Typically, patients participate in GPM once each week (Curr Opin Psychol. 2018 Jun;21:127-31).

Vidyard Video

For most people, it works just as well as dialectical behavioral therapy, and when it doesn’t, patients can transition to that or another more intensive approach. Training is less intensive and sometimes free. GPM is offered at McLean Hospital in Boston, where the intervention originated. McLean also is Dr. Jenkins’s former institution.

Dr. Jenkins reported that he had no disclosures.

aotto@mdedge.com

SAN DIEGO – A relatively new treatment approach called good psychiatric management (GPM) is available for patients with borderline personality disorder.

It’s a solid option for “environments where people may not have many resources and might not be able to deliver treatments that are more resource intensive, like dialectical behavioral therapy,” the standard intervention, said James Jenkins, MD, a psychiatrist affiliated with Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, in a video interview at the annual Psych Congress.

“GPM is a treatment, not a psychotherapy, that’s maybe a little bit more easily adaptable to a variety of different contexts and situations,” he said.

It’s an atheoretical, pragmatic approach that focuses on helping people establish a life outside of therapy. Clinicians actively engage with patients, encouraging them to start working and building successful relationships with other people. The model emphasizes the value of educating people about the condition and giving them hope. Typically, patients participate in GPM once each week (Curr Opin Psychol. 2018 Jun;21:127-31).

Vidyard Video

For most people, it works just as well as dialectical behavioral therapy, and when it doesn’t, patients can transition to that or another more intensive approach. Training is less intensive and sometimes free. GPM is offered at McLean Hospital in Boston, where the intervention originated. McLean also is Dr. Jenkins’s former institution.

Dr. Jenkins reported that he had no disclosures.

aotto@mdedge.com

SAN DIEGO – A relatively new treatment approach called good psychiatric management (GPM) is available for patients with borderline personality disorder.

It’s a solid option for “environments where people may not have many resources and might not be able to deliver treatments that are more resource intensive, like dialectical behavioral therapy,” the standard intervention, said James Jenkins, MD, a psychiatrist affiliated with Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, in a video interview at the annual Psych Congress.

“GPM is a treatment, not a psychotherapy, that’s maybe a little bit more easily adaptable to a variety of different contexts and situations,” he said.

It’s an atheoretical, pragmatic approach that focuses on helping people establish a life outside of therapy. Clinicians actively engage with patients, encouraging them to start working and building successful relationships with other people. The model emphasizes the value of educating people about the condition and giving them hope. Typically, patients participate in GPM once each week (Curr Opin Psychol. 2018 Jun;21:127-31).

Vidyard Video

For most people, it works just as well as dialectical behavioral therapy, and when it doesn’t, patients can transition to that or another more intensive approach. Training is less intensive and sometimes free. GPM is offered at McLean Hospital in Boston, where the intervention originated. McLean also is Dr. Jenkins’s former institution.

Dr. Jenkins reported that he had no disclosures.

aotto@mdedge.com

SAN DIEGO – While an “exciting” ketamine-based product is finally available and approved to treat treatment-resistant depression (TRD), there are still plenty of questions about the use of intranasal esketamine, a psychiatrist told colleagues.

“We have a lot of unmet needs in terms of research,” said Sanjay J. Mathew, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine and Michael E. Debakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, both in Houston, at the annual Psych Congress. “What do we do in the long term? What are the dosing strategies and response predictors? What about elderly patients?”

The Food and Drug Administration approved esketamine nasal spray (Spravato) for TRD in March 2019. Patients with TRD are defined as those with major depressive disorder who have failed at least two different antidepressants.

Dr. Mathew highlighted a 2019 randomized, double-blind, controlled study of patients who reached stable remission after 16 weeks on esketamine. It revealed there’s “a significant enhancement of the time to relapse for patients who remained on ketamine [compared with placebo] – a 51% risk reduction in the median number of days to relapse” (JAMA Psychiatry. 2019;76[9]:893-903).

However, about a quarter of patients still relapsed over the time of the study, Dr. Mathew said. “While this is certainly exciting, we need to talk to our patients about this and set expectations. And we need to emphasize close vigilance, follow-up, and psychotherapy.”

Patients should understand that, if patients are doing remarkably well at 16 weeks, “you’re not out of the woods. You really need to take it long term,” he said.

Dr. Mathew emphasized that patients must take the drug under supervision in a certified facility. “It’s a quick and simple process to do it [get certified] and get registered,” he said. Patients must be monitored over 2 hours and not drive for the rest of the day.

“You need space for some privacy, so a busy [postanesthesia care unit] or ER setting may not be optimal,” he said, adding that, “if you only have one office, it’s hard to pull this off for a number of logistical reasons.”

Dr. Mathew recommended lowering the level of stimulation in the room where the drug is administered. “We have a VA setting that can be loud with code greens blasting over the speaker,” he said. “That is not optimal, but at least we have a private room for our IV infusions. Keep the lights muted, let the patient listen to peaceful music that they enjoy. Having a family member close by can be helpful and comforting to them.”

He added that “you do need a way to recline the head. Having a barber-type chair would be necessary.”

Side effects are common, he said. Sedation is a major risk (49%-61%), as is dissociation (61%-75%). “It’s primarily a sense of alteration – perceptual alterations, altered sense of time, unreality, being disconnected from body, feeling unusually big in fingers or hands, or feeling like you’re unusually tall or skinny.”

Moving forward, more data about long-term effects and ideal doses are needed. “There are many clinics that go above 0.5 milligrams per kg, and some even go to 2. We have no good data,” he said.

People aged over 65 years have lower response rates, and men seem to respond less than women. Dr. Mathew also noted that the studies into the drug generally limited the number of antidepressant failures in patients: “Are there patients too refractory to be considered for this? How refractory is too refractory?”

Dr. Mathew reported various disclosures including a relationship with Janssen, manufacturer of intranasal esketamine.

SAN DIEGO – While an “exciting” ketamine-based product is finally available and approved to treat treatment-resistant depression (TRD), there are still plenty of questions about the use of intranasal esketamine, a psychiatrist told colleagues.

“We have a lot of unmet needs in terms of research,” said Sanjay J. Mathew, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine and Michael E. Debakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, both in Houston, at the annual Psych Congress. “What do we do in the long term? What are the dosing strategies and response predictors? What about elderly patients?”

The Food and Drug Administration approved esketamine nasal spray (Spravato) for TRD in March 2019. Patients with TRD are defined as those with major depressive disorder who have failed at least two different antidepressants.

Dr. Mathew highlighted a 2019 randomized, double-blind, controlled study of patients who reached stable remission after 16 weeks on esketamine. It revealed there’s “a significant enhancement of the time to relapse for patients who remained on ketamine [compared with placebo] – a 51% risk reduction in the median number of days to relapse” (JAMA Psychiatry. 2019;76[9]:893-903).

However, about a quarter of patients still relapsed over the time of the study, Dr. Mathew said. “While this is certainly exciting, we need to talk to our patients about this and set expectations. And we need to emphasize close vigilance, follow-up, and psychotherapy.”

Patients should understand that, if patients are doing remarkably well at 16 weeks, “you’re not out of the woods. You really need to take it long term,” he said.

Dr. Mathew emphasized that patients must take the drug under supervision in a certified facility. “It’s a quick and simple process to do it [get certified] and get registered,” he said. Patients must be monitored over 2 hours and not drive for the rest of the day.

“You need space for some privacy, so a busy [postanesthesia care unit] or ER setting may not be optimal,” he said, adding that, “if you only have one office, it’s hard to pull this off for a number of logistical reasons.”

Dr. Mathew recommended lowering the level of stimulation in the room where the drug is administered. “We have a VA setting that can be loud with code greens blasting over the speaker,” he said. “That is not optimal, but at least we have a private room for our IV infusions. Keep the lights muted, let the patient listen to peaceful music that they enjoy. Having a family member close by can be helpful and comforting to them.”

He added that “you do need a way to recline the head. Having a barber-type chair would be necessary.”

Side effects are common, he said. Sedation is a major risk (49%-61%), as is dissociation (61%-75%). “It’s primarily a sense of alteration – perceptual alterations, altered sense of time, unreality, being disconnected from body, feeling unusually big in fingers or hands, or feeling like you’re unusually tall or skinny.”

Moving forward, more data about long-term effects and ideal doses are needed. “There are many clinics that go above 0.5 milligrams per kg, and some even go to 2. We have no good data,” he said.

People aged over 65 years have lower response rates, and men seem to respond less than women. Dr. Mathew also noted that the studies into the drug generally limited the number of antidepressant failures in patients: “Are there patients too refractory to be considered for this? How refractory is too refractory?”

Dr. Mathew reported various disclosures including a relationship with Janssen, manufacturer of intranasal esketamine.

SAN DIEGO – While an “exciting” ketamine-based product is finally available and approved to treat treatment-resistant depression (TRD), there are still plenty of questions about the use of intranasal esketamine, a psychiatrist told colleagues.

“We have a lot of unmet needs in terms of research,” said Sanjay J. Mathew, MD, of Baylor College of Medicine and Michael E. Debakey Veterans Affairs Medical Center, both in Houston, at the annual Psych Congress. “What do we do in the long term? What are the dosing strategies and response predictors? What about elderly patients?”

The Food and Drug Administration approved esketamine nasal spray (Spravato) for TRD in March 2019. Patients with TRD are defined as those with major depressive disorder who have failed at least two different antidepressants.

Dr. Mathew highlighted a 2019 randomized, double-blind, controlled study of patients who reached stable remission after 16 weeks on esketamine. It revealed there’s “a significant enhancement of the time to relapse for patients who remained on ketamine [compared with placebo] – a 51% risk reduction in the median number of days to relapse” (JAMA Psychiatry. 2019;76[9]:893-903).

However, about a quarter of patients still relapsed over the time of the study, Dr. Mathew said. “While this is certainly exciting, we need to talk to our patients about this and set expectations. And we need to emphasize close vigilance, follow-up, and psychotherapy.”

Patients should understand that, if patients are doing remarkably well at 16 weeks, “you’re not out of the woods. You really need to take it long term,” he said.

Dr. Mathew emphasized that patients must take the drug under supervision in a certified facility. “It’s a quick and simple process to do it [get certified] and get registered,” he said. Patients must be monitored over 2 hours and not drive for the rest of the day.

“You need space for some privacy, so a busy [postanesthesia care unit] or ER setting may not be optimal,” he said, adding that, “if you only have one office, it’s hard to pull this off for a number of logistical reasons.”

Dr. Mathew recommended lowering the level of stimulation in the room where the drug is administered. “We have a VA setting that can be loud with code greens blasting over the speaker,” he said. “That is not optimal, but at least we have a private room for our IV infusions. Keep the lights muted, let the patient listen to peaceful music that they enjoy. Having a family member close by can be helpful and comforting to them.”

He added that “you do need a way to recline the head. Having a barber-type chair would be necessary.”

Side effects are common, he said. Sedation is a major risk (49%-61%), as is dissociation (61%-75%). “It’s primarily a sense of alteration – perceptual alterations, altered sense of time, unreality, being disconnected from body, feeling unusually big in fingers or hands, or feeling like you’re unusually tall or skinny.”

Moving forward, more data about long-term effects and ideal doses are needed. “There are many clinics that go above 0.5 milligrams per kg, and some even go to 2. We have no good data,” he said.

People aged over 65 years have lower response rates, and men seem to respond less than women. Dr. Mathew also noted that the studies into the drug generally limited the number of antidepressant failures in patients: “Are there patients too refractory to be considered for this? How refractory is too refractory?”

Dr. Mathew reported various disclosures including a relationship with Janssen, manufacturer of intranasal esketamine.