[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Limited information exists regarding the consumption of psychopharmaceuticals for non-Alzheimer's degenerative dementias (n-ADDs), despite the fact that the treatment of neuropsychiatric symptoms of these diseases is an important challenge for clinicians.
The aim of this study was to describe sociodemographic and clinical data from 235 patients with various subtypes of n-ADD, together with the level of consumption of pharmaceuticals with central nervous system activity.
A descriptive, observational, cross-sectional study was conducted using the data registered by the Registry of Dementias of Girona, northeast Catalunya, Spain. All drugs were categorized according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical Classification System.
The results showed a high level of psychopharmaceutical prescription: 48.9 % of the n-ADD patients used acetylcholinesterase inhibitors and 9.8 % used memantine. Antipsychotics and benzodiazepines were prescribed to 45.5 and 46.8 % of the patients, respectively. Antidepressants were consumed by 70.2 % of the registered cases.
High levels of psychopharmaceutical prescribing were observed in our study and many of these prescriptions lacked specific indications for n-ADDs. It is necessary to consider the risk-benefit relationship before prescribing pharmaceuticals. Specific training programmes will be necessary to improve the use of pharmaceuticals in n-ADD patients.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Antidepressants (ADs) are commonly prescribed in primary care and are mostly indicated for depression. According to the literature, they are now more frequently prescribed for health conditions other than psychiatric ones. Due to their many indications in a wide range of medical fields, assessing the appropriateness of AD prescription seems to be a challenge for GPs. The aim of this study was to review evidence from guidelines for antidepressant prescription for non-psychiatric conditions in Primary Care (PC) settings. METHODS: Data were retrieved from French, English and US guideline databases. Guidelines or reviews were eligible if keywords regarding 44 non-psychiatric conditions related to GPs' prescription of ADs were encountered. After excluding psychiatric and non-primary care conditions, the guidelines were checked for keywords related to AD use. The latest updated version of the guidelines was kept. Recent data was searched in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and in PubMed for updated reviews and randomized control trials (RCTs). RESULTS: Seventy-eight documents were retrieved and were used to assess the level of evidence of a potential benefit to prescribing an AD. For 15 conditions, there was a consensus that prescribing an AD was beneficial. For 5 others, ADs were seen as potentially beneficial. No proof of benefit was found for 15 conditions and proof of no benefit was found for the last 9. There were higher levels of evidence for pain conditions, (neuropathic pain, diabetic painful neuropathy, central neuropathic pain, migraine, tension-type headaches, and fibromyalgia) incontinence and irritable bowel syndrome. There were difficulties in summarizing the data, due to a lack of information on the level of evidence, and due to variations in efficacy between and among the various classes of ADs. CONCLUSIONS: Prescription of ADs was found to be beneficial for many non-psychiatric health conditions regularly encountered in PC settings. On the whole, the guidelines were heterogeneous, seemingly due to a lack of trials assessing the role of ADs in treatment strategies.
BMC Family Practice 05/2013; 14(1):55. · 1.74 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.