Carl Salzman

Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States

Are you Carl Salzman?

Claim your profile

Publications (84)352.76 Total impact

  • Carl Salzman, Ira D Glick
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This commentary focuses on psychopharmacology teachers and their teaching. The authors offer broadly based pedagogic suggestions on how to deliver evidence-based and neurobiologically informed prescribing information to clinicians at all levels of experience. They argue that teaching essential psychopharmacology knowledge and practice must be up-to-date, accurate, and consistent with the reality of an individual patient's life experience and beliefs. They stress that educators must teach that nonpsychopharmacological factors in a patient's life may be as relevant to the treatment setting as the actual pharmacological basis of psychotropic drug therapeutics.
    Academic Psychiatry 12/2014; DOI:10.1007/s40596-014-0263-z · 0.81 Impact Factor
  • Carl Salzman, Richard I Shader
    Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology 11/2014; 35(1). DOI:10.1097/JCP.0000000000000247 · 3.76 Impact Factor
  • Carl Salzman
    Journal of clinical psychopharmacology 12/2012; 33(1). DOI:10.1097/JCP.0b013e31827cad8c · 3.76 Impact Factor
  • American Journal of Psychiatry 10/2012; 169(10):1037. DOI:10.1176/appi.ajp.2012.12030362 · 13.56 Impact Factor
  • Carl Salzman
    Journal of clinical psychopharmacology 12/2011; 31(6):688-9. DOI:10.1097/JCP.0b013e31823777fd · 3.76 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study examined the association between a Medicaid prior-authorization policy for second-generation antipsychotic and anticonvulsant agents and medication discontinuation and health service use by patients with bipolar disorder. A pre-post design with a historical comparison group was used to analyze Maine Medicaid and Medicare claims data. A total of 946 newly treated patients were identified during the eight-month policy (July 2003-February 2004), and a comparison group of 1,014 was identified from the prepolicy period (July 2002-February 2003). Patients were stratified by number of visits to community mental health centers (CMHCs) before medication initiation (proxy for illness severity): CMHC attenders, at least two visits; nonattenders, fewer than two. Changes in rates of medication discontinuation and outpatient, emergency room, and hospital visits were estimated. Compared with nonattenders, at baseline CMHC attenders had substantially higher rates of comorbid mental disorders and use of medications and health services. The policy was associated with increased medication discontinuation among attenders and nonattenders, reductions in mental health visits after discontinuation among attenders (-.64 per patient per month; p<.05), and increases in emergency room visits after discontinuation among nonattenders (.16 per patient per month; p<.05). During the eight-month policy period, the policy had no detectable impact on hospitalization risk. The prior-authorization policy was associated with increased medication discontinuation and subsequent changes in health service use. Although small, these unintended effects raise concerns about quality of care for a group of vulnerable patients. Long-term consequences of prior-authorization policies on patient outcomes warrant further investigation.
    Psychiatric services (Washington, D.C.) 02/2011; 62(2):186-93. DOI:10.1176/appi.ps.62.2.186 · 1.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aging of the world’s population has resulted in a new demographic phenomenon: a significant increase in the percentage of elderly compared with the general population. Between 1960 and 1990, the general population in the U.S. increased by less than 50%, while those over 65 increased by almost 100%, and those over 85 years of age increased by almost 250% (1).
    12/2010: pages 125-183;
  • Journal of clinical psychopharmacology 12/2010; 30(6):653-5. DOI:10.1097/JCP.0b013e3181fb53c2 · 3.76 Impact Factor
  • Carl Salzman
    Journal of clinical psychopharmacology 10/2010; 30(5):485-6. DOI:10.1097/JCP.0b013e3181f131c6 · 3.76 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To address issues concerning potential treatment-emergent "suicidality," a consensus conference was convened March 23-24, 2009. This gathering of participants from academia, government, and industry brought together experts in suicide prevention, clinical trial design, psychometrics, pharmacoepidemiology, and genetics, as well as research psychiatrists involved in studies of major depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, substance abuse/dependence, and other psychiatric disorders associated with elevated suicide risk across the life cycle. The process involved reviews of the relevant literature, and a series of 6 breakout sessions focused on specific questions of interest. Each of the participants at the meeting received references relevant to the formal presentations (as well as the slides for the presentations) for their review prior to the meeting. In addition, the assessment instruments of suicidal ideation/behavior were reviewed in relationship to standard measures of validity, reliability, and clinical utility, and these findings were discussed at length in relevant breakout groups, in the final plenary session, and in the preparation of the article. Consensus and dissenting views were noted. Discussion and questions followed each formal presentation during the plenary sessions. Approximately 6 questions per breakout group were prepared in advance by members of the Steering Committee and each breakout group chair. Consensus in the breakout groups was achieved by nominal group process. Consensus recommendations and any dissent were reviewed for each breakout group at the final plenary session. All plenary sessions were recorded and transcribed by a court stenographer. Following the transcript, with input by each of the authors, the final paper went through 14 drafts. The output of the meeting was organized into this scholarly article, which has been developed by the authors with feedback from all participants at the meeting and represents a consensus view. Any areas of disagreement have been noted. The term suicidality is not as clinically useful as more specific terminology (ideation, behavior, attempts, and suicide). Most participants applauded the FDA's effort to promote standard definitions and definable expectations for investigators and industry sponsors by endorsing the terminology in the Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA). Further research of available assessment instruments is needed to verify their utility, reliability, and validity in identifying suicide-associated treatment-emergent adverse effects and/or a signal of efficacy in suicide prevention trials. The FDA needs to build upon its new authority to systematically monitor postmarketing events by encouraging the development of a validated instrument for postmarketing surveillance of suicidal ideation, behavior, and risk within informative large health care-related databases in the United States and abroad. Over time, the FDA, industry, and clinical researchers should evaluate the impact of the current Agency requirement that all CNS clinical drug trials must include a C-CASA-compatible screening instrument for assessing and documenting the occurrence of treatment-emergent suicidal ideation and behavior. Finally, patients at high risk for suicide can safely be included in clinical trials, if proper precautions are followed, and they need to be included to enable premarket assessments of the risks and benefits of medications related to suicidal ideation, suicidal behavior, and suicide in such patients.
    The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 08/2010; 71(8):e1-e21. DOI:10.4088/JCP.10cs06070blu · 5.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To address issues concerning potential treatment-emergent "suicidality," a consensus conference was convened March 23-24, 2009. This gathering of participants from academia, government, and industry brought together experts in suicide prevention, clinical trial design, psychometrics, pharmacoepidemiology, and genetics, as well as research psychiatrists involved in studies in studies of psychiatric disorders associated with elevated suicide risk across the life cycle. The process involved reviews of the relevant literature, and a series of 6 breakout sessions focused on specific questions of interest. Each of the participants at the meeting received references relevant to the formal presentations (as well as the slides for the presentations) for their review prior to the meeting. In addition, the assessment instruments of suicidal ideation/behavior were reviewed in relationship to standard measures of validity, reliability, and clinical utility, and these findings were discussed at length in relevant breakout groups, in the final plenary session, and in the preparation of the article. Consensus and dissenting views were noted. Discussion and questions followed each formal presentation during the plenary sessions. Approximately 6 questions per breakout group were prepared in advance by members of the Steering Committee and each breakout group chair. Consensus in the breakout groups was achieved by nominal group process. Consensus recommendations and any dissent were reviewed for each breakout group at the final plenary session. All plenary sessions were recorded and transcribed by a court stenographer. Following the transcript, with input by each of the authors, the final paper went through 14 drafts. The output of the meeting was organized into this brief report and the accompanying full article from which it is distilled. The full article was developed by the authors with feedback from all participants at the meeting and represents a consensus view. Any areas of disagreement at the conference have been noted in the text. The term suicidality is not as clinically useful as more specific terminology (ideation, behavior, attempts, and suicide). Most participants applauded the FDA's encouragement of standard definitions and definable expectations for investigators and industry sponsors. Further research of available assessment instruments is needed to verify their utility, reliability, and validity in identifying suicide-associated treatment-emergent adverse effects and/or a signal of efficacy in suicide prevention trials. The FDA needs to systematically monitor postmarketing events by encouraging the development of a validated instrument for postmarketing surveillance of suicidal ideation, behavior, and risk. Over time, the FDA, industry, and clinical researchers should evaluate the impact of the requirement that all central nervous system clinical drug trials must include a Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA)-compatible screening instrument for assessing and documenting the occurrence of treatment-emergent suicidal ideation and behavior. Finally, patients at high risk for suicide can safely be included in clinical trials, if proper precautions are followed.
    The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 08/2010; 71(8):1040-6. DOI:10.4088/JCP.10cs06070ablu · 5.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Atypical antipsychotic drugs have been used off label in clinical practice for treatment of serious dementia-associated agitation and aggression. Following reports of cerebrovascular adverse events associated with the use of atypical antipsychotics in elderly patients with dementia, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued black box warnings for several atypical antipsychotics titled "Cerebrovascular Adverse Events, Including Stroke, in Elderly Patients With Dementia." Subsequently, the FDA initiated a metaanalysis of safety data from 17 registration trials across 6 antipsychotic drugs (5 atypical antipsychotics and haloperidol). In 2005, the FDA issued a black box warning regarding increased risk of mortality associated with the use of atypical antipsychotic drugs in this patient population. Geriatric mental health experts participating in a 2006 consensus conference (Bethesda, Md., June 28-29) reviewed evidence on the safety and efficacy of antipsychotics, as well as nonpharmacologic approaches, in treating dementia-related symptoms of agitation and aggression. EVIDENCE/CONSENSUS PROCESS: The participants concluded that, while problems in clinical trial designs may have been one of the contributors to the failure to find a signal of drug efficacy, the findings related to drug safety should be taken seriously by clinicians in assessing the potential risks and benefits of treatment in a frail population, and in advising families about treatment. Information provided to patients and family members should be documented in the patient's chart. Drugs should be used only when nonpharmacologic approaches have failed to adequately control behavioral disruption. Participants also agreed that there is a need for an FDA-approved medication for the treatment of severe, persistent, or recurrent dementia-related symptoms of agitation and aggression (even in the absence of psychosis) that are unresponsive to nonpharmacologic intervention. This article outlines methodological enhancements to better evaluate treatment approaches in future registration trials and provides an algorithm for improving the treatment of these patients in nursing home and non-nursing home settings.
    The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 06/2008; 69(6):889-98. DOI:10.4088/JCP.v69n0602 · 5.14 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In elderly persons, antipsychotic drugs are clinically prescribed off-label for a number of disorders outside of their Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved indications (schizophrenia and bipolar disorder). The largest number of antipsychotic prescriptions in older adults is for behavioral disturbances associated with dementia. In April 2005, the FDA, based on a meta-analysis of 17 double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trials among elderly people with dementia, determined that atypical antipsychotics were associated with a significantly (1.6-1.7 times) greater mortality risk compared with placebo, and asked that drug manufacturers add a 'black box' warning to prescribing information for these drugs. Most deaths were due to either cardiac or infectious causes, the two most common immediate causes of death in dementia in general. Clinicians, patients, and caregivers are left with unclear choices of treatment for dementia patients with psychosis and/or severe agitation. Not only are psychosis and agitation common in persons with dementia but they also frequently cause considerable caregiver distress and hasten institutionalization of patients. At the same time, there is a paucity of evidence-based treatment alternatives to antipsychotics for this population. Thus, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that psychotropics other than antipsychotics represent an overall effective and safe, let alone better, treatment choice for psychosis or agitation in dementia; currently no such treatment has been approved by the FDA for these symptoms. Similarly, the data on the efficacy of specific psychosocial treatments in patients with dementia are limited and inconclusive. The goal of this White Paper is to review relevant issues and make clinical and research recommendations regarding the treatment of elderly dementia patients with psychosis and/or agitation. The role of shared decision making and caution in using pharmacotherapy for these patients is stressed.
    Neuropsychopharmacology 05/2008; 33(5):957-70. DOI:10.1038/sj.npp.1301492 · 7.83 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: How do we best teach clinical psychopharmacology to trainees and clinicians, so they not only increase their knowledge base, but even more importantly also learn to practice the most informed, evidence-based practice possible? This article attempts to answer this elusive question by compiling the individual and combined wisdom of 5 expert psychopharmacology teachers, each of whom draws on years of their own experiences as master educators. The topics covered include teaching clinical psychopharmacological competence in adult psychiatry residency training and in issues specific to both pediatric and geriatric populations, teaching physicians to improve clinical outcomes through continuing medical education, and new developments in adult-centered pedagogy and assessment. Although the focus of this article is on practical pearls found useful in teaching psychiatric residents and practicing physicians, the lessons learned are applicable to other groups of learners such as medical students, other trainees, and nonmedical clinicians. Our goal is to help educators produce competent psychopharmacology clinicians schooled in the latest evidence, capable of keeping up with new knowledge as it becomes available, and practicing both the art and science of expert clinical care.
    Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology 03/2008; 28(1):96-100. DOI:10.1097/jcp.0b013e3181603f6b · 3.76 Impact Factor
  • Carl Salzman
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Disturbed sleep is common in the elderly, who, as a group, take a disproportionately large number of hypnotic medications. Benzodiazepine hypnotics, as well as the newer benzodiazepine receptor agonists, are the primary treatments for these late-life sleep disorders and are effective and safe when used within recommended prescribing guidelines. The elderly also receive other psychiatric medications to induce sleep, although these are off-label uses not well supported by research literature. There is also no literature support for the use of over-the-counter sleep preparations, although both melatonin and a melatonin receptor agonist appear to be moderately effective and safe. Prescribing guidelines for the elderly continue to emphasize short-term, low-dose use, with short-half-life medications. Hypnotic drugs should be used in conjunction with nonmedication treatments, including appropriate sleep hygiene practice, and treatment of other medical or psychiatric causes of disturbed sleep.
    Harvard Review of Psychiatry 01/2008; 16(5):271-8. DOI:10.1080/10673220802432442 · 2.49 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The most common complaints of older adults concern their difficulty initiating or maintaining sleep, which results in insufficient sleep and an increased risk of falls, difficulty with concentration and memory, and overall decreased quality of life. Difficulties sleeping are not, however, an inevitable part of aging. Rather, the sleep complaints are often comorbid with medical and psychiatric illness, associated with the medications used to treat those illnesses, or the result of circadian rhythm changes or other sleep disorders. Health care professionals specializing in geriatrics need to learn to recognize the different causes of sleep disturbances in this population and to initiate appropriate treatment. Nonpharmacological treatment techniques are discussed; pharmacological treatments are discussed in a companion article.
    Harvard Review of Psychiatry 01/2008; 16(5):279-86. DOI:10.1080/10673220802432210 · 2.49 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Treatment studies of depression in residential care are limited. Reports of predictors of response are rare. In the largest nursing home prospective antidepressant trial reported, we examined predictors of response. This was a 12-week open-label study of mirtazapine orally disintegrating tablets performed in 30 US nursing homes. Subjects were men and women aged >or=70, with a Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) score >or=10, who had a depressive disorder that required antidepressant treatment. Mirtazapine was started at 15 mg at bedtime, and adjusted to 15-45 mg/day. A 16-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale was used to assess depression at baseline, weeks 2, 4, 8, and 12 or early termination. One hundred and twenty-four patients received at least one dose of study drug and of these, 119 had at least one post-drug assessment. Mean age was 82.9 years and 72% were female. Response rates at 12 weeks were 47% on the HAMD and 54% on the CGI. Age, sex, MMSE score, medical burden, history of prior depression, and baseline HAMD severity were not significantly associated with HAMD response (>or=50% improvement) and in most cases correlations were trivial, <0.1. Advanced age, medical burden, and cognitive impairment did not predict adverse events. In this sample of depressed nursing home residents treated with mirtazapine orally disintegrating tablets, advanced age, medical illness, and cognitive impairment did not predict response. The findings suggest that these variables need not be viewed as obstacles to treatment.
    International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry 10/2007; 22(10):999-1003. DOI:10.1002/gps.1779 · 3.09 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The authors summarize two special sessions focused on the teaching of psychopharmacology at the 2003 and 2004 annual meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ACNP). The focus was on whether "improving the teaching-learning process" in psychiatric residency programs could improve clinical practice. Problems of strategies and pedagogic techniques that have been used were presented from multiple perspectives (e.g., from a dean, department chair, training director, and former students). There was a consensus that action involving psychopharmacology organizations and the American Association of Directors of Residency Training in Psychiatry (AADPRT) was necessary to improve "evidence-based" competencies before graduation and to follow prescribing patterns into clinical practice to determine whether the standards of care could be improved.
    Academic Psychiatry 06/2007; 31(3):211-7. DOI:10.1176/appi.ap.31.3.211 · 0.81 Impact Factor
  • Carl Salzman
    JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association 07/2006; 296(2):167-168. DOI:10.1001/jama.296.2.167-c · 30.39 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We examined the effects of a prescription-monitoring program on benzodiazepine access among Medicaid enrollees living in neighborhoods of different racial composition. We used interrupted time series and logistic regression to analyze data from noninstitutionalized persons aged 18 years or older (N = 124 867) enrolled continuously in New York Medicaid 12 months before and 24 months and 7 years after initiation of the program. We used census data to identify the racial composition of the neighborhoods. Outcome measures were nonproblematic use (short term, within dosing guidelines), potentially problematic use (>120 days' use or more than twice the recommended dose), and pharmacy hopping (filling prescriptions for the same benzodiazepine in different pharmacies within 7 days). There was a sudden, sustained reduction in benzodiazepine use in all the neighborhoods after the program's introduction. Despite the lowest rates of baseline use, enrollees in predominantly (> or = 75%) black neighborhoods experienced the highest rates of discontinuation after introduction of the program. This difference remained 7 years after policy initiation. Compared with white participants, black participants were more likely to discontinue nonproblematic (odds ratio, 1.78; 95% confidence interval, 1.47-2.17) and potentially problematic (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.45-2.17) benzodiazepine use, after adjusting for sex, eligibility status, neighborhood poverty, and baseline use. The program almost completely eliminated pharmacy hopping in all racial groups, although less among white participants (82.6%) vs black participants (88.7%). A systematic benzodiazepine prescription-monitoring program reduced inappropriate prescribing, with a stronger effect in predominantly black neighborhoods despite lower baseline use. The policy may have resulted in an unintended decrease in nonproblematic use that disproportionately affects black populations.
    Archives of Internal Medicine 04/2006; 166(5):572-9. DOI:10.1001/archinte.166.5.572 · 13.25 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

2k Citations
352.76 Total Impact Points

Institutions

  • 1998–2014
    • Harvard University
      Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States
  • 1974–2014
    • Harvard Medical School
      • • Department of Psychiatry
      • • Commonwealth Research Center
      Boston, Massachusetts, United States
  • 2011–2012
    • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
      • Department of Psychiatry
      Boston, Massachusetts, United States
  • 2002
    • JSI Research & Training Institute, Inc.
      Boston, Massachusetts, United States
  • 1990
    • Commonwealth of Massachusetts
      Boston, Massachusetts, United States
    • Brown University
      Providence, Rhode Island, United States