Delving into the Perception, Use, and Context of Duloxetine in Clinical Practice: An Analysis Based on the Experience of Healthcare Professionals.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Oscar Fraile-Martinez, Cielo Garcia-Montero, Miguel Angel Alvarez-Mon, Miguel A Ortega, Melchor Alvarez-Mon, Javier Quintero
{"title":"Delving into the Perception, Use, and Context of Duloxetine in Clinical Practice: An Analysis Based on the Experience of Healthcare Professionals.","authors":"Oscar Fraile-Martinez, Cielo Garcia-Montero, Miguel Angel Alvarez-Mon, Miguel A Ortega, Melchor Alvarez-Mon, Javier Quintero","doi":"10.3390/brainsci15070757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Duloxetine is widely used for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), and various types of neuropathic pain. While its efficacy is well documented in clinical trials, less is known about how it is perceived and utilized in routine psychiatric practice. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a cross-sectional observational study involving 80 psychiatrists from Spain to assess real-world clinical attitudes toward duloxetine.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants completed a 20-item multiple-choice questionnaire that examined familiarity, perceived efficacy in multiple conditions (MDD, GAD, neuropathic pain, somatization, and quality of life), and perspectives on tolerability, safety, adherence, and overall satisfaction.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Survey results indicated that a large majority of psychiatrists frequently prescribe duloxetine, particularly for patients with MDD and comorbid chronic pain. Notably, 94% rated it as either \"more effective\" or \"much more effective\" for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. Psychiatrists reported a high perceived efficacy of duloxetine: 94% rated it as \"more effective\" or \"much more effective\" for diabetic peripheral neuropathy, and 93% gave similarly positive ratings for general neuropathic pain. For somatization, 70% found it \"effective\" or \"very effective\", and 83% observed improvements in quality of life for many of their patients. Psychiatrists generally reported favorable perceptions of duloxetine's tolerability profile: 97.5% rated it as the antidepressant associated with the least weight gain, and 82.5% perceived fewer sexual side effects compared to other options. Sedation and gastrointestinal side effects were generally considered mild or less severe. In terms of treatment adherence, 69% rated it as \"better\" or \"much better\" than other antidepressants, and 80% found its combination with other antidepressants to be \"favorable\" or \"very favorable\". Overall satisfaction was high, with 99% of psychiatrists reporting being either \"satisfied\" or \"very satisfied\" with its use. The side effect profile was generally viewed as manageable, with low perceived rates of weight gain, sedation, and sexual dysfunction. Furthermore, 96% of respondents expressed a willingness to recommend duloxetine to their colleagues.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Psychiatrists reported highly favorable attitudes toward duloxetine, viewing it as a flexible treatment option in routine care. However, these findings reflect clinicians' subjective perceptions rather than objective clinical outcomes and should be interpreted accordingly.</p>","PeriodicalId":9095,"journal":{"name":"Brain Sciences","volume":"15 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12293169/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci15070757","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Duloxetine is widely used for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), and various types of neuropathic pain. While its efficacy is well documented in clinical trials, less is known about how it is perceived and utilized in routine psychiatric practice. To address this knowledge gap, we conducted a cross-sectional observational study involving 80 psychiatrists from Spain to assess real-world clinical attitudes toward duloxetine.

Methods: Participants completed a 20-item multiple-choice questionnaire that examined familiarity, perceived efficacy in multiple conditions (MDD, GAD, neuropathic pain, somatization, and quality of life), and perspectives on tolerability, safety, adherence, and overall satisfaction.

Results: Survey results indicated that a large majority of psychiatrists frequently prescribe duloxetine, particularly for patients with MDD and comorbid chronic pain. Notably, 94% rated it as either "more effective" or "much more effective" for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. Psychiatrists reported a high perceived efficacy of duloxetine: 94% rated it as "more effective" or "much more effective" for diabetic peripheral neuropathy, and 93% gave similarly positive ratings for general neuropathic pain. For somatization, 70% found it "effective" or "very effective", and 83% observed improvements in quality of life for many of their patients. Psychiatrists generally reported favorable perceptions of duloxetine's tolerability profile: 97.5% rated it as the antidepressant associated with the least weight gain, and 82.5% perceived fewer sexual side effects compared to other options. Sedation and gastrointestinal side effects were generally considered mild or less severe. In terms of treatment adherence, 69% rated it as "better" or "much better" than other antidepressants, and 80% found its combination with other antidepressants to be "favorable" or "very favorable". Overall satisfaction was high, with 99% of psychiatrists reporting being either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with its use. The side effect profile was generally viewed as manageable, with low perceived rates of weight gain, sedation, and sexual dysfunction. Furthermore, 96% of respondents expressed a willingness to recommend duloxetine to their colleagues.

Conclusions: Psychiatrists reported highly favorable attitudes toward duloxetine, viewing it as a flexible treatment option in routine care. However, these findings reflect clinicians' subjective perceptions rather than objective clinical outcomes and should be interpreted accordingly.

在临床实践中深入研究度洛西汀的感知、使用和背景:基于医疗保健专业人员经验的分析。
背景与目的:度洛西汀被广泛用于治疗重度抑郁症(MDD)、广泛性焦虑症(GAD)和各种类型的神经性疼痛。虽然它的有效性在临床试验中得到了充分的证明,但在日常精神病学实践中,人们对它的认知和利用却知之甚少。为了解决这一知识差距,我们进行了一项横断面观察性研究,包括来自西班牙的80名精神病学家,以评估现实世界中临床对度洛西汀的态度。方法:参与者完成一份20项多项选择问卷,考察熟悉程度、在多种情况下(重度抑郁症、广泛性焦虑症、神经性疼痛、躯体化和生活质量)的感知疗效,以及耐受性、安全性、依从性和总体满意度。结果:调查结果表明,绝大多数精神科医生经常开度洛西汀,特别是对重度抑郁症和共病慢性疼痛患者。值得注意的是,94%的人认为它对糖尿病周围神经性疼痛“更有效”或“更有效”。精神病学家报告了度洛西汀的高疗效:94%的人认为它对糖尿病周围神经病变“更有效”或“更有效”,93%的人对一般神经性疼痛给出了类似的正面评价。对于躯体化,70%的人认为它“有效”或“非常有效”,83%的人观察到许多病人的生活质量得到了改善。精神科医生普遍对度洛西汀的耐受性持乐观态度:97.5%的人认为它是与体重增加最少相关的抗抑郁药,82.5%的人认为与其他选择相比,度洛西汀的性副作用更少。镇静和胃肠道副作用通常被认为是轻微的或不太严重的。在治疗依从性方面,69%的人认为它比其他抗抑郁药“更好”或“好得多”,80%的人认为它与其他抗抑郁药的组合“有利”或“非常有利”。总体满意度很高,99%的精神科医生报告对其使用“满意”或“非常满意”。副作用通常被认为是可控的,体重增加、镇静和性功能障碍的发生率较低。此外,96%的受访者表示愿意向他们的同事推荐度洛西汀。结论:精神科医生报告了对度洛西汀的高度支持态度,将其视为常规护理中灵活的治疗选择。然而,这些发现反映的是临床医生的主观感受,而不是客观的临床结果,应该据此解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Brain Sciences
Brain Sciences Neuroscience-General Neuroscience
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
9.10%
发文量
1472
审稿时长
18.71 days
期刊介绍: Brain Sciences (ISSN 2076-3425) is a peer-reviewed scientific journal that publishes original articles, critical reviews, research notes and short communications in the areas of cognitive neuroscience, developmental neuroscience, molecular and cellular neuroscience, neural engineering, neuroimaging, neurolinguistics, neuropathy, systems neuroscience, and theoretical and computational neuroscience. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. The full experimental details must be provided so that the results can be reproduced. Electronic files or software regarding the full details of the calculation and experimental procedure, if unable to be published in a normal way, can be deposited as supplementary material.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信