锂,抗惊厥药,抗精神病药,抗抑郁药的临床处方主要情绪障碍。

IF 2.8 2区 医学 Q2 PSYCHIATRY
Carolina Hernandorena, Micaela Dines, Alessandro Miola, Nicolas A Nuñez, Leonardo Tondo, Ross J Baldessarini, Gustavo H Vázquez
{"title":"锂,抗惊厥药,抗精神病药,抗抑郁药的临床处方主要情绪障碍。","authors":"Carolina Hernandorena, Micaela Dines, Alessandro Miola, Nicolas A Nuñez, Leonardo Tondo, Ross J Baldessarini, Gustavo H Vázquez","doi":"10.1186/s40345-025-00381-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As choices of treatments for bipolar disorder types I (BD1) and II (BD2) and major depressive disorder (MDD) continue to evolve, we reviewed studies directly comparing current clinical usage rates of medicinal treatments for these disorders.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Comprehensive searching of five literature databases through March 2024 identified reports on clinical drug prescription rates for BD and MDD patients. Rates were summarized and compared by random-effects meta-analyses with R-Studio software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 18 reports (2006-2023) supported comparisons of clinically prescribed treatments for 17,572 mood-disorder patients (mean age 42.8 years; 7936 BD1 age 43.2 years; 6309 BD2, age 43.3; 3327 MDD, age 40.0). Among diagnoses: (BD1 vs. BD2 vs. MDD), treatments differed as: lithium (54.4% vs. 38.0% vs. 6.78%), second-generation antipsychotics (41.6% vs. 22.3% vs. 15.9%), valproate (25.7% vs. 21.5%; no MDD data), lamotrigine (13.1% vs. 27.2%; no MDD data), and antidepressants (34.9% vs. 46.4% vs. 77.5%). International use of lithium for BD appeared to increase between 2006 and 2023.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Outcomes were heterogeneous and requiring inclusion of lithium may introduce selection bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Clinical treatment selections for BD1, BD2, and MDD patients differed substantially. Use of modern antipsychotics is undergoing major increases for both BD and MDD; optimal use of antidepressants for BD remains uncertain; and notably, international use of lithium tended to increase in the present data.</p>","PeriodicalId":13944,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Bipolar Disorders","volume":"13 1","pages":"24"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12240914/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical prescription of lithium, anticonvulsants antipsychotics, and antidepressants for major mood disorders.\",\"authors\":\"Carolina Hernandorena, Micaela Dines, Alessandro Miola, Nicolas A Nuñez, Leonardo Tondo, Ross J Baldessarini, Gustavo H Vázquez\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40345-025-00381-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As choices of treatments for bipolar disorder types I (BD1) and II (BD2) and major depressive disorder (MDD) continue to evolve, we reviewed studies directly comparing current clinical usage rates of medicinal treatments for these disorders.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Comprehensive searching of five literature databases through March 2024 identified reports on clinical drug prescription rates for BD and MDD patients. Rates were summarized and compared by random-effects meta-analyses with R-Studio software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 18 reports (2006-2023) supported comparisons of clinically prescribed treatments for 17,572 mood-disorder patients (mean age 42.8 years; 7936 BD1 age 43.2 years; 6309 BD2, age 43.3; 3327 MDD, age 40.0). Among diagnoses: (BD1 vs. BD2 vs. MDD), treatments differed as: lithium (54.4% vs. 38.0% vs. 6.78%), second-generation antipsychotics (41.6% vs. 22.3% vs. 15.9%), valproate (25.7% vs. 21.5%; no MDD data), lamotrigine (13.1% vs. 27.2%; no MDD data), and antidepressants (34.9% vs. 46.4% vs. 77.5%). International use of lithium for BD appeared to increase between 2006 and 2023.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Outcomes were heterogeneous and requiring inclusion of lithium may introduce selection bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Clinical treatment selections for BD1, BD2, and MDD patients differed substantially. Use of modern antipsychotics is undergoing major increases for both BD and MDD; optimal use of antidepressants for BD remains uncertain; and notably, international use of lithium tended to increase in the present data.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13944,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Bipolar Disorders\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"24\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12240914/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Bipolar Disorders\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40345-025-00381-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Bipolar Disorders","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40345-025-00381-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:随着I型双相情感障碍(BD1)和II型双相情感障碍(BD2)以及重度抑郁症(MDD)治疗方法的选择不断发展,我们回顾了一些研究,直接比较了这些疾病目前药物治疗的临床使用率。方法:综合检索截至2024年3月的5个文献数据库,确定BD和MDD患者的临床药物处方率报告。用R-Studio软件进行随机效应荟萃分析,总结和比较发病率。结果:共有18篇报告(2006-2023)支持对17572例情绪障碍患者(平均年龄42.8岁;7936 BD1年龄43.2岁;6309 BD2,年龄43.3岁;3327 MDD,年龄40.0)。在诊断中(BD1 vs BD2 vs MDD),治疗方法不同:锂(54.4% vs. 38.0% vs. 6.78%),第二代抗精神病药物(41.6% vs. 22.3% vs. 15.9%),丙戊酸盐(25.7% vs. 21.5%;无MDD数据),拉莫三嗪(13.1% vs. 27.2%;无重度抑郁症数据)和抗抑郁药物(34.9% vs. 46.4% vs. 77.5%)。2006年至2023年间,国际上对锂的使用似乎有所增加。局限性:结果是异质性的,需要纳入锂可能会导致选择偏倚。结论:BD1、BD2和MDD患者的临床治疗选择存在显著差异。对于双相障碍和重度抑郁症,现代抗精神病药物的使用正在大幅增加;抗抑郁药对双相障碍的最佳使用仍不确定;值得注意的是,在目前的数据中,锂的国际使用量有增加的趋势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical prescription of lithium, anticonvulsants antipsychotics, and antidepressants for major mood disorders.

Background: As choices of treatments for bipolar disorder types I (BD1) and II (BD2) and major depressive disorder (MDD) continue to evolve, we reviewed studies directly comparing current clinical usage rates of medicinal treatments for these disorders.

Methods: Comprehensive searching of five literature databases through March 2024 identified reports on clinical drug prescription rates for BD and MDD patients. Rates were summarized and compared by random-effects meta-analyses with R-Studio software.

Results: A total of 18 reports (2006-2023) supported comparisons of clinically prescribed treatments for 17,572 mood-disorder patients (mean age 42.8 years; 7936 BD1 age 43.2 years; 6309 BD2, age 43.3; 3327 MDD, age 40.0). Among diagnoses: (BD1 vs. BD2 vs. MDD), treatments differed as: lithium (54.4% vs. 38.0% vs. 6.78%), second-generation antipsychotics (41.6% vs. 22.3% vs. 15.9%), valproate (25.7% vs. 21.5%; no MDD data), lamotrigine (13.1% vs. 27.2%; no MDD data), and antidepressants (34.9% vs. 46.4% vs. 77.5%). International use of lithium for BD appeared to increase between 2006 and 2023.

Limitations: Outcomes were heterogeneous and requiring inclusion of lithium may introduce selection bias.

Conclusions: Clinical treatment selections for BD1, BD2, and MDD patients differed substantially. Use of modern antipsychotics is undergoing major increases for both BD and MDD; optimal use of antidepressants for BD remains uncertain; and notably, international use of lithium tended to increase in the present data.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Bipolar Disorders
International Journal of Bipolar Disorders Medicine-Psychiatry and Mental Health
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
26
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Bipolar Disorders is a peer-reviewed, open access online journal published under the SpringerOpen brand. It publishes contributions from the broad range of clinical, psychological and biological research in bipolar disorders. It is the official journal of the ECNP-ENBREC (European Network of Bipolar Research Expert Centres ) Bipolar Disorders Network, the International Group for the study of Lithium Treated Patients (IGSLi) and the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Bipolare Störungen (DGBS) and invites clinicians and researchers from around the globe to submit original research papers, short research communications, reviews, guidelines, case reports and letters to the editor that help to enhance understanding of bipolar disorders.
×
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