万花筒。

Derek K Tracy, Dan W Joyce, Dawn N Albertson, Sukhwinder S Shergill
{"title":"万花筒。","authors":"Derek K Tracy, Dan W Joyce, Dawn N Albertson, Sukhwinder S Shergill","doi":"10.1192/bjp.2021.160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The majority of people treated with antidepressants receive them in primary care, but there are limited data on medication maintenance or discontinuation in this setting. Nevertheless, much of the public discourse centres on primary care practices, with debate on ‘over-medicalisation of sadness in life’ and concern about the doubling of the prevalence of antidepressant prescriptions over the past couple of decades (in truth, much of the latter is due to longer treatment regimens, better aligning to national guidelines). Lewis et al undertook a pragmatic double-blinded randomised controlled trial across 150 UK general practices, recruiting 478 participants (the mean age was 54 years and three-quarters were women). All had a history of at least two depressive episodes and had taken antidepressants for at least 2 years but now felt well enough to consider stopping them. Only those on therapeutic doses of citalopram, sertraline, fluoxetine or mirtazapine were included, owing to the frequency of prescription of these antidepressants in primary care and their more limited discontinuation symptoms, to help mask blinding. Participants were either continued on treatment or put on a tapered discontinuation programme over several months via a pill placebo. Adherence to this across the following year was 70% and 52% in the respective groups. By the 52-week primary cut-off point, 39% of the maintenance group had relapsed, compared with 56% of the discontinuation cohort. By the end of the study, almost two-fifths of those in the discontinuation arm had been recommenced on medication. These data remind us that, unfortunately, relapse is common in depression whatever one does; clearly, they also show that many people can discontinue medication safely, but remaining on treatment enhances outcomes. The findings thus do not definitively guide the patient or clinician in ‘what to do’, but they help inform such discussions with best evidence on relative risks. It is particularly helpful to have such research in primary care, where the majority of such conversations will occur, and with non-specialised patient cohorts more reflective of ‘real world’ practice.","PeriodicalId":520791,"journal":{"name":"The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science","volume":" ","pages":"701-702"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Kaleidoscope.\",\"authors\":\"Derek K Tracy, Dan W Joyce, Dawn N Albertson, Sukhwinder S Shergill\",\"doi\":\"10.1192/bjp.2021.160\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The majority of people treated with antidepressants receive them in primary care, but there are limited data on medication maintenance or discontinuation in this setting. Nevertheless, much of the public discourse centres on primary care practices, with debate on ‘over-medicalisation of sadness in life’ and concern about the doubling of the prevalence of antidepressant prescriptions over the past couple of decades (in truth, much of the latter is due to longer treatment regimens, better aligning to national guidelines). Lewis et al undertook a pragmatic double-blinded randomised controlled trial across 150 UK general practices, recruiting 478 participants (the mean age was 54 years and three-quarters were women). All had a history of at least two depressive episodes and had taken antidepressants for at least 2 years but now felt well enough to consider stopping them. Only those on therapeutic doses of citalopram, sertraline, fluoxetine or mirtazapine were included, owing to the frequency of prescription of these antidepressants in primary care and their more limited discontinuation symptoms, to help mask blinding. Participants were either continued on treatment or put on a tapered discontinuation programme over several months via a pill placebo. Adherence to this across the following year was 70% and 52% in the respective groups. By the 52-week primary cut-off point, 39% of the maintenance group had relapsed, compared with 56% of the discontinuation cohort. By the end of the study, almost two-fifths of those in the discontinuation arm had been recommenced on medication. These data remind us that, unfortunately, relapse is common in depression whatever one does; clearly, they also show that many people can discontinue medication safely, but remaining on treatment enhances outcomes. The findings thus do not definitively guide the patient or clinician in ‘what to do’, but they help inform such discussions with best evidence on relative risks. It is particularly helpful to have such research in primary care, where the majority of such conversations will occur, and with non-specialised patient cohorts more reflective of ‘real world’ practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":520791,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"701-702\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2021.160\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British journal of psychiatry : the journal of mental science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2021.160","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Kaleidoscope.
The majority of people treated with antidepressants receive them in primary care, but there are limited data on medication maintenance or discontinuation in this setting. Nevertheless, much of the public discourse centres on primary care practices, with debate on ‘over-medicalisation of sadness in life’ and concern about the doubling of the prevalence of antidepressant prescriptions over the past couple of decades (in truth, much of the latter is due to longer treatment regimens, better aligning to national guidelines). Lewis et al undertook a pragmatic double-blinded randomised controlled trial across 150 UK general practices, recruiting 478 participants (the mean age was 54 years and three-quarters were women). All had a history of at least two depressive episodes and had taken antidepressants for at least 2 years but now felt well enough to consider stopping them. Only those on therapeutic doses of citalopram, sertraline, fluoxetine or mirtazapine were included, owing to the frequency of prescription of these antidepressants in primary care and their more limited discontinuation symptoms, to help mask blinding. Participants were either continued on treatment or put on a tapered discontinuation programme over several months via a pill placebo. Adherence to this across the following year was 70% and 52% in the respective groups. By the 52-week primary cut-off point, 39% of the maintenance group had relapsed, compared with 56% of the discontinuation cohort. By the end of the study, almost two-fifths of those in the discontinuation arm had been recommenced on medication. These data remind us that, unfortunately, relapse is common in depression whatever one does; clearly, they also show that many people can discontinue medication safely, but remaining on treatment enhances outcomes. The findings thus do not definitively guide the patient or clinician in ‘what to do’, but they help inform such discussions with best evidence on relative risks. It is particularly helpful to have such research in primary care, where the majority of such conversations will occur, and with non-specialised patient cohorts more reflective of ‘real world’ practice.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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