Search

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.

Objective: 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., Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusions: 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.

Objective: To address issues concerning potential treatment-emergent "suicidality," a consensus conference was convened March 23-24, 2009., Participants: 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., Evidence: 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., Consensus Process: 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., Conclusions: 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., (Copyright 2010 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: To address issues concerning potential treatment-emergent "suicidality," a consensus conference was convened March 23-24, 2009., Participants: 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., Evidence: 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., Consensus Process: 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., Conclusions: 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., (Copyright 2010 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

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.

Objective: 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., Method: 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)., Conclusions: 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.

Objective: To consider the limited usefulness of expert guidelines for teaching psychopharmacology., Method: Potential problems using expert guidelines for teaching psychopharmacology are reviewed., Results: Expert guidelines are an important contribution to the growth of evidence-based psychiatry. As such, they may also be used to teach fundamentals of psychopharmacology. Their use as teaching materials may be limited by their reliance on Diagnostic and Statistical manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) diagnoses, especially for patients with unclear or complicated diagnosing pictures. Biases may also exist in their construction and the data from which they are derived. Other problems include overemphasis on newly released medications and the potential for teaching a "cookbook" approach to psychopharmacology treatment, limiting the development of the "art" of psychopharmacology practice., Conclusion: Although expert guidelines may be a useful tool for teaching psychopharmacology, they also may limit the teaching of psychopharmacology. Comprehensive psychopharmacology training programs that use expert guidelines as teaching tools should emphasize critical reading of clinical trials literature and teaching the use of all psychotropic drugs. Training in the art of psychopharmacology including, nonpharmacological aspects of drug treatment, should also be included.

Objectives: To review progress made during the past decade in late-life mood disorders and to identify areas of unmet need in health care delivery and research., Participants: The Consensus Development Panel consisted of experts in late-life mood disorders, geriatrics, primary care, mental health and aging policy research, and advocacy., Evidence: (1) Literature reviews addressing risk factors, prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and delivery of services and (2) opinions and experiences of primary care and mental health care providers, policy analysts, and advocates., Consensus Process: The Consensus Development Panel listened to presentations and participated in discussions. Workgroups considered the evidence and prepared preliminary statements. Workgroup leaders presented drafts for discussion by the Consensus Development Panel. The final document was reviewed and edited to incorporate input from the entire Consensus Development Panel., Conclusions: Despite the availability of safe and efficacious treatments, mood disorders remain a significant health care issue for the elderly and are associated with disability, functional decline, diminished quality of life, mortality from comorbid medical conditions or suicide, demands on caregivers, and increased service utilization. Discriminatory coverage and reimbursement policies for mental health care are a challenge for the elderly, especially those with modest incomes, and for clinicians. Minorities are particularly underserved. Access to mental health care services for most elderly individuals is inadequate, and coordination of services is lacking. There is an immediate need for collaboration among patients, families, researchers, clinicians, governmental agencies, and third-party payers to improve diagnosis, treatment, and delivery of services for elderly persons with mood disorders.

A computer-based literature search of all antidepressant and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) treatment studies published between 1995 and September 2001 was conducted. In addition, a review of published chapters, review articles, and metaanalyses was also conducted. Articles were categorized into those reporting comparative studies, those in which the therapeutic agent was not compared with another, articles about ECT, and review articles. These recent publications support the conclusions from prior reviews that antidepressants and ECT are effective and safe treatments for depressed elderly patients. Differences in efficacy and side effects appear to be slight among the various types of antidepressants. Research studies of depressed elderly increased markedly since 1995 compared with all previous years although more studies are still necessary.