OBJECTIVE: This study assessed patterns of psychopharmacological treatment for bipolar disorder. METHOD: Intake treatment data were examined for the first 500 patients in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) study (1998 to 1999). Diagnoses were assessed by using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV mood modules. Data on treatments were obtained by interviewing patients during the initial psychiatric examination. RESULTS: Of the 500 participants, 73.6 percent had bipolarI disorder, 23.0 percent had bipolar II disorder, and 3.4 percent had bipolar disorder not otherwise specified. Upon examination, 63.4 percent were euthymic, 24.6 percent were depressed, and 12.0 percent were experiencing manic, hypomanic, or mixed states. Standard mood stabilizers (lithium, valproate, or carbamazepine) were the most commonly prescribed class of drugs that participants were taking at intake (71.9 percent). The next most common class of agents was antidepressants (40.6 percent), followed by novel anticonvulsants (31.8 percent), second-generation neuroleptics (27.2 percent), and benzodiazepines (25.0 percent). Eleven percent of patients were treated with standard mood stabilizer monotherapy. These prescribing patterns were further analyzed by subtype of illness and compared with patterns in other clinical and community settings. CONCLUSION: In a large, well-characterized cross-sectional analysis of prescription patterns in the U.S. psychiatric academic setting, patients with bipolar disorder were primarily treated with standard mood stabilizers, followed by moderate use of antidepressants, novel anticonvulsants, and second-generation neuroleptics. Results can be useful in understanding the current clinical standard of care, as well as in guiding research studies toward areas in which there is a relative absence of evidence to inform clinical practice. Studies of longitudinal prescribing patterns in bipolar disorder are also needed.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: This study assessed patterns of psychopharmacological treatment for bipolar disorder. METHOD: Intake treatment data were examined for the first 500 patients in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) study (1998 to 1999). Diagnoses were assessed by using the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV mood modules. Data on treatments were obtained by interviewing patients during the initial psychiatric examination. RESULTS: Of the 500 participants, 73.6 percent had bipolar I disorder, 23.0 percent had bipolar II disorder, and 3.4 percent had bipolar disorder not otherwise specified. Upon examination, 63.4 percent were euthymic, 24.6 percent were depressed, and 12.0 percent were experiencing manic, hypomanic, or mixed states. Standard mood stabilizers (lithium, valproate, or carbamazepine) were the most commonly prescribed class of drugs that participants were taking at intake (71.9 percent). The next most common class of agents was antidepressants (40.6 percent), followed by novel anticonvulsants (31.8 percent), second-generation neuroleptics (27.2 percent), and benzodiazepines (25.0 percent). Eleven percent of patients were treated with standard mood stabilizer monotherapy. These prescribing patterns were further analyzed by subtype of illness and compared with patterns in other clinical and community settings. CONCLUSION: In a large, well-characterized cross-sectional analysis of prescription patterns in the U.S. psychiatric academic setting, patients with bipolar disorder were primarily treated with standard mood stabilizers, followed by moderate use of antidepressants, novel anticonvulsants, and second-generation neuroleptics. Results can be useful in understanding the current clinical standard of care, as well as in guiding research studies toward areas in which there is a relative absence of evidence to inform clinical practice. Studies of longitudinal prescribing patterns in bipolar disorder are also needed.
Authors: Keming Gao; David E Kemp; Zuowei Wang; Stephen J Ganocy; Carla Conroy; Marry Beth Serrano; Martha Sajatovic; Robert L Findling; Joseph R Calabrese Journal: Psychopharmacol Bull Date: 2010
Authors: Dominic Hodgkin; Elizabeth L Merrick; Peggy L O'Brien; Thomas G McGuire; Sue Lee; Thilo Deckersbach; Andrew A Nierenberg Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2016-06-21 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: John C Fortney; Jeffrey M Pyne; Susan Ward-Jones; Ian M Bennett; Joan Diehl; Kellee Farris; Joseph M Cerimele; Geoffrey M Curran Journal: Fam Syst Health Date: 2018-05-28 Impact factor: 1.950
Authors: Dominic Hodgkin; Joanna Volpe-Vartanian; Elizabeth L Merrick; Constance M Horgan; Andrew A Nierenberg; Richard G Frank; Sue Lee Journal: Health Econ Date: 2011-04-19 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Alisa B Busch; Haiden A Huskamp; Brian Neelon; Tim Manning; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Thomas G McGuire Journal: Med Care Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Mona P Potter; Howard Y Liu; Michael C Monuteaux; Carly S Henderson; Janet Wozniak; Timothy E Wilens; Joseph Biederman Journal: J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 2.576