Shrinks In Sneakers

Tag: mental health is health

  • Breaking the Cycle: Effective Strategies to Prevent Self-Injurious Behavior (SIB)

    Breaking the Cycle: Effective Strategies to Prevent Self-Injurious Behavior (SIB)

    This post comes from another real-world case that I frequently encounter in clinical practice. Self-injurious behavior (SIB) is common in the inpatient care setting and the strategies to prevent it are mostly behavioral. Many patients and families are also looking for pharmacological options. Here are some of the more common options and recommendations for treating SIB.

    Behavioral Interventions

    1. Functional Behavior Analysis (FBA): Start with an FBA to understand why the self-injury is occurring (e.g., to gain attention, avoid demands, or self-soothe). This guides intervention planning.
    2. Positive Reinforcement and Skill Building: Reinforce alternative, adaptive behaviors that fulfill the same needs as self-injury, such as communication skills (e.g., teaching to request attention) or self-soothing techniques.
    3. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT): For individuals able to engage in talk therapy, CBT can address underlying thoughts and emotions driving SIB, such as distress intolerance, perfectionism, or negative self-beliefs.
    4. Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT): DBT is particularly effective for reducing SIB, especially in borderline personality disorder. It combines emotional regulation, mindfulness, and distress tolerance skills.
    5. Environmental Modifications: Minimizing triggers in the individual’s environment can help reduce occurrences. This might include changes in routines, avoiding overstimulation, or modifying demands.
    6. Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA): Techniques from ABA, like differential reinforcement of other behaviors (DRO) or non-contingent reinforcement (NCR), can reduce self-injury by decreasing its functional value.

    Pharmacological Interventions

    1. SSRIs (Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors): Useful if self-injury is driven by anxiety, depression, or obsessive-compulsive tendencies. SSRIs can help stabilize mood and reduce anxiety, lessening the need for SIB.
    2. Antipsychotics: Atypical antipsychotics, such as risperidone or aripiprazole, are sometimes effective, particularly in autism spectrum disorders or severe intellectual disabilities. However, weigh these benefits against side effects, especially for long-term use.
    3. Mood Stabilizers: Medications like lithium, lamotrigine, or valproate can help regulate mood fluctuations that contribute to SIB. Lithium, in particular, has shown effectiveness in reducing aggression and impulsivity.
    4. Naltrexone: This opioid antagonist can be effective in cases where SIB is hypothesized to release endogenous opioids, providing a calming effect.
    5. Beta-blockers (e.g., propranolol): In cases of high impulsivity or aggression linked to SIB, beta-blockers can reduce physiological arousal, lessening the drive for self-injury.
    6. Clonidine or Guanfacine: These medications, which target the noradrenergic system, can help reduce impulsivity and aggression in patients with ADHD or autism, indirectly lowering self-injury.

    Choosing the best approach depends on the individual’s specific triggers, co-occurring conditions, and underlying motivations for SIB. Integrating both behavioral and medication interventions, while monitoring closely for effectiveness and side effects, often yields the best outcomes.

  • Is Clozapine Disease Modifying?

    Is Clozapine Disease Modifying?

    This post comes from my real world experience with treating many patients with treatment resistant schizophrenia. I wanted to create a consolidated post that goes over what we know about the benefits of clozapine in schizophrenia treatment as well as what we do not know. Clozapine is unique among antipsychotics due to its superior efficacy in treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS), but whether it is disease-modifying remains debated.

    1. Superior Long-term Outcomes in TRS

    • Reduced Relapse Rates: Clozapine has been shown to reduce relapse rates more effectively than other antipsychotics. For instance, a large cohort study found lower rates of rehospitalization for patients on clozapine compared to those on other second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs). The lower relapse rates may suggest stabilization of disease progression.
    • Cognitive Benefits: Several studies report improvements or stabilization in cognitive function in patients on clozapine, which contrasts with the cognitive decline often observed in schizophrenia. The preservation or improvement in cognitive function could indicate a modification of disease trajectory.

    2. Impact on Mortality and Suicidality

    • Reduced Mortality: Long-term use of clozapine has been associated with lower mortality rates in schizophrenia, both due to reduced suicide risk and fewer overall medical complications compared to other antipsychotics.
    • Suicide Prevention: Clozapine is the only antipsychotic shown to significantly reduce suicidality in schizophrenia patients, which may point to broader effects on disease severity and progression.

    3. Neurobiological Effects

    • Neuroprotection: Preclinical and human imaging studies suggest clozapine might have neuroprotective properties. Some animal models and neuroimaging studies indicate that clozapine can increase neurogenesis, reduce oxidative stress, and potentially protect against the neurodegeneration associated with chronic schizophrenia.
    • Synaptic Remodeling: There is some evidence that clozapine might positively influence synaptic plasticity. Studies suggest it might normalize the synaptic dysfunction seen in schizophrenia, which could theoretically have a disease-modifying effect by restoring some aspects of brain connectivity and function.

    4. Delay in Onset of TRS

    • Intervention Timing: There is emerging evidence suggesting that earlier introduction of clozapine (when TRS is identified) might lead to better long-term functional outcomes. This hints that clozapine could modify the disease course if used earlier in resistant cases, though direct evidence of disease modification remains scarce.

    5. Chronicity and Brain Volume Loss

    • Potential for Reduced Brain Volume Loss: Some studies indicate that clozapine may be associated with less gray matter loss over time compared to other antipsychotics. This could imply a reduction in the neuroprogressive aspects of schizophrenia.

    Limitations in Evidence

    While clozapine shows many positive outcomes, definitive evidence proving it is “disease-modifying” remains elusive:

    • Lack of RCTs Focused on Disease Modification: Most clinical trials focus on symptomatic improvement rather than long-term neurobiological changes or functional outcomes.
    • Challenges in Measuring Disease Progression: Schizophrenia is a complex, heterogeneous disorder with no clear biomarkers for progression, making it difficult to measure whether clozapine alters the underlying disease process.

    In summary, while there is compelling evidence that clozapine leads to better long-term outcomes and may have neuroprotective effects, proving it as a true disease-modifying treatment in schizophrenia requires more robust, long-term studies focused specifically on changes in the disease course.

  • The Culture of Burnout in Modern Medicine

    The Culture of Burnout in Modern Medicine

    Modern medicine has given rise to a new culture of burnout. As physicians, we are already high achievers—it’s a prerequisite to make it through the intense training. However, this constant push for relentless productivity often leads to feelings of exhaustion and disconnection. In medicine, the focus is always on doing more—seeing more patients, finishing more tasks, and achieving more outcomes each day.

    With digital technology, we’re constantly connected, always on call. Patients, colleagues, and administrators reach out through calls, texts, and emails at all hours. The pressure to respond immediately leads to guilt when we can’t meet these demands, even when they’re unreasonable. The result? We push ourselves beyond our limits, sacrificing our own well-being in the process.

    This grind leaves little room to rest or tend to our mental health. The importance of downtime is overlooked, even though it’s essential for long-term sustainability in our profession. But it’s time we rethink the culture of busyness and productivity. We need to start focusing on slowing down, with an emphasis on not staying busy for the sake of being busy.

    If you’re like me, you’ve probably tried this, only to find your mind immediately wandering to the next thing you need to do. The challenge is real. But to reclaim a deeper sense of meaning and purpose in both our personal and professional lives, we must commit to this change. By slowing down, we can begin to find more peace, love, and joy in our day-to-day activities.

    Let’s reclaim our lives—it’s long overdue

  • Non-Harvard Trained: Real Care, Real Results

    Non-Harvard Trained: Real Care, Real Results

    I constantly come across the phrase “Harvard-trained” in people’s bios. Sure, it brings instant brand recognition and credibility. But in reality, being trained at a prestigious institution—even one like Harvard—doesn’t automatically mean better skills or superior patient care.

    In psychiatry, quality care is shaped by much more than where someone trained. It comes from clinical experience, empathy, lifelong learning, and the ability to genuinely connect with patients. These are the factors that truly define the impact we make.

    While training is important, the real measure of a psychiatrist’s ability is in the care they provide and the outcomes they achieve. Psychiatry is such a nuanced field that no amount of prestige can substitute for hands-on experience and genuine compassion.

    It’s unfortunate that where someone trained is often used as a superficial marker of competence, overshadowing the true work that goes into patient care. Personally, I’d reject a Harvard offer, because for me, it’s about one thing: providing the highest level of care possible, every single day.

  • Unintended Outcomes After FDA Pediatric Antidepressant Warnings

    Unintended Outcomes After FDA Pediatric Antidepressant Warnings

    The article “Intended and Unintended Outcomes After FDA Pediatric Antidepressant Warnings: A Systematic Review” examines the effects of the FDA’s 2003-2004 black box warning on antidepressants regarding the risk of increased suicidal thoughts and behaviors in children and adolescents.

    Intended Outcome:

    • The FDA issued the warning to ensure greater awareness of potential risks, encouraging careful monitoring of pediatric patients taking antidepressants.
    • The goal was to reduce suicidal behaviors potentially linked to antidepressant use in younger populations.

    Unintended Outcomes:

    • The warning led to a significant drop in antidepressant prescriptions for children and adolescents.
    • There was a corresponding increase in untreated depression, which may have led to higher rates of suicide attempts and worsening mental health outcomes in some cases.
    • Reduced prescriptions were associated with a decrease in diagnosis and treatment of mood disorders in pediatric populations.
    • The warning inadvertently caused confusion among healthcare providers and parents, often resulting in delays in seeking treatment for depression or anxiety.

    Post-Warning Trends:

    • Follow-up research found no consistent evidence that the use of antidepressants in pediatric patients increases the risk of completed suicides.
    • The decline in antidepressant use and increase in suicidal behaviors during the period following the warning suggest unintended negative consequences of the FDA’s decision.

    Conclusions:

    • While the warning achieved its goal of raising awareness about the risks of antidepressants in children, it also resulted in under-treatment of depression, potentially exacerbating mental health challenges.
    • The article calls for balanced decision-making in pediatric antidepressant use, emphasizing the need for risk-benefit assessments and careful monitoring rather than outright avoidance of antidepressants.

      The FDA’s black box warning led to a reduction in antidepressant use but also to increased untreated mental illness, highlighting the complexities of addressing medication risks in vulnerable populations.

    1. Let’s Invest In Mental Health

      Let’s Invest In Mental Health

      World Mental Health Day:

      World Mental Health Day is a reminder that mental health is not just important—it’s essential. There’s a saying, “There is no health without mental health,” and I couldn’t agree more. One of the leading causes of disability in the United States is untreated mental health conditions. Yet, we face a mental health crisis, largely because we continue to avoid investing in proper treatment.

      It doesn’t make sense to ignore mental health, only to pay heavily later on. By focusing on early intervention and accessible care, we could improve countless lives and reduce the long-term costs that come from untreated conditions. It’s not glamorous, it won’t make anyone rich overnight, but it will undeniably make the world a better place—and that, in itself, pays dividends for everyone.

      This World Mental Health Day, let’s commit to giving mental health the attention and investment it truly deserves.

    2. Antidepressants and the Black Box Warning: Has Treatment Declined?

      Antidepressants and the Black Box Warning: Has Treatment Declined?

      The FDA’s black box warning on antidepressants highlights an increased risk of suicidal thoughts and behaviors, particularly in children, adolescents, and young adults during the early stages of treatment. However, while this warning raised concerns, it’s essential to understand its context:

      • The Risk: Antidepressants, especially SSRIs, can cause agitation or mood swings during the first few weeks of use, which may increase the risk of suicidal ideation. But studies have shown that untreated depression carries a far greater risk of suicide.
      • Impact on Treatment: Initially, the warning led to a reduction in prescriptions, especially for younger populations. However, there is now growing recognition that avoiding treatment for depression and anxiety can lead to worsened outcomes, including a higher risk of suicide.
      • Guidance: The black box warning does not mean antidepressants are dangerous for everyone. It is a reminder that careful monitoring during the first few weeks of treatment is essential. Psychotherapy combined with medication remains the most effective treatment for many.

      The takeaway: Antidepressants save lives, but starting treatment should always involve open communication between the patient and healthcare provider to manage risks and monitor progress closely.

    3. The parallels between the psychiatric asylums and modern inpatient psychiatric treatment 

      The parallels between the psychiatric asylums and modern inpatient psychiatric treatment 

      The history of psychiatric asylums is a dark chapter in mental health care, yet the more I reflect on it, the more I see troubling parallels between the asylum era and our modern system of inpatient psychiatric treatment.

      Asylums, in their earliest forms, were created with good intentions: to provide care for those with severe mental illnesses and intellectual disabilities who could not be safely or adequately treated in their communities. However, as these institutions became overcrowded, underfunded, and poorly staffed, they devolved into places of neglect, abuse, and suffering. The eventual closures of these institutions were a necessary response to the horrific conditions exposed, but the underlying issues didn’t disappear. They merely shifted.

      Today, many of the same challenges persist in our modern inpatient psychiatric system. Patients with severe mental illnesses or disabilities still require long-term care, but instead of asylums, they are placed in short-term facilities. These hospitals are often understaffed and overburdened, operating under financial pressures to prioritize quick turnover rather than long-term recovery. It’s not uncommon for patients to be admitted, stabilized just enough for discharge, and then readmitted within weeks—sometimes even days—because the core issues remain unaddressed.

      In both the asylums of the past and the short-term psychiatric hospitals of today, patients often receive the same types of medications and therapies. The difference is that today’s treatment settings operate under stricter legal frameworks aimed at preserving patient rights, but the lack of continuity and depth in treatment results in a revolving door of care. Rather than focusing on sustained recovery, the focus is often on crisis management and meeting insurance-imposed timelines.

      This cycle is problematic for patients and clinicians alike. For patients, it results in frustration, instability, and a lack of meaningful progress. For healthcare workers, it leads to burnout, similar to what was seen in the asylum era. The system, despite its modern façade, hasn’t evolved enough to address the long-term needs of individuals with severe mental illnesses. Until we invest in creating a system that prioritizes long-term, comprehensive care, we risk repeating the mistakes of the past—only this time without the walls of the asylum to contain the issue.

    4. Tragic final words of doctor, 33, before he died by suicide

      Tragic final words of doctor, 33, before he died by suicide

      The tragic loss of a 33-year-old ophthalmology resident by suicide is a heartbreaking reminder of the immense pressures faced by those in the medical field. Residency, known for its intense demands and long hours, often leaves little room for self-care, mental health support, and the emotional toll that comes with caring for others. This devastating event highlights the urgent need for systemic changes in medical training and work environments, ensuring that mental health resources are accessible, stigma is reduced, and medical professionals receive the support they need. Our hearts go out to the family, friends, and colleagues affected by this tragedy.

      As a doctor myself, I ask you—who hasn’t felt like they’re running on empty at one point or another during their training or career? The #burnout in this profession is as real as it gets. It can destroy your life, ruin time with your family, and, in the worst cases, end your life. Are we really the ones who are sick, or are we just products of a sick society? We need to do better for each other.

    5. Have We Truly Moved Beyond the Asylum? Rethinking Modern Mental Health Care

      Have We Truly Moved Beyond the Asylum? Rethinking Modern Mental Health Care

      It’s that time of year when fall festivities begin, bringing with them the comforting embrace of pumpkin spice and the thrill of Halloween fun. Over the weekend, I visited Pennhurst Asylum to experience its haunted attractions. While it’s all good fun and purely fictional, it stands in stark contrast to the true horrors that once existed within asylums. I learned a great deal about Pennhurst’s tragic history—how it was eventually shut down due to horrendous living conditions, rampant abuse, lack of proper care, and the heartbreaking deaths of many patients.

      The concept of an asylum was originally born from good intentions. There was a need for a controlled, carefully monitored environment where individuals with severe mental illnesses and intellectual disabilities could receive care when it couldn’t be provided at home. However, these institutions quickly became overcrowded and severely underfunded, leading to dangerous conditions and substandard care. When you listen to interviews with former staff, it becomes painfully clear that most of them genuinely wanted to help, but they were overwhelmed by the lack of resources and growing patient populations, which ultimately led to burnout and a breakdown in the system.

      What struck me the most during my visit is how little our modern mental health system has progressed beyond the asylum model. While the walls of these institutions may have crumbled, the systemic issues remain. We still face a severe shortage of resources, and we still have large populations of patients with serious mental illnesses or intellectual disabilities, conditions that we have yet to find effective cures for. The difference now is that the burden has shifted to short-term inpatient facilities, where it’s not uncommon to treat and discharge the same patient multiple times within a single month. These patients deserve a place where they can receive long-term, consistent treatment and careful observation—certainly more than just five to seven days.

      The problem is multifaceted. It involves the tension between patients’ rights, insurance companies, and the pressure to generate profit from the care delivered. We find ourselves in a vicious cycle where patients make minimal progress with short-term interventions, are discharged, and quickly decompensate upon returning to the community. In many ways, the same forms of therapy and the same medications that were used in asylums are being employed today in these short-term facilities.

      While I’d like to be hopeful, I can’t help but see the striking parallels between our current system and the asylums of the past. Unfortunately, the evolution of mental health care feels more like a lateral move than a leap forward. Until we address the root issues—underfunding, understaffing, and the over-reliance on short-term fixes—it’s difficult to imagine real progress.