Why People with Major Depression Don’t Get Better 

When Someone does not experience remission from major depression, we need to ask ourselves why, and come up with new solutions. This discussion will focus on the treatment of these individuals by first explaining what symptoms predict poor response to treatment and what symptoms of major depression result in the most psychosocial dysfunction. 

What Causes Functional Impairment in Major Depression 

From the STAR*D study we know that only 50% of patients respond to the first antidepressant treatment and only 33% achieve remission. An important question is why, or more specifically what factors result in poor outcomes. 

Contrary to popular belief the medications we use to treat depression work well for some neurovegetative symptoms. Symptoms such as sleep, and appetite improve but the most debilitating symptoms often remain. Consistently Anhedonia and concentration are rated by patients with depression as the most debilitating. These cognitive symptoms such as trouble concentrating, difficulty planning, and poor attention lead to dysfunction at home and work. 

Cognitive Symptoms Impair Work Performance 

We all need to work to live, and depression is a leading cause of disability and poor work performance worldwide. What we know is that subjective measures of cognitive dysfunction are a better predictor of workplace performance than total depression severity. Someone with more severe overall depression scores may perform better at work than someone with perceived cognitive dysfunction from depression. This is one possible reason for a lack of improvement as many treatments do not address cognitive symptoms. 

Anhedonia makes everything Worse 

Possibly the most debilitating symptom of depression is anhedonia. Anhedonia is defined as loss of interest in previously pleasurable activities. A strong predictor of poor antidepressant outcome is the loss of interest. Making anhedonia a primary target of treatment would be wise if we want to improve outcomes in depression. 

We have additional evidence that indicates how important anhedonia is for psychosocial function. Functional improvement is strongly associated with improvement in anhedonia. The improvement in anhedonia had a larger effect on psychosocial function than overall symptomatic response. 

Emotional Blunting Effects on Treatment Outcomes 

While people do not want to be depressed, they also do not want to be emotionally dull. Unfortunately, we know that emotional blunting is reported in nearly half of all depressed patients on antidepressants. This appears to be common to all monoamine antidepressants with bupropion having the lowest reported risk. Emotional blunting cannot be totally accounted for as just a side effect of treatment, it’s also a symptom of depression. However, the point remains the same emotional blunting results in poorer quality of remission. 

Doctors Are Too Medically Oriented

The world of psychiatry is very different from other medical specialties. Psychiatry is really art based in science and if you try to approach mental health treatment from a strictly scientific basis you will never help anyone. When patients and physicians are asked to rank the symptoms of depression, they believe are most important, the lists do not match up. 

Patients focus on restoration of positive affect by ranking things such as meaning and purpose in life, enjoyment in life, satisfaction with oneself as the top three most important things to address in depression. Clearly what should stand out to you here is that medication is unlikely to improve any of these factors. 

Doctors rank depressed mood, hopelessness, and anhedonia as their top three symptoms to address. These symptoms are far better addressed by medication than the ones listed by patients although you could argue that hopelessness and anhedonia are difficult to treat with medication. 

The effect of Loneliness on Health Outcomes

I’ve talked about this before and it continues to be a major concern in our modern world. We are the most connected we have ever been as a society with the advent of social media and the internet, yet no one feels connected. This is an existential crisis for all of us and I haven’t heard many good solutions. Time and time again we go back to the same things such as the internet and social media to feel connected and they continue to let us down. Not only is this emotionally taxing, but it’s also effecting our physical health as well. Here is yet another example of something that is very important for depression treatment outcomes that medication cannot fix. 

Conclusion

What does this all mean? Should we stop attempting to use medication for the symptoms of depression? For me these findings indicate we need to screen more carefully for these specific symptoms that result in poor outcomes. We need to improve our psychosocial treatments to help people address ways to enhancing meaning and purpose in their lives. We need to recognize the limitations of medications. Medications have a place and do address some of the symptoms associated with depression, they just aren’t the ones patients believe are most important in their lives. 

The Real Story Behind Using Two Antipsychotics For Schizophrenia

It wasn’t that long ago when I was sitting in lectures as a first-year psychiatry resident. I learned about the first- and second-generation antipsychotic medications in detail. One commandment that was always preached in my training was to never combine two antipsychotic medications because there is no additional benefit. Today we are here to explore this idea and see if there is truly no additional benefit to using two antipsychotics and explore why there is so much antipsychotic polypharmacy in serious mental illness.  

Introduction

While all training programs preach the use of mono-therapy when it comes to the use of antipsychotics in clinical practice, the reality is up to 50% of psychiatric inpatients are receiving antipsychotic polypharmacy

Since most guidelines discourage the use of multiple antipsychotic medications, why are many psychiatrists going against these guidelines? In most cases we are just trying to stabilize patients, get them better, and keep them out of the hospital as the goal is to provide most psychiatric care in the community. To reach these goals a single medication does not always produce the desired results. 

Patients that end up on multiple antipsychotics have some unique characteristics. They tend to have more severe psychotic symptoms, are male, unemployed, and younger. Those with frequent inpatient admissions on involuntary status are also more likely to end up on two medications. 

What To Do When a Single Medication Is Not Enough?

The use of multiple antipsychotics is an area of limitted research. However, there is a difference between rational polypharmacy and irrational polypharmacy.

We should start this discussion by saying a patient should be started on monotherapy titrated to an effective dose and continued on the medication for 6 weeks prior to making a change. If the first medications fails, then switching to another medication or long acting injectable is a reasonable next step. If after another 6 weeks of treatment the patient remains unstable and symptomatic the technical next step is to start clozapine. There are many reasons why clozapine may not be a good option for a particular patient including the strict requirements for weekly complete blood cell counts CBCs.

Assuming this process is followed and the patient is still symptomatic what’s the next step?

Consider Receptor Binding Profiles

This is the first step in prescribing two medications rationally. Most first-generation medications such as Haldol will bind tightly to D2 receptors and stay bound to the sites longer. Second-generation medications like quetiapine are known to bind to the receptors and quickly dissociate giving an on-off like effect. Tight binding and longer duration of binding can lead to extrapyramidal side effects (EPS), whereas quick on-off medications like quetiapine have limitted EPS risk. 

You should also consider other receptors the medication may target such as histamine and muscarinic cholinergic receptors. It would be best to avoid combining two medications that have high antihistamine and anticholinergic activity.

Let’s look at some scenarios where antipsychotic polypharmacy makes sense. 

Patients With Acute Agitation

This is a common problem on the inpatient unit. A patient is on a low-potency quick on-off medication like quetiapine but remains symptomatic and is engaging in dangerous behavior. 

The addition of a higher potency, higher affinity medication like Haldol makes some sense here. This will control the acute agitation, can be titrated until the psychotic aggression is controlled, and can be stopped as soon as the patient is stable on quetiapine. We can see how the receptor binding profile makes this combination reasonable.

Clozapine Refractory Patients

What do you do when a patient is on the best antipsychotic medication but remains symptomatic? 

We do have several lines of evidence that we can look at for this question. One option is to add low dose risperidone. This is a similar idea to adding Haldol to quetiapine. Clozapine has lower affinity for the D2 receptor than risperidone which has much higher affinity for D2 receptors. There were two placebo-controlled trials that support this combination. Before combining medications, I would suggest obtaining a clozapine level to make sure it’s therapeutic. 

There are two more recent studies that compared multiple antipsychotic medication combinations and used rehospitalization as a measure of effectiveness. Both studies found a significant reduction in rehospitalization for patients receiving polypharmacy compared to those receiving monotherapy. The best outcome was achieved when clozapine was combined with aripiprazole

Patient is On a Long Acting Injectable (LAI) but Remains Symptomatic at the Highest Dose 

This is a common problem because the doses of LAIs are limitted. For example, the LAI aripiprazole (Aristida) is limitted to a maximum dose of 20 mg/day. The oral formulations of aripiprazole allow for a maximum dose of 30 mg/day. One strategy is to give the injection early. This will usually be done on week 3 for formulations that last 4 weeks. Another option is to add another medication with a different receptor binding profile such as the clozapine aripiprazole combination that was shown to reduce the risk of rehospitalization.

Treatment of Insomnia 

The addition of low dose quetiapine to a medication like paliperidone is common in clinical practice. Once D2 receptor blockade has been maximized by reaching an effective dose of paliperidone, considering the addition of as need (PRN) quetiapine for its low potency and sedating properties is reasonable. The medication should be used PRN only and should be removed once the insomnia has resolved. Consider a sleep study if sleep apnea is possible and using other options such as short-term orexin antagonists, melatonin, and sedating antidepressant if appropriate. 

Treatment of Antipsychotic Induced Side Effects 

I know what you are going to say, adding a medication to treat a side effect of another medication doesn’t make sense. Let’s take an example to illustrate why this makes sense. If a patient is stable on risperidone and is discovered to have an elevated prolactin level you have an obligation to address it. The addition of low dose aripiprazole has been proven to reduce prolactin levels in these cases. Another possibility is using aripiprazole to reduce the metabolic burden of medications such as clozapine. There is much more limited data in this area and I would consider metformin a much better option to start with if antipsychotic induced weight gain is a problem.

In the process of Switching Medication the Patient Achieves Remission 

This is another common clinical scenario. A patient didn’t respond to a medication, and you begin decreasing the dose of the first medication while titrating the new medicine. Then suddenly they are better. You don’t know why but they are better than they have ever been and now you are afraid to make any additional changes. Ideally you would finish the process and appropriately titrate the new medicine while discontinuing the ineffective medication. There is no good data to support inadequate dosing of two antipsychotics, and it’s best to continue your taper/titration and reevaluate after it’s complete.

Conclusion

There is still limited data to support the use of multiple antipsychotic medications although it is often seen in clinical practice. There are a few places where the addition of a second medication makes sense, and we can use receptor profiles to help us make rational decisions and avoid excess side effect burden. 

5 Stage Method for Treatment Resistant Depression (TRD)

I get a lot of questions that go something like this, I’ve been on X, Y, Z medications and nothing seems to help. It seems that what most are asking about is what is the algorithm for treating depression and when does it become treatment resistant. This video will provide a look at what treatment resistant depression is and provides a 5-stage strategy to medication selection.  

Intramuscular Medication (IM) in Psychiatry: Is it Better?

Intramuscular medication as the name implies is a long-acting injectable form of medication that is usually administered into the gluteal muscle or deltoid muscle and it’s designed to take the place of PO or oral formulations.

The medications available in IM formulations

  • Aripiprazole (Abilify Maintena) 
  • Aripiprazole lauroxil (Aristada) 
  • Fluphenazine (prolixin)
  • Haloperidol (Haldol)
  • Olanzapine pamoate (Zyprexa Relprevv) 
  • Paliperidone (Invega Sustenna, Invega Trinza) 
  • Risperidone (Risperdal Consta) 

Most last between 2-4 weeks but medications like Invega trinza lasts up to 3 months 

This solves one of the major issues when prescribing medication, which is adherence with treatment. 

Notice that all these medications are first- or second-generation dopamine blockers. These medications are commonly used to treat disorder like Bipolar and Schizophrenia (serious mental illness). These populations often have difficulty with medication adherence. 

Clinically most psychiatrists will tell you IM medication improves patient outcomes. However, they may not outperform PO medication taken daily and consistently. Where these medication formulations have the biggest impact is for people who had improvement on oral medication but often forget to take medication or do not want to take medication daily. Many patients with serious mental illness stop taking medication when symptoms resolve making relapse likely. 

Side effects will be similar to the oral medication with the added logistical issue of coming to the office for the injection, and pain at the injection site. Normally we assess tolerability and risk of side effects with oral medication before giving IM medication. This avoids the potential for long lasting side effects. 

Immediate Release Vs Extended-Release Formulations in Psychiatry

Highlights From the Video

Immediate release the medication is released immediately and results is quick onset and a peak blood level. This type of formulation is generally less expensive and may be advantageous in some cases. For example, if you are using quetiapine at night in part for its sedating effects, I will use immediate release because I want a rapid effect. The same with methylphenidate or bupropion. 

The problem is this formulation requires twice a day or even three times per day dosing and results in more peaks and troughs. In general, for medications that are being used for maintenance you want consistent blood levels and not peaks and troughs.

With IR formulations, there can be more side effects and addictive potential. We believe it’s the rapid rise in blood levels of the medication that cause side effects and with medications like amphetamines for ADHD it’s the rapid rise in medication levels that can result in euphoria and thus addictive potential.

Extended release does not change the active ingredient in the medication, rather it provides a different delivery mechanism that slows the release of medication over an extended period of time. This has the opposite effect on blood levels when compared to IR. There will be less peaks and troughs and more sustained blood levels of medication. The advantage is once daily dosing and potentially fewer side effects for the pervious mentioned reasons. 

The downside is these medications tend to cost more money and some have argued when initiating these medications, a patient who has an adverse reaction will have symptoms longer with XR. Although clinically I’m not sure this is true and will generally use extended release if possible for maintenance medications.

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d