PRAC issues warning for Valproate use during pregnancy


https://speciality.medicaldialogues.in/prac-issues-warning-for-valproate-use-during-pregnancy/

Mid-life stress ‘precedes dementia’


stressed woman
Mid-life stress may increase a woman’s risk of developing dementia, according to researchers.

In a study of 800 Swedish women, those who had to cope with events such as divorce or bereavement were more likely to get Alzheimer’s decades later.

The more stressful events there were, the higher the dementia risk became, BMJ Open reports.

The study authors say stress hormones may be to blame, triggering harmful alterations in the brain.

Stress hormones can cause a number of changes in the body and affect things such as blood pressure and blood sugar control.

“Start Quote

Current evidence suggest the best ways to reduce the risk of dementia are to eat a balanced diet, take regular exercise, not smoke, and keep blood pressure and cholesterol in check”

Dr Simon Ridley Alzheimer’s Research UK

And they can remain at high levels many years after experiencing a traumatic event, Dr Lena Johansson and colleagues explain.

But they say more work is needed to confirm their findings and ascertain whether the same stress and dementia link might also occur in men.

Stress link

In the study, the women underwent a battery of tests and examinations when they were in either their late 30s, mid-40s or 50s, and then again at regular intervals over the next four decades.

At the start of the study, one in four women said they had experienced at least one stressful event, such as widowhood or unemployment.

A similar proportion had experienced at least two stressful events, while one in five had experienced at least three. The remaining women had either experienced more than this or none.

During follow-up, 425 of the women died and 153 developed dementia.

When the researchers looked back at the women’s history of mid-life stress, they found the link between stress and dementia risk.

Dr Johansson says future studies should look at whether stress management and behavioural therapy might help offset dementia.

Dr Simon Ridley, of Alzheimer’s Research UK, said that from this study, it was hard to know whether stress contributed directly to the development of dementia, whether it was purely an indicator of another underlying risk factor in this population of women, or whether the link was due to an entirely different factor.

“We know that the risk factors for dementia are complex and our age, genetics and environment may all play a role. Current evidence suggests the best ways to reduce the risk of dementia are to eat a balanced diet, take regular exercise, not smoke, and keep blood pressure and cholesterol in check.

“If you are feeling stressed or concerned about your health in general, we would recommend you talk this through with your GP.”

Anti-depressants’ ‘link to diabetes’


People prescribed anti-depressants should be aware they could be at increased risk of type 2 diabetes, say UK researchers.

The University of Southampton team looked at available medical studies and found evidence the two were linked.

_70092127_sertraline_hydrochloride_tablet-spl-1

But there was no proof that one necessarily caused the other.

It may be that people taking anti-depressants put on weight which, in turn, increases their diabetes risk, the team told Diabetes Care journal.

Or the drugs themselves may interfere with blood sugar control.

 “Start Quote

These findings fall short of being strong evidence that taking anti-depressants directly increases risk of type 2 diabetes”

Dr Matthew Hobbs of Diabetes UK

Their analysis of 22 studies involving thousands of patients on anti-depressants could not single out any class of drug or type of person as high risk.

Prof Richard Holt and colleagues say more research is needed to investigate what factors lie behind the findings.

And they say doctors should keep a closer check for early warning signs of diabetes in patients who have been prescribed these drugs.

With 46 million anti-depressant prescriptions a year in the UK, this potential increased risk is worrying, they say.

Prof Holt said: “Some of this may be coincidence but there’s a signal that people who are being treated with anti-depressants then have an increased risk of going on to develop diabetes.

“We need to think about screening and look at means to reduce that risk.”

Diabetes is easy to diagnose with a blood test, and Prof Holt says this ought to be part of a doctor’s consultation.

“Diabetes is potentially preventable by changing your diet and being more physically active.

“Physical activity is also good for your mental health so there’s a double reason to be thinking about lifestyle changes.”

Around three million people in the UK are thought to have diabetes, with most cases being type 2.

Dr Matthew Hobbs of Diabetes UK, said: “These findings fall short of being strong evidence that taking anti-depressants directly increases risk of type 2 diabetes. In this review, even the studies that did suggest a link showed only a small effect and just because two things tend to occur together, it doesn’t necessarily mean that one is causing the other.

“But what is clear is that some anti-depressants lead to weight gain and that putting on weight increases risk of type 2 diabetes. Anyone who is currently taking, or considering taking, anti-depressants and is concerned about this should discuss their concerns with their GP.”

Source: BBC

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation as adjunct to primary care management for tennis elbow: pragmatic randomised controlled trial .


Abstract

Objective To investigate the effectiveness of supplementing information and advice on analgesia and exercise from a general practitioner with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) as a non-drug form of analgesia to reduce pain intensity in patients with tennis elbow.

Design Pragmatic randomised controlled trial in primary care.

Setting and 38 general practices in the West Midlands, UK.

Participants 241 adults consulting with a first or new (no consultation in previous six months) clinical diagnosis of tennis elbow.

Interventions Participants were randomly allocated to either primary care management alone, consisting of a consultation with a general practitioner followed by information and advice on exercises, or primary care management plus TENS to be used once a day for 45 minutes over six weeks (or until symptom resolution) for pain relief.

Outcome measures The primary outcome was self reported intensity of elbow pain (0-10 rating scale) at six weeks. Primary and secondary outcomes were measured at baseline and at six weeks, six months, and 12 months by postal questionnaire. Analysis was by intention to treat.

Results 121 participants were randomised to primary care management plus TENS and 120 to primary care management only (first episode, n=197 (82%); duration <1-3 months, n=138 (57%)). Adherence to exercise and TENS recommendations reported at six weeks was low; only 42 participants in the primary care management plus TENS group met a priori defined adherence criteria. Both intervention groups showed large improvements in pain and secondary outcomes, especially during the first six weeks of follow-up. However, no clinically or statistically significant differences were seen between groups at any follow-up timepoint. At the primary endpoint (six weeks), the between group difference in improvement of pain was −0.33 (95% confidence interval −0.96 to 0.31; P=0.31) in favour of the primary care management only group, with adjustment for age, sex, and baseline pain score.

Conclusions This trial does not provide evidence for additional benefit of TENS as an adjunct to primary care management of tennis elbow. Poor adherence to interventions is evidence of the challenges of implementing self management treatment strategies in primary care.

 

Source: BMJ

 

Improving antibiotic prescribing in acute respiratory tract infections: cluster randomised trial from Norwegian general practice (prescription peer academic detailing) .


Abstract

Objective To assess the effects of a multifaceted educational intervention in Norwegian general practice aiming to reduce antibiotic prescription rates for acute respiratory tract infections and to reduce the use of broad spectrum antibiotics.

Design Cluster randomised controlled study.

Setting Existing continuing medical education groups were recruited and randomised to intervention or control.

Participants 79 groups, comprising 382 general practitioners, completed the interventions and data extractions.

Interventions The intervention groups had two visits by peer academic detailers, the first presenting the national clinical guidelines for antibiotic use and recent research evidence on acute respiratory tract infections, the second based on feedback reports on each general practitioner’s antibiotic prescribing profile from the preceding year. Regional one day seminars were arranged as a supplement. The control arm received a different intervention targeting prescribing practice for older patients.

Main outcome measures Prescription rates and proportion of non-penicillin V antibiotics prescribed at the group level before and after the intervention, compared with corresponding data from the controls.

Results In an adjusted, multilevel model, the effect of the intervention on the 39 intervention groups (183 general practitioners) was a reduction (odds ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 0.84) in prescribing of antibiotics for acute respiratory tract infections compared with the controls (40 continuing medical education groups with 199 general practitioners). A corresponding reduction was seen in the odds (0.64, 0.49 to 0.82) for prescribing a non-penicillin V antibiotic when an antibiotic was issued. Prescriptions per 1000 listed patients increased from 80.3 to 84.6 in the intervention arm and from 80.9 to 89.0 in the control arm, but this reflects a greater incidence of infections (particularly pneumonia) that needed treating in the intervention arm.

Conclusions The intervention led to improved antibiotic prescribing for respiratory tract infections in a representative sample of Norwegian general practitioners, and the courses were feasible to the general practitioners.

Source: BMJ

 

Babies to be offered vomiting bug vaccine.


An extra vaccination is to be offered to babies in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to protect them against a vomiting and diarrhoea bug.

Rotavirus infection is the most common cause of gastroenteritis (vomiting and diarrhoea) in children under five._68442595_oralvaccine

Nearly every child currently gets the condition by the time they are five.

But experts hope the oral vaccine, given to babies at two and three months old, will halve the number of cases seen annually.

The bug currently accounts for 130,000 visits to the GP and 13,000 hospital visits for dehydration every year.

Scotland introduced a rotavirus vaccine in May.

‘Protect your baby’

Dr Paul Cosford, director for health protection and medical director at Public Health England, said: “Rotavirus is a highly infectious and unpleasant illness that affects thousands of young children each year.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

The best way to protect your baby from catching rotavirus is to get them vaccinated”

Dr Paul Cosford,Public Health England

“While most recover within a few days, nearly one in five will need to see their doctor, and one in 10 will end up in hospital as a result.”

He added: “Although good hygiene measures can help prevent spread of the disease, the best way to protect your baby from catching rotavirus is to get them vaccinated.

“The new vaccine will provide protection to those young babies who are most vulnerable to complications arising from rotavirus.

“From now on, parents will be offered this protection alongside their baby’s other childhood vaccinations.”

Further new vaccinations against shingles, meningococcal C and flu will be introduced later this year.

Source: BBC

Wrist sensor may be better measure of blood pressure.


wrist

A new device could improve how blood pressure is measured, according to NHS researchers.

A team at University College London showed a sensor worn on the wrist could measure the pressure of blood leaving the heart throughout the day.

Normally blood pressure is measured in the arteries in the arm, but the pressure at the heart might be a better predictor of future health problems.

If blood pressure is too high it can lead to heart attacks and stroke.

About a third of people in the UK have hypertension, dangerously high blood pressure, but most are unaware of the condition.

A team at the NHS National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) trialled the sensor, which contains a mini-plunger that moves up and down as blood pulses past with every heartbeat.

A computer programme in the wrist strap used this “pulse wave” to work out the pressure in the heart. This was compared with measures taken from sensors in patients’ hearts.

“It was remarkably accurate,” said Prof Bryan Williams, the director of the NIHR University College London Hospitals Biomedical Research Centre.

Disease predictor

Guidelines in the UK recommend that blood pressure is measured at home over the course of 24 hours before drugs for hypertension are prescribed.

Their study, published in the journal Hypertension, showed that the measurements in the arm did not reflect the true changes in blood pressure at night.

Prof Williams said: “What we have shown is that pressures by the heart do not dip as much during sleep as we previously thought.

“We know the pressure when someone is asleep is a strong predictor of heart disease. This [the device] almost certainly gives a better measure than blood pressure in the arm.

“This is not mainstream, but in the future you could see people having their central blood pressure measured instead of in the arm.”

Clinical trials will now test whether using the device leads to better diagnoses.

Amy Thompson, senior cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation, said: “It’s still early stages for this new measuring device, but advances in technology could lead to better prevention and treatment of high blood pressure in the future.

“The only way to know if your blood pressure is high is to have it measured. The easiest way to do this is by visiting your GP surgery.

“However, blood pressure fluctuates throughout the day depending on what you’re doing, and if it’s found to be high you may need to have it tested several times.”

Source: BBC

 

Each GP saves 4.7 lives a year, say researchers.


save life

Each GP saves nearly five lives a year, shows the first study to estimate the impact of disease prevention by practices.

Researchers estimated the public health impact (PHI) score for all practices in England and found 139,100 lives were saved nationally as a direct result of disease preventation activities in 2009/2010.

This equated to an average, per GP, of 4.71 lives saved a year.

The research, to published be in the British Journal of General Practice next month, is the first to quantify the impact of GPs on lives saved, with the PHI score calculated based on 20 QOF indicators, including those for flu vaccination, smoking cessation advice, and HbA1c control.

QOF data was taken from 8,136 general practices in England for the study, 97.97% of all practices.

They found the mean estimated PHI score was 258.9 lives saved per 100,000 registered patients, per year. This represented 75.7% of the maximum potential PHI score of 340.9.

The researchers said they hoped the PHI score would help CCGs to assess the impact of practices more accurately and lead to better public health outcomes.

Study leader Dr Mark Ashworth, a GP in south-east London and clinical senior lecturer at King’s College London, said that the study gave GPs a real measure of how much good they are doing in the community.

He said: ‘What this is doing for the first time is giving GPs a feel that, actually, all that disease prevention work they do translates into something really tangible.

“This figure is a way of looking at how well you are doing which is not so much using the management agenda, which is so often what’s being applied to general practice. It is using something that means much more to GPs, and much more to patients. It translates into a figure for lives saved.’

He added that the score was not necessarily related to high overall QOF scores: ‘You’ve got other sets of practices that don’t do very well at QOF – so aren’t said to be doing very well in terms of care performance – and yet their PHI score is very high.

‘It gives you some sense that QOF isn’t fully rewarding the practices that have necessarily performed best in terms of saving lives out in their community.’

Source: http://www.pulsetoday.co.uk

 

 

 

Psychotic depression.


This patient works as a psychiatrist in the hospital where she is treated, and has been admitted, for depressive disorder. She tells her story, and describes her feelings about other health professionals’ attitudes towards her

I had an easy early life. My family was a combination of conservative and intellectual, and throughout medical school I fitted in. There were, perhaps, a number of warning signs of what was to come—a long period of blackness after a relationship ended, and one of poorly controlled mood before final exams—but hardly different from many others. I was unaware at that time of family history.

I coped well with the stress of house jobs followed by a number of senior house officer jobs and a period of travelling. I then decided, for romantic and literary reasons, to do my GP training year in Cornwall. It was hard work, but all went well until, after my marriage, I found myself rather unexpectedly—though not unhappily—pregnant. Quite suddenly my life fell apart. I don’t remember feeling depressed, but I became terrified of everything, afraid to eat, and convinced the baby would die. I saw a psychiatrist, who dispensed with note taking as it might apparently affect my career, and ended up briefly in a psychiatric hospital before being looked after by one of my fellow GPs, my husband, and my mother-in-law. I had no idea what was wrong with me.

When I was around five months pregnant, we moved back to Edinburgh and went to our GP, who immediately referred me to a psychiatrist, who sent me straight to the local hospital. I had last been there as a medical student, several of my friends and colleagues worked there, and my previous life as a doctor was instantly shattered. I had hoped to train as a psychiatrist myself, and I thought that possibility was now extinguished, that anyone who had been a psychiatric inpatient would never be accepted as a colleague.

I don’t really know how I felt—bleak and exhausted, but also sad and angry, especially when I saw other doctors apparently confident and successful. I had a series of admissions, both before and after my baby was born.

What was my diagnosis? How to classify the feelings of fear, terrible fatigue, anxiety, and blackness? Depression was what I was told, but I formed an unshakeable conviction that everyone thought I had a personality disorder. Looking back, I still think my personality was sorely tested by my experiences. I did improve with electroconvulsive therapy and medication, but hated taking them.

Finally, after a period of relative stability, I managed to return to work, to a junior hospital post. I hadn’t worked for two and a half years, and felt incompetent and inadequate. I subsequently finished my GP training, but realised I would be unlikely to get a job given my medical history. When I look back now, I wonder how I had the courage, or the cheek, to apply for a psychiatric training scheme. One of my psychiatrists advised me not to, and I am generally very reluctant to do things others disapprove of, but I think I knew I would always regret not doing it.

I had a long commute, as I, and others, felt I could not work locally. I loved the work and think I was good at it, but I can’t pretend it wasn’t emotionally draining. I have always felt like two people—the psychiatrist and the psychiatric patient—and it is very difficult when they overlap. I even use two names, as do many female doctors, but I think my reasons are slightly different.

My training proceeded well, and I was lucky to experience no problems with exams. Life was not straightforward, though. I had an early stillbirth, and, perhaps inevitably, a relapse followed. But I picked myself up, and staggered through another pregnancy as well as my training. Looking back, I think I was very anxious for some years after this, but relatively well otherwise, at least partly due to my always supportive husband. I think I took medication for much of the time, but certainly had some lucky periods where I didn’t.

My husband has always found the switch from spouse to carer and back rather difficult, particularly during periods of recovery, and especially given that I don’t really appreciate what I’m like when ill. He also finds my occasional non-compliance with medication understandably infuriating. But I admit I worry more about the potential effect on my three daughters. Any illness in a parent is both frightening and annoying for children, and mine isn’t an easy one to understand, or indeed to explain to friends or teachers. Worse, I’ve not always been there for them, and one of them has experienced emotional difficulties. I can’t prove that my illness caused this, but I’m pretty sure it contributed, and I shall always bear the guilt.

Six years ago I gained a consultant post in addiction psychiatry in the local hospital where I had been a patient. I had been a trainee with my colleagues, and, for the first time, had not divulged my history. In fact, I thought they knew and was rather mortified when I subsequently discovered this was not the case. But I couldn’t quite believe it—a job near my home in the specialty of my choice. Initially, I found that walking past wards where I had been a patient was troubling, but I gradually stopped thinking of myself as a patient.

Unfortunately I have since had episodes of illness, one necessitating an admission out of area and another resulting in a series of electroconvulsive therapy as a day patient in the hospital where I work. I still find the experience of illness troubling and confusing—in many ways it makes me feel like a different person. When I read a textbook description of psychotic depression, my diagnosis, I can’t marry it with how I feel. I do feel low, but also agitated and frightened, and simply very ill. I still fear that others think I have a personality disorder. And this, for me, is one of the harder aspects. I work in a hospital where I’ve had some significant admissions and treatment. I find it hard when I speak with doctors who have treated me. But what is far worse is the uncertainty as to whether others—doctors and nurses—have seen me as a patient, or have listened to the inevitable hospital gossip, and formed opinions.

My memories of my periods of illness are very muddled, and I simply don’t know who knows or who has treated me. My close colleagues are hugely supportive, but I’ve heard talk about psychiatric patients, including about healthcare professionals, and it’s not all kind. It’s difficult to sit in a ward round talking with a nurse I suspect may have seen me in much unhappier circumstances, and I can’t help wondering whether people think I shouldn’t work here. My current plan is to be more open and to tell people, but that’s not easy either. Often they’re very embarrassed, and I don’t want my patient status to become the most important thing that people know about me.

Some day I hope my two selves will become less separate, and my working life will become more comfortable. Until then I will try to comply with my psychiatrist’s advice, try to remain well, and to make sure the psychiatrist remembers what the patient experiences.

A clinician’s perspective

Rebecca meets the diagnostic criteria for recurrent depressive disorder (ICD-10 code F33), and during an episode she often has psychotic symptoms. At her most ill, Rebecca is convinced that she is a terrible doctor, about to be referred to the General Medical Council, and a burden on others. Her view that she has a personality disorder rather than depression, which I do not agree with, also comes to the fore. Reassurance, rational challenge, and cognitive therapy do not cut much mustard at these times.

Depression that may benefit from treatment is so common—affecting about 5% of the population at any one time, about 20% each year, and 50% over the average lifetime—that it is part of most lives in some way. Psychotic depression is, however, rare, with a lifetime risk of only 0.35%. In other words, less than one in 100 people with depression will have psychotic symptoms. There is much debate about how to manage “everyday” depression, but psychotic depression needs treatment to avoid the risks of dehydration, starvation, and suicide. Electroconvulsive therapy is the evidence based treatment of choice and can be lifesaving.

It took almost two years of drug treatment, including two courses of electroconvulsive therapy, before Rebecca recovered from her first episode 20 years ago. She completed her training under the cloud of her illness but had good spells, sometimes without treatment. About four years ago, another course of electroconvulsive therapy, in another health district, was followed by a return to maintenance treatment with lithium and fluoxetine. Towards the end of last year, we avoided hospital admission with quetiapine augmentation, but some combination of Rebecca stopping that drug, going back to full time work, and perhaps a naturally worsening episode underneath it all led to a relapse earlier this year.

Reinstating and then maximising the dose of quetiapine helped a bit, affording some respite from insomnia but bringing weight gain. Rebecca and her husband suggested electroconvulsive therapy, done locally to reduce disruption to the family but as an outpatient to minimise the chances of bumping into colleagues. All the medical and nursing staff involved went out of their way to make it go successfully with a minimum of fuss. We have recently added tri-iodothyronine hormone augmentation, with apparent success, so that quetiapine can be reduced. Once Rebecca has been well for 6-12 months, we could phase out medication.

Rebecca is now back to her usual self—an excellent clinician and active in educating students, mentoring trainees, audit, and research. Her abilities make her a highly valued member of the team, and a dry and often self deprecatory wit contribute to her popularity around the hospital and beyond.

I admire Rebecca for having the courage of her convictions and publishing this piece. It is brave to do so, but I doubt that anyone will think less of her for having depression, and most will applaud her in being so open about it. As she says, it will allow her to know that everyone knows, or at least could know, rather than having to deal with the uncertainty of not knowing and people being unable to talk about it. This will not, of course, preclude insensitive remarks, even if they are made in the guise of empathy or with the best of intentions. What we really need to reduce and ultimately defeat the stigmatisation of psychiatric disorders, and to allow people to practise talking about them with some sophistication, is capable people like Rebecca saying how it is: that one can have severe psychiatric disorders, respond to treatment, and get back to a productive, happy life at work and with family.

What are the learning points from all of this? For starters, that careers advice is best left out of doctor-patient consultations. That the vicissitudes of life as a clinician or academic are as nothing compared with accepting and managing a major illness and the treatment for it. That it is difficult for people to share their innermost thoughts with a doctor, especially if he or she is a colleague. I am reminded of the primacy of patient experience, the power clinicians have, and the trust required in and of them. It may not be straightforward having a doctor as a patient, but it is a lot easier than it is for a doctor to be a patient. Being a doctor is almost always easier than being a patient. Having a colleague as a patient helps one to appreciate the inevitable but necessary power imbalance in the doctor-patient relationship. Perhaps that is why I was so pleased that Rebecca told me, at our most recent appointment, that it was the first time she hadn’t been nervous about seeing me.

Preparing this text has crystallised these thoughts for me. I hope the article contributes to de-stigmatising depression among doctors and others, and helps Rebecca and those around her manage her illness as best we all can.

Stephen M Lawrie

Useful resources for patients and health professionals

  • Doctors Support Network (www.dsn.org.uk)—A confidential self help group for doctors
  • Depression Alliance (www.depressionalliance.org)—Provides information and support services in the UK
  • Royal College of Psychiatrists (www.rcpsych.ac.uk)—UK professional and educational body for psychiatrists; provides educational material and information for psychiatrists and general public
  • Samaritans (www.samaritans.org)—National charity providing confidential emotional support
  • Befrienders Worldwide with Samaritans (www.befrienders.org)—Worldwide confidential emotional support
  • National Institute of Mental Health (www.nimh.nih.gov)—Provides mental health information and education in the US
  • Beyondblue (www.beyondblue.org.au)—National, independent, not for profit organisation working to address issues associated with depression, anxiety, and related disorders in Australia

Source: BMJ

Widespread Screening for Type 2 Diabetes Might Not Lower 10-Year Mortality.


In a population-based U.K. study, screening all middle-aged high-risk patients did not help.

Early diagnosis of type 2 diabetes can improve clinical outcomes, and mathematical models have suggested that widespread screening might lower diabetes-related mortality. To test this hypothesis, researchers cluster-randomized 33 general practices in eastern England to offer either a single round of formal screening to all middle-aged patients (age range, 40–69) considered to be at high risk for diabetes according to specified clinical characteristics (28 practices with approximately 16,000 high-risk patients) or to continue diagnosing diabetes in such patients through routine clinical assessment (5 practices with approximately 4000 high-risk patients).

Overall, 73% of invited patients participated in screening, and 3% of patients in both groups received diabetes diagnoses. After a median 9.6 years of follow-up, overall mortality among high-risk patients was similar in the screening and no-screening practices (10.5 and 9.9 deaths per 1000 person-years, respectively). Rates of cardiovascular- and cancer-related mortality also were similar in the two groups.

Comment: The study population was of above-average socioeconomic status; these results might not be generalizable to less-affluent populations in which the prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes might be higher. In addition, multiple rounds of screening and longer follow-up might be necessary to detect mortality differences attributable to screening. Furthermore, important outcomes other than mortality might be modifiable by screening. Regardless, these data suggest that population screening for diabetes might be less effective than expected and should be evaluated carefully before widespread implementation.

Source: Journal Watch General Medicine