Bipolar Disorder

Psychotropic drugs are big business: in 2009, roughly 300,000,000 prescriptions were written for these agents.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is noninvasive focused brain stimulation that uses pulsed magnetic fields. The underlying mechanism depends on the principle of electromagnetic induction, the process (discovered by Faraday in 1839) by which electrical energy is converted into a magnetic field and vice versa.1

Questions have also been raised about the extent of industry influence on the American Psychiatric Association’s diagnostic and treatment guidelines-namely, its DSM and Clinical Practice Guidelines.

In addition to their use in the management of epilepsy, anticonvulsants are indicated for management of bipolar disorder, mania, neuralgia, migraine, and neuropathic pain.

This is the second installment of a new series in which clinically relevant research is briefly discussed and, perhaps more important, a few tips on how to read and interpret research studies are presented. Your feedback, suggestions, and questions are eagerly solicited at rajnish.mago@jefferson.edu.

The overall effectiveness of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is well known, but its speed of action is much less talked about. Here I review what is known about the time course of action of ECT in depression.

Houston, we have a problem. There is a critical shortage of psychiatrists.

DSM5 first went wrong because of excessive ambition; then stayed wrong because of its disorganized methods and its lack of caution. Its excessive and elusive ambition was to aim at a “paradigm shift.” Work groups were instructed to think creatively, that everything was on the table. Accordingly, and not surprisingly, they came up with numerous pet suggestions that had in common a wide expansion of the diagnostic system-stretching the ever elastic concept of mental disorder. Their combined suggestions would redefine tens of millions of people who previously were considered normal and hundreds of thousands who were previously considered criminal or delinquent.

I often get asked if practical consequences should play an important role in DSM5 decisions. It was posed again yesterday in response to my blog "Bipolar II Revisited" which tangentially raised the issue.

Sometimes you spot a serious problem and figure out a very well-intended solution, only to discover eventually that your solution created as much trouble as the original problem. The workers on DSM5 have spotted an enormously worrying problem-the wild overdiagnosis of childhood bipolar disorder (BD) which has led to a massive increase in the use of antipsychotic and mood stabilizing medications in children and teenagers.

DSM5 suggests 2 changes that would make it much easier for an adult to get a first time diagnosis of Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD): 1) reducing the number of symptoms required for adults from 6 to 3; and 2) relaxing the requirement that the onset of symptoms must have occurred before age 7 (by allowing the onset to be up to age 12).

Almost the first memory I have of a physician is our family doctor at my bedside, leaning over to press his warm fingers against my neck and beneath my jaw. I’m 5, maybe 6 years old. I have a fever and a sore throat, and Dr Gerace is carefully palpating my cervical and submandibular lymph nodes. In my family, Dr Gerace’s opinion carried a lot of weight. It was the 1950s, and my mother did not quite trust those new-fangled antibiotics. She usually tried to haggle with the doctor over the dose-“Can’t the boy take just half that much?”-but even my mother would ultimately bow to Dr Gerace’s considered opinion.

DSM5 first went wrong because of excessive ambition; then stayed wrong because of its disorganized methods and its lack of caution. Its excessive and elusive ambition was to aim at a "paradigm shift.”

Mark Twain observed that "the past may not repeat itself, but it sure does rhyme." An unfortunate rhyme in psychiatric history is the recurrence of fad diagnoses. Childhood Bipolar Disorder is the most dangerous current bubble, with a remarkable forty-fold inflation in just one decade.

Avoid Surprises and Unintended Consequences

Diagnostic Dilemmas-Effective Treatment Approaches

Oregon’s legislature has passed the bill: should the governor sign it? Most opinions on this issue are strong, and many have reached the point of invective. Even such a cool mind as Ronald Pies' has weighed in with an emotionally charged editorial.1 To speak in favor when so many are opposed seems only to invite more affective discharge. On the other hand, editorial views thus far may be moving us toward extremes on an issue that is highly complex. Perhaps a dialectic approach -– what value can we find in an opposing view? -- would be wise at this point. In that spirit, here are 4 considerations that I hope will be useful.

DSM-IV provides separate categories for Substance Abuse and Substance Dependence. The typical substance abuser is someone who gets into recurrent, but intermittent, trouble as a consequence of recreational binges. This is in contrast to the continuous and compulsive pattern of use that is typical of DSM-IV Substance Dependence.

I have been closely following the discussions of the proposed DSM5 in Psychiatric Times. Your publication of this discourse is a significant contribution to our field. As a research psychiatrist who has published over 150 peer-reviewed papers, I strongly support Allen Frances’ emphasis on the importance of continuity in diagnostic criteria for DSM5.

It is safe to say that few authors of mental health–related books would introduce themselves by presenting these credentials:

The issues being debated here have important long-term implications for psychiatry, and we are pleased to present these revised versions of 2 principal presentations.

Quick-which screening test or instrument has greater specificity for the target condition: the PSA (prostate specific antigen) test for prostate cancer, or the BSDS (Bipolar Spectrum Diagnostic Scale), for bipolar disorders?

Treating Child and Adolescent Mental Illness: A Practical, All-in-One Guide is just what its title promises: a clinically relevant, encompassing yet concise guide to child and adolescent mental health care. Dr Shatkin’s book serves as a useful primer for medical and mental health clinicians who do not specialize in the treatment of children and adolescents but who find themselves faced with the growing demand to provide mental health services to this sector. It is also a handy refresher for child and adolescent clinicians called on to treat disorders seen less often in their practices, as well as a reference for nonphysicians less familiar with psychopharmacological interventions.

While Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) broadens his conflict of interest (COI) investigations to include mental health leaders and associations, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), teaching hospitals, universities, and mental health organizations are intensifying their vigilance and taking corrective actions.

It is generally held that the offspring of parents with bipolar disorder (BD) are at risk for BD. The degree of risk is an important question for both clinicians and parents. A recent study of bipolar offspring by Birmaher and colleagues1 sheds light on this issue.

During my medical training in the early 1980s, I attended a Grand Rounds on health care reform. Sleep-deprived physicians-in-training are easily conditioned to snooze upright in their auditorium seats, and economics is not an interest of choice for me, but when the speaker told us that there would be no solution to rising health care costs except to fracture the bond between patient and doctor, I found myself engaging in nightmarish fantasies that in subsequent decades have come true.

The young adult years (18 to 29) are a critical time of transition, and they present unique challenges in regard to mental health issues and development. Until recently, most research has focused either on children and adolescents or adults. Grant and Potenza’s Young Adult Mental Health is a comprehensive text for clinicians and researchers who work with persons in the transitional period of young adulthood.

A pair of recent research articles has cast the public spotlight on treating schizophrenia in youths with antipsychotic medications.

In 2 previous editorials-“The ‘McDonaldization’ of Psychiatry” and “Doctor, Are You ‘Drugging’ or Medicating Your Patients?”-I focused on some serious problems in current psychiatric practice and on various shortcomings in our treatments. In the third “panel” of this editorial triptych, I want to take note of the considerable good that psychiatric treatment may bring to those who suffer with devastating illnesses.

You have prescribed an atypical antipsychotic for a patient who is undergoing psychotherapy. You need to check for signs of the metabolic syndrome with a physical exam. . . but is it ethical to touch the patient for this clinical purpose? Listen to ethicist Dr Cynthia Geppert examine the issues in her series “Living the Questions: Cases in Psychiatric Ethics.