To provide up-to-date clinical guidance on the efficacy of lamotrigine in bipolar disorder (BD).
Eligible studies were identified during a systematic literature search according to PRISMA-guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that quantitatively assessed lamotrigine's efficacy in BD. We divided the included studies into three groups: 1. acute treatment of depression, 2. acute treatment of mania and hypomania, and 3. maintenance treatment. Analyses were stratified by control group (placebo vs active comparator) and treatment strategy (monotherapy vs add-on treatment).
We included 20 RCTs (n = 1166 lamotrigine users) and 20 cohort studies (n = 11,141 lamotrigine users). Twenty-four of these studies were included in meta-analyses. During depressive episodes, greater decreases in depressive symptomatology were associated with initiation of lamotrigine as add-on treatment than with placebo (SMD −0.30 [95% CI = −0.51, −0.10], df = 3, p = 0.004). Decreases in depressive symptomatology did not differ significantly between lamotrigine and the active comparator (SMD −0.28 [95% CI = −1.06, 0.50], df = 3, p = 0.488).
As a maintenance treatment, lamotrigine was associated with a significantly lower relapse/recurrence rate than placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.84 [95% CI = 0.71, 0.99], df = 2, p = 0.037). Relapse/recurrence rates did not differ significantly between lamotrigine and lithium (RR 1.06 [95% CI = 0.89, 1.25], df = 2, p = 0.513). A qualitative assessment of high-quality register-based studies found that lamotrigine was associated with lower hospital admission rates than other commonly used treatment regimes.
There is substantial evidence for the efficacy of lamotrigine in BD, specifically as add-on treatment during acute depressive episodes and as maintenance treatment for preventing relapse and recurrence.
The cover image is based on the Commentary Advancing clinical practice and discovery research through revised taxonomy: Case in point bipolar disorder diagnosis by Anne Duffy and Paul Grof, https://doi.org/10.1111/bdi.13415.
In the context of global warming, new terms emerged in the global media and in the psychology field to embody the negative feelings which come along with climate change such as ‘eco-anxiety’ or ‘solastalgia’. The pathological character of these emotions is denied although medical opinion is often required for helping people to handle them. Also, no proper medical framework in the field exists to study and care for these patients.
In this narrative review, we aim to (1) analyse the concept of eco-anxiety by focusing on its history and developed concepts, (2) summarize the different scales built to assess eco-anxiety and (3) propose a new medical framework.
We came out with a framework based on the transformation of a physiological adaptative behaviour the ‘eco-distress’. It is composed of three dimensions: eco-anger, eco-grief and eco-worry, it is not debilitating in daily life and promotes coping strategies such as management of negative emotions and pro-environmental behaviours (PEB). It can transform itself into a pathological state, the ‘ecolalgia’, composed of two core dimensions: eco-anxiety and eco-depression, leading to functional impairment and decrease in PEB. If ecolalgia maintains over 15 days, we propose to consider it as a full psychiatric disorder needing medical advice.
This new framework enables a novel approach that is necessary for the improved management of mental health issues related to climate change.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：