Kung, Simon

Objective Previous research suggests that electroconvulsive therapy (ECT)—the criterion standard for the treatment of severe depression—is not as effective when the patient has comorbid borderline personality disorder (BPD). The ECT outcomes of patients with and without BPD were compared in a retrospective chart review to test this claim. Methods We enrolled 137 patients with a diagnosis of major depressive disorder who completed the McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder. Twenty-nine patients had positive screening scores for BPD. The difference in Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) scores before and after ECT was compared between patients with and without BPD. Follow-up PHQ-9 scores determined after treatment were collected and analyzed. Results Electroconvulsive therapy equally improved symptoms of depression as measured by PHQ-9 score in both patients who screened positive and patients who screened negative for BPD. No difference in the increase in PHQ-9 scores between these 2 groups was noted 1 month after treatment (P = 0.19). Conclusions These data showed that a positive BPD screen does not necessarily predict a poorer response to ECT, nor does it predict greater symptom recurrence after ECT. This does not suggest that ECT is necessarily an appropriate treatment for major depressive disorder in patients with a comorbid BPD, given the limitations of screening instruments.

AbstractObjectivesCaregiving can negatively impact well‐being. Cancer caregivers face unique challenges given the intense nature of cancer and treatment, which increases their risk for burden, poor quality of life (QOL), and burnout. Studies to reduce caregiver burden demonstrate QOL improvement and distress reduction in the short term. However, few studies exist to address long‐term benefits. We assessed changes in various QOL domains after participation in a QOL intervention for caregivers of patients having newly diagnosed advanced cancer.MethodsOur institutional review board‐approved study randomized patient–caregiver dyads to either usual care or an in‐person group intervention composed of six 90‐min sessions of structured multidisciplinary QOL components delivered over 4 weeks, with 10 follow‐up phone calls within 20 weeks. Caregivers attended four of the six sessions attended by patients. Sessions included physical therapy, coping and communication strategies, mental health education, spirituality, and social needs. Caregiver QOL (Caregiver Quality of Life Index‐Cancer Scale [CQOLC] and Linear Analogue Self‐Assessment [LASA]) and mood (Profile of Mood States‐Brief [POMS‐B]) were measured at baseline and 4, 27, and 52 weeks. Wilcoxon tests and effect sizes were used to compare the caregiver groups.ResultsOf the 131 caregivers (65 intervention and 66 usual care), 116 completed the study. Caregivers post‐intervention (at 4 weeks) had improved scores on LASA Spiritual Well‐being; POMS‐B total score, Vigor/Activity, and Fatigue/Inertia; and CQOLC Adaptation. At long term (at 27 weeks), caregivers retained improvement in POMS‐B Fatigue/Inertia and gained improvements in CQOLC Disruptiveness and Financial Concerns.ConclusionsCaregivers who received the intervention had higher QOL ratings for specific QOL domains but not for overall QOL. Although a comprehensive intervention was helpful, more specific, targeted interventions tailored for individual needs are recommended. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Background: The burden associated with caregiving has been well documented. Caregivers have multiple responsibilities, and technology may be accessible as a potential burden-alleviating resource. Materials and Methods: We surveyed cancer caregivers regarding current technology use and willingness to use technology for easing burden or distress. Because age has been associated with technology use, responses were compared between geriatric (≥65 years old) and nongeriatric (18–64 years old) caregivers. Results: We had 112 respondents. Based on nonmissing responses, 66% ( n =71) were women, 95% ( n =106) were white, and 84% ( n =91) had post–high school education. Almost all caregivers reported having Internet (105 [94%]) and e-mail (102 [91%]) access. Nongeriatric caregivers indicated more willingness to access Internet-based tools that help caregivers (54 [93%] versus 41 [76%]; p =0.04) and were more frequent users of social media (37 [64%] versus 16 [30%]; p =0.01), smartphones (33 [57%] versus 16 [30%]; p =0.01), and other mobile wireless devices (42 [72%] versus 19 [35%]; p <0.001) than geriatric caregivers. They also more frequently expected technologies to improve their own quality of life ( p =0.009), increase their feelings of being effective as a caregiver ( p =0.02), and save time ( p =0.003). Regardless of age, a majority of caregivers (67 [62%]) endorsed the potential benefit of caregiving technologies in preventing burnout. Conclusions: Most caregivers have high access to and use of technology. Geriatric and nongeriatric caregivers were receptive to technology-based tools to help with their caregiving roles. Although nongeriatric caregivers expected to derive more benefit from such tools, both groups believed that caregiving technologies could reduce burden.

ObjectivesTo determine whether clinical features of bipolar disorder, such as history of psychosis, and cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors contribute to a higher risk of CVD among patients with bipolar disorder.MethodsThis cross‐sectional study included a sample of 988 patients with bipolar I or bipolar II disorder or schizoaffective bipolar type confirmed by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM‐IV‐TR disorders (SCID). Medical comorbidity burden was quantified utilizing the Cumulative Illness Severity Rating Scale (CIRS). This 13‐item organ‐based scale includes cardiac disease severity quantification. Confirmed by medical record review, patients who scored 1 (current mild or past significant problem) or higher in the cardiac item were compared by logistic regression to patients who scored 0 (no impairment), adjusting for CVD risk factors that were selected using a backwards stepwise approach or were obtained from the literature.ResultsIn a multivariate model, age [odds ratio (OR) = 3.03, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.66–5.54, p < 0.0001], hypertension (OR = 2.43, 95% CI: 1.69–3.55, p < 0.0001), and history of psychosis (OR = 1.48, 95% CI: 1.03–2.13, p = 0.03) were associated with CVD. When CVD risk factors from the literature were added to the analysis, age (OR = 3.19, 95% CI: 1.67–6.10, p = 0.0005) and hypertension (OR = 2.46, 95% CI: 1.61–3.76, p < 0.01) remained significant, with psychosis being at the trend level (OR = 1.43, 95% CI: 0.96–2.13, p = 0.08).ConclusionsThe phenotype of psychotic bipolar disorder may reflect higher illness severity with associated cardiac comorbidity. Further studies are encouraged to clarify the effect of the disease burden (i.e., depression), lifestyle, and treatment interventions (i.e., atypical antipsychotics) on this risk association.

Identifying patients who will benefit from a palliative care approach is the first critical step in integrating palliative with curative therapy. Criteria are established that identify hospitalized medical patients who are near end of life, yet there are no criteria with respect to hospitalized patients with psychiatric disorders. The records of 276 consecutive patients admitted to a dedicated inpatient psychiatric unit were reviewed to identify prognostic criteria predictive of mortality. Mortality predictors were 2 or more admissions in the past year ( P = .0114) and older age ( P = .0006). Twenty-two percent of patients met National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization noncancer criteria for dementia. Palliative care intervention should be considered when treating inpatients with psychiatric disorders, especially older patients who have a previous hospitalization or history of dementia.

AbstractObjective The high level of stress associated with caring for others with medical conditions has been recognized for some time. Reducing caregiver stress can improve caregiver quality of life as well as improve the care they provide to loved ones. This systematic review assesses the effectiveness of internet-based interventions to decrease caregiver stress.Materials and methods A comprehensive literature search of Ovid MEDLINE (1946–2013), Embase (1988–2013), PsycINFO (1987–2013), and CINAHL was conducted using terms related to caregiver and internet-based interventions. Internet-based interventions involving informal caregivers in an open-label or randomized controlled trial setting were included. A pair of raters independently reviewed all published abstracts. Data regarding participants, interventions, and outcomes were extracted and, for randomized trials, methodology quality was also reviewed.Results Eight open-label trials met the review criteria: three showed positive benefit in reducing caregiver stress, four were partially positive (some outcomes positive, others negative), and one was a negative study. Sixteen randomized trials met the review criteria: six showed positive benefit, five were partially positive, and five were negative. There were no clear patterns as to the variables (such as study duration and complexity of intervention) associated with better outcomes, although earlier studies typically had more negative outcomes.Discussion Internet-based interventions were mostly effective in reducing aspects of caregiver stress and improving their well-being. Further studies to assess outcomes for caregivers and their recipients’ health, different technology delivery methods, and the cost of such interventions are needed.

Recently, a FDA Safety Communication warned of a dose-dependent risk for QTc prolongation with citalopram, which is metabolized by CYP2C19 of the cytochrome P450 system. We investigate associations between citalopram and escitalopram dose, serum concentration, CYP2C19 phenotype, and QTc. We undertook a retrospective chart review of citalopram or escitalopram patients with the inclusion criteria of consistent medication dose, CYP2C19 phenotype (extensive metabolizers [EM], intermediate metabolizers [IM], poor metabolizers [PM]), and QTc interval on ECG. We further identified 42 citalopram users with citalopram serum concentration measurements and ECG. Regression and one-way ANOVA were used to examine the relationship between citalopram dose, citalopram serum concentration, CYP2C19 phenotype, and QTc interval. Of 75 citalopram patients, the EM group had significantly shorter QTc intervals than a combined IM+PM group (427.1±23.6 ms vs. 440.1±26.6 ms, one-tailed t-test, p=0.029). In the 80 escitalopram cohort, there was no significant difference in QTc between phenotype groups. There was no statistical correlation between citalopram ( p=0.62) or escitalopram ( p=0.30) dose and QTc. QTc was not associated with citalopram serum level ( p=0.45). In contrast to the FDA warning, this study found no association between citalopram/escitalopram dose and QTc. However, PM of the drug tended to have longer QTc intervals. Our findings suggest cytochrome P450 genotyping in select patients may be helpful to guide medication optimization while limiting harmful effects.