A call for improving lithium literacy among clinicians and patients

Countering the declining use of lithium therapy: a call to arms

For over half a century, it has been widely known that lithium is the most efficacious treatment for bipolar disorder. Yet, despite this, its prescription has consistently declined over this same period of time. A number of reasons for this apparent disparity between evidence and clinical practice have been proposed, including a lack of confidence amongst clinicians possibly because of an absence of training and lack of familiarity with the molecule. Simultaneously, competition has grown within the pharmacological armamentarium for bipolar disorder with newer treatments promoting an image of being safer and easier to prescribe primarily because of not necessitating plasma monitoring, which understandably is appealing to patients who then exercise their preferences accordingly. However, these somewhat incipient agents are yet to reach the standard lithium has attained in terms of its efficacy in providing prophylaxis against the seemingly inevitable recrudescence of acute episodes that punctuates the course of bipolar disorder. In addition, none of these mimics have the additional benefits of preventing suicide and perhaps providing neuroprotection. Thus, a change in strategy is urgently required, wherein myths regarding the supposed difficulties in prescribing lithium and the gravity of its side-effects are resolutely dispelled. It is this cause to which we have pledged our allegiance and it is to this end that we have penned this article.

Practices, knowledge, and attitudes about lithium treatment: Results of online surveys completed by clinicians and lithium-treated patients

BACKGROUND

Lithium remains the gold-standard medication for acute and prophylactic treatment of bipolar disorder. Understanding clinicians' practices and patients' experiences, knowledge and attitudes about lithium may improve its clinical use.

METHODS

Online anonymous surveys collected information about clinician's practices and level of confidence in managing lithium and patients' experiences with lithium treatment and information received about benefits and side effects. Knowledge and attitudes regarding lithium were assessed with the Lithium Knowledge Test (LKT) and the Lithium Attitudes Questionnaire (LAQ).

RESULTS

Among 201 clinicians, 64.2% endorsed often treating patients with lithium and reported high levels of confidence in assessing and managing lithium. Practices concerning clinical indications, drug titration, and serum levels were guideline-concordant, but compliance with monitoring recommendations was less frequent. Practitioners were interested in receiving more education about lithium. The patients' survey recruited 219 participants with 70.3% being current lithium users. Most patients (68%) found lithium helpful and 71% reported experiencing any kind of side effect. Most responders did not receive information about side effects or other benefits of lithium. Patients with higher scores on the LKT were more likely to have positive attitudes about lithium.

LIMITATIONS

Cross-sectional design with predominantly English-speaking participants from Brazil and North America.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a discrepancy between guidelines, clinician confidence and knowledge of lithium use and practice. A deeper understanding of how to monitor, prevent and manage long-term side effects and which patients are most likely to benefit from lithium may narrow the gap between knowledge and use.

Clinicians' preferences and attitudes towards the use of lithium in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorders around the world: a survey from the ISBD Lithium task force

BACKGROUND

Lithium has long been considered the gold-standard pharmacological treatment for the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorders (BD) which is supported by a wide body of evidence. Prior research has shown a steady decline in lithium prescriptions during the last two decades. We aim to identify potential factors explaining this decline across the world with an anonymous worldwide survey developed by the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) Task Force "Role of Lithium in Bipolar Disorders" and distributed by diverse academic and professional international channels.

RESULTS

A total of 886 responses were received of which 606 completed the entire questionnaire while 206 completed it partially. Respondents were from 43 different countries comprising all continents. Lithium was the most preferred treatment option for the maintenance of BD patients (59%). The most relevant clinical circumstances in which lithium was the preferred option were in patients with BD I (53%), a family history of response (18%), and a prior response during acute treatment (17%). In contrast, Lithium was not the preferred option in case of patients´ negative beliefs and/or attitudes towards lithium (13%), acute side-effects or tolerability problems (10%) and intoxication risk (8%). Clinicians were less likely to prefer lithium as a first option in BD maintenance phase when practising in developing economy countries [X2 (1, N = 430) = 9465, p = 0.002) ] and private sectors [X2 (1, N = 434) = 8191, p = 0.004)].

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians' preferences and attitudes towards the use of lithium in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorders appear to be affected by both the patients' beliefs and the professional contexts where clinicians provide their services. More research involving patients is needed for identifying their attitudes toward lithium and factors affecting its use, particularly in developing economies.

Lithium levels and lifestyle in patients with bipolar disorder: a new tool for self-management

BACKGROUND

Patients should get actively involved in the management of their illness. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of lifestyle factors, including sleep, diet, and physical activity, on lithium levels in patients with bipolar disorder.

METHODS

A multicenter study was performed. In total, 157 lithium measurements were done biweekly in a sample of 65 patients (35 women) over 6 weeks. Lifestyle, based on total sleep hours and physical activity, was assessed by actigraphy. Diet was evaluated using the Mediterranean Lifestyle Index (Medlife).

RESULTS

35.4% of patients had a normal weight. The mean Medlife score was 14.5 (± 2.5) (moderate-good adherence to Mediterranean diet). BMI, daily dose of lithium and intensity of physical activity had a combined effect on lithium levels, after adjustment for other variables. Patients who practiced intense physical exercise, who took lower doses and had a higher BMI exhibited lower levels of lithium.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher physical activity and BMI contribute to lower lithium levels. Patients should be made aware of these relationships to improve their perception of control and self-management. Lifestyle-based interventions contribute to establishing a more personalized medicine.

Provider Perspectives on the Current Use of Lithium Medications and Lithium Monitoring Practices for Psychiatric Conditions

PURPOSE

Despite lithium being a gold standard treatment for bipolar disorder, the percentage of patients with bipolar disorder who are prescribed lithium medication has declined in many parts of the world over the past two decades. The use of lithium is limited by its narrow therapeutic window and adverse side effects, which necessitates frequent serum lithium monitoring; hence, there is a critical need for improved ways to monitor lithium levels in psychiatric patients. We have recently shown that saliva lithium levels are highly correlated with those in blood, thereby presenting an alternative to venipuncture. Saliva sampling could open the door for at-home collections - potential that has been exemplified throughout the COVID-19 pandemic - thereby allowing samples to be collected remotely and delivered to a specific site for testing. In addition, prototype point-of-care devices have been developed by others for serum lithium monitoring, suggesting potential for a saliva lithium monitoring device. Our objective was to query the perspectives of American psychiatrists on lithium treatment practices and obstacles, the potential for at-home saliva collection and point-of-care devices, for lithium monitoring, as an alternative to pathology-based blood testing.

METHODS

Data was collected through an online, anonymous survey, distributed to American psychiatric societies.

RESULTS

Sixty-five respondents from 21 American states completed the survey. The majority of respondents were female, over 65 years of age, and/or had practiced for 30 years or more. The most frequent obstacles encountered with regard to lithium monitoring were adverse drug effects, and the need for monitoring. Overall, respondents believed saliva lithium monitoring and point-of-care devices would be useful, however raised concerns regarding validity and time-delay.

CONCLUSION

Point-of-care devices and saliva lithium monitoring are promising alternatives to blood testing that would be welcomed by psychiatric societies, however, require extensive development and validation before implementation into a clinical setting.