Reviewing long-term antidepressants can reduce drug burden: a prospective observational cohort study

Health care professional barriers and facilitators to discontinuing antidepressant use: A systematic review and thematic synthesis

INTRODUCTION

Long-term antidepressant (AD) use, much longer than recommended, is very common and can lead to potential harms.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the existing literature on perspectives of health professionals (HPs) regarding long-term AD treatment, focusing on barriers and facilitators to discontinuation.

METHODS

A systematic review with thematic synthesis. Eight electronic databases were searched until August 2023 including MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, AMED, Health Management Information Consortium, and the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertation.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included in the review. Of these, nine focused on general practitioner perspectives, one on psychiatrist perspectives, and three on a mix of HPs perspectives. Barriers and facilitators to discontinuing long-term ADs emerged within eight themes, ordered chronologically based on HP considerations during an AD review: perception of AD use, fears, HP role and responsibility, HPs' perception of AD discontinuation, HPs' confidence regarding their ability to manage discontinuation, perceived patient readiness to stop, support from patient's trusted people, and support from other HPs.

LIMITATIONS

Coding and development of subthemes and themes was performed by one researcher and further developed through discussion within the research team.

CONCLUSION

Deprescribing long-term ADs is a challenging concept for HPs. The review found evidence that the barriers far outweigh the facilitators with fear of relapse as a main barrier. HP education, reassurance and confidence-building is essential to increase the initiation of the discontinuation process. Further research into the perspectives of pharmacists and mental health workers is needed as well as exploring the role of trusted people.

Internet and Telephone Support for Discontinuing Long-Term Antidepressants: The REDUCE Cluster Randomized Trial

Importance

There is significant concern regarding increasing long-term antidepressant treatment for depression beyond an evidence-based duration.

Objective

To determine whether adding internet and telephone support to a family practitioner review to consider discontinuing long-term antidepressant treatment is safe and more effective than a practitioner review alone.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cluster randomized clinical trial, 131 UK family practices were randomized between December 1, 2018, and March 31, 2022, with remote computerized allocation and 12 months of follow-up. Participants and researchers were aware of allocation, but analysis was blind. Participants were adults who were receiving antidepressants for more than 1 year for a first episode of depression or more than 2 years for recurrent depression who were currently well enough to consider discontinuation and wished to do so and who were at low risk of relapse. Of 6725 patients mailed invitations, 330 (4.9%) were eligible and consented.

Interventions

Internet and telephone self-management support, codesigned and coproduced with patients and practitioners.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary (safety) outcome was depression at 6 months (prespecified complete-case analysis), testing for noninferiority of the intervention to under 2 points on the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9). Secondary outcomes (testing for superiority) were antidepressant discontinuation, anxiety, quality of life, antidepressant withdrawal symptoms, mental well-being, enablement, satisfaction, use of health care services, and adverse events. Analyses for the main outcomes were performed on a complete-case basis, and multiple imputation sensitivity analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis.

Results

Of 330 participants recruited (325 eligible for inclusion; 178 in intervention practices and 147 in control practices; mean [SD] age at baseline, 54.0 [14.9] years; 223 women [68.6%]), 276 (83.6%) were followed up at 6 months, and 240 (72.7%) at 12 months. The intervention proved noninferior; mean (SD) PHQ-9 scores at 6 months were slightly lower in the intervention arm than in the control arm in the complete-case analysis (4.0 [4.3] vs 5.0 [4.7]; adjusted difference, -1.1; 95% CI, -2.1 to -0.1; P = .03) but not significantly different in an intention-to-treat multiple imputation sensitivity analysis (adjusted difference, -0.9 (95% CI, -1.9 to 0.1; P = .08). By 6 months, antidepressants had been discontinued by 66 of 145 intervention arm participants (45.5%) who provided discontinuation data and 54 of 129 control arm participants (41.9%) (adjusted odds ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.52-1.99; P = .96). In the intervention arm, antidepressant withdrawal symptoms were less severe, and mental well-being was better compared with the control arm; differences were small but significant. There were no significant differences in the other outcomes; 28 of 179 intervention arm participants (15.6%) and 22 of 151 control arm participants (14.6%) experienced adverse events.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cluster randomized clinical trial of adding internet and telephone support to a practitioner review for possible antidepressant discontinuation, depression was slightly better with support, but the rate of discontinuation of antidepressants did not significantly increase. Improvements in antidepressant withdrawal symptoms and mental well-being were also small. There were no significant harms. Family practitioner review for possible discontinuation of antidepressants appeared safe and effective for more than 40% of patients willing and well enough to discontinue.

Trial Registration

ISRCTN registry Identifiers: ISRCTN15036829 (internal pilot trial) and ISRCTN12417565 (main trial).

Evaluating the efficacy and mechanisms of a ketogenic diet as adjunctive treatment for people with treatment-resistant depression: A protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

One-third of people with depression do not respond to antidepressants, and, after two adequate courses of antidepressants, are classified as having treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Some case reports suggest that ketogenic diets (KDs) may improve some mental illnesses, and preclinical data indicate that KDs can influence brain reward signalling, anhedonia, cortisol, and gut microbiome which are associated with depression. To date, no trials have examined the clinical effect of a KD on TRD.

METHODS

This is a proof-of-concept randomised controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of a six-week programme of weekly dietitian counselling plus provision of KD meals, compared with an intervention involving similar dietetic contact time and promoting a healthy diet with increased vegetable consumption and reduction in saturated fat, plus food vouchers to purchase healthier items. At 12 weeks we will assess whether participants have continued to follow the assigned diet. The primary outcome is the difference between groups in the change in Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) score from baseline to 6 weeks. PHQ-9 will be measured at weeks 2, 4, 6 and 12. The secondary outcomes are the differences between groups in the change in remission of depression, change in anxiety score, functioning ability, quality of life, cognitive performance, reward sensitivity, and anhedonia from baseline to 6 and 12 weeks. We will also assess whether changes in reward sensitivity, anhedonia, cortisol awakening response and gut microbiome may explain any changes in depression severity.

DISCUSSION

This study will test whether a ketogenic diet is an effective intervention to reduce the severity of depression, anxiety and improve quality of life and functioning ability for people with treatment-resistant depression.

Deprescribing of antidepressants: development of indicators of high-risk and overprescribing using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method

BACKGROUND

Antidepressants are first-line medications for many psychiatric disorders. However, their widespread long-term use in some indications (e.g., mild depression and insomnia) is concerning. Particularly in older adults with comorbidities and polypharmacy, who are more susceptible to adverse drug reactions, the risks and benefits of treatment should be regularly reviewed. The aim of this consensus process was to identify explicit criteria of potentially inappropriate antidepressant use (indicators) in order to support primary care clinicians in identifying situations, where deprescribing of antidepressants should be considered.

METHODS

We used the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method to identify the indicators of high-risk and overprescribing of antidepressants. We combined a structured literature review with a 3-round expert panel, with results discussed in moderated meetings in between rounds. Each of the 282 candidate indicators was scored on a 9-point Likert scale representing the necessity of a critical review of antidepressant continuation (1-3 = not necessary; 4-6 = uncertain; 7-9 = clearly necessary). Experts rated the indicators for the necessity of review, since decisions to deprescribe require considerations of patient risk/benefit balance and preferences. Indicators with a median necessity rating of ≥ 7 without disagreement after 3 rating rounds were accepted.

RESULTS

The expert panel comprised 2 general practitioners, 2 clinical pharmacologists, 1 gerontopsychiatrist, 2 psychiatrists, and 3 internists/geriatricians (total N = 10). After 3 assessment rounds, there was consensus for 37 indicators of high-risk and 25 indicators of overprescribing, where critical reviews were felt to be necessary. High-risk prescribing indicators included settings posing risks of drug-drug, drug-disease, and drug-age interactions or the occurrence of adverse drug reactions. Indicators with the highest ratings included those suggesting the possibility of cardiovascular risks (QTc prolongation), delirium, gastrointestinal bleeding, and liver injury in specific patient subgroups with additional risk factors. Overprescribing indicators target patients with long treatment durations for depression, anxiety, and insomnia as well as high doses for pain and insomnia.

CONCLUSIONS

Explicit indicators of antidepressant high-risk and overprescribing may be used directly by patients and health care providers, and integrated within clinical decision support tools, in order to improve the overall risk/benefit balance of this commonly prescribed class of prescription drugs.

Clinical factors associated with relapse in depression in a sample of UK primary care patients who have been on long-term antidepressant treatment

BACKGROUND

This paper investigates whether age of onset of depression, duration of the last episode, number of episodes, and residual symptoms of depression and anxiety are associated with depression relapse in primary care patients who have been on long-term maintenance antidepressant treatment and no longer meet ICD10 criteria for depression.

METHODS

An observational cohort using data from ANTLER (N = 478), a double-blind placebo-controlled trial. The primary outcome was time to relapse using the retrospective CIS-R. Participants were followed for 12 months.

RESULTS

Primary outcome was available for 468 participants. Time to relapse in those with more than five previous episodes of depression was shorter, hazard ratio (HR) 1.84 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-2.75) compared to people with two episodes; HR 1.57 (95% CI 1.01-2.43) after adjustment. The residual symptoms of depression at baseline were also associated with increased relapse: HR 1.05 (95% CI 1.01-1.09) and HR 1.06 (95% CI 1.01-1.12) in the adjusted model. There was evidence of reduced rate of relapse in older age of onset group: HR 0.86 (95% CI 0.78-0.95); HR attenuated after adjustment HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.81-1.02). There was no evidence of an association between duration of the current episode and residual anxiety symptoms with relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of previous episodes and residual symptoms of depression were associated with increased likelihood of relapse. These factors could inform joint decision making when patients are considering tapering off maintenance antidepressant treatment or considering other treatments to prevent relapse.

Beneficial and harmful effects of tricyclic antidepressants for adults with major depressive disorder: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

QUESTION

Tricyclic antidepressants are used to treat depression worldwide, but the adverse effects have not been systematically assessed. Our objective was to assess the beneficial and harmful effects of all tricyclic antidepressants for adults with major depressive disorder.

STUDY SELECTION AND ANALYSIS

We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS and other sources from inception to January 2023 for randomised clinical trials comparing tricyclic antidepressants versus placebo or 'active placebo' for adults with major depressive disorder. The primary outcomes were depressive symptoms measured on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17), serious adverse events and quality of life. The minimal important difference was defined as three points on the HDRS-17.

FINDINGS

We included 103 trials randomising 10 590 participants. All results were at high risk of bias, and the certainty of the evidence was very low or low. All trials only assessed outcomes at the end of the treatment period at a maximum of 12 weeks after randomisation. Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis showed evidence of a beneficial effect of tricyclic antidepressants compared with placebo (mean difference -3.77 HDRS-17 points; 95% CI -5.91 to -1.63; 17 trials). Meta-analysis showed evidence of a harmful effect of tricyclic antidepressants compared with placebo on serious adverse events (OR 2.78; 95% CI 2.18 to 3.55; 35 trials), but the required information size was not reached. Only 2 out of 103 trials reported on quality of life and t-tests showed no evidence of a difference.

CONCLUSIONS

The long-term effects of tricyclic antidepressants and the effects on quality of life are unknown. Short-term results suggest that tricyclic antidepressants may reduce depressive symptoms while also increasing the risks of serious adverse events, but these results were based on low and very low certainty evidence.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021226161.

Supporting antidepressant discontinuation using mindfulness plus monitoring versus monitoring alone: A cluster randomized trial in general practice

Discontinuing antidepressant medication (ADM) can be challenging for patients and clinicians. In the current study we investigated if Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) added to supported protocolized discontinuation (SPD) is more effective than SPD alone to help patients discontinue ADM. This study describes a prospective, cluster-randomized controlled trial (completed). From 151 invited primary care practices in the Netherlands, 36 (24%) were willing to participate and randomly allocated to SPD+MBCT (k = 20) or SPD (k = 16). Adults using ADM > 9 months were invited by GPs to discuss tapering, followed by either MBCT+SPD, or SPD alone. Exclusion criteria included current psychiatric treatment; substance use disorder; non-psychiatric indication for ADM; attended MBCT within past 5 years; cognitive barriers. From the approximately 3000 invited patients, 276 responded, 119 participated in the interventions and 92 completed all assessments. All patients were offered a decision aid and a personalized tapering schedule (with GP). MBCT consisted of eight group sessions of 2.5 hours and one full day of practice. SPD was optional and consisted of consultations with a mental health assistant. Patients were assessed at baseline and 6, 9 and 12 months follow-up, non-blinded. In line with our protocol, primary outcome was full discontinuation of ADM within 6 months. Secondary outcomes were depression, anxiety, withdrawal symptoms, rumination, well-being, mindfulness skills, and self-compassion. Patients allocated to SPD + MBCT (n = 73) were not significantly more successful in discontinuing (44%) than those allocated to SPD (n = 46; 33%), OR 1.60, 95% CI 0.73 to 3.49, p = .24, number needed to treat = 9. Only 20/73 allocated to MBCT (27%) completed MBCT. No serious adverse events were reported. In conclusion, we were unable to demonstrate a significant benefit of adding MBCT to SPD to support discontinuation in general practice. Actual participation in patient-tailored interventions was low, both for practices and for patients. (Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov PRS ID: NCT03361514 registered December 2017).

The need for antidepressant withdrawal support services: Recommendations from 708 patients

Approximately half of the tens of millions of people currently taking antidepressants will experience withdrawal symptoms when they try to reduce or come off them. Nearly half of these describe their symptoms as severe in surveys. Many prescribing doctors seem ill-informed and unprepared to provide effective discontinuation advice and support, often misdiagnosing withdrawal as a relapse of depression or anxiety. 708 members of online support groups for people on antidepressants, from 31 countries, completed a sentence in an online survey: 'A public health service to help people come off antidepressants should include ................'. Two independent researchers categorised their responses into themes, and then reached consensus via discussion. Seven themes emerged: 'Prescriber Role', 'Information', 'Other Supports/Services', 'Strong Negative Feelings re Doctors/Services etc.', Informed Consent When Prescribed', 'Drug Companies' and: 'Public Health Campaign'. The most frequently mentioned requirements of the Prescriber Role were that prescribers be properly informed, provide small doses/liquid/tapering strips, develop a withdrawal plan and believe patients about their withdrawal experiences. The most frequently recommended other services were psychotherapy/counselling, support groups, patient led/informed services, nutrition advice, 24-hour crisis support and 'holistic/lifestyle' approaches. Many respondents were angry about how uninformed their doctors were and how they had been treated.

Designing withdrawal support services for antidepressant users: Patients' views on existing services and what they really need

BACKGROUND

Public Health England has recommended that services be put in place to support people who choose to withdraw from antidepressants because of a current gap. This study aims to explore the views of members of online withdrawal peer-support groups about existing healthcare and what additional support is needed.

METHODS

The administrators of 15 online support groups for people stopping antidepressants were asked to advertise an online survey to their members. The survey, which was online from May 2021 to April 2022, was completed by 1276 people from 49 countries.

RESULTS

71% of respondents found their doctors' advice unhelpful (57% 'very unhelpful') regarding stopping an antidepressant; the main reasons being 'Recommended a reduction rate that was too quick for me', 'Not familiar enough with withdrawal symptoms to advise me' and 'Suggested stopping antidepressants would not cause withdrawal symptoms'. One in three did not seek advice from their prescriber when deciding whether to withdraw, with the main reasons being 'I felt they would not be supportive' (58%) and 'I felt that they didn't have the expertise to help me' (51%). The most common prescriber responses to those who did seek advice was 'Suggested a quick withdrawal schedule' (56%) and 'Not supportive and offered no guidance' (27%). The most common discontinuation periods recommended by doctors were one month (23%) and two weeks (19%). A range of potential professional services were rated 'very useful', most frequently: 'Access to smaller doses (e.g. tapering strips, liquid, smaller dose tablets) to ensure gradual reduction' (88%) and 'A health professional providing a personalised, flexible reduction plan' (79%).

LIMITATIONS

This was a convenience sample, which may have been biased towards people who took longer to withdraw, and experienced more withdrawal symptoms, than antidepressant users in general. Black and ethnic minority people, and people without access to the internet, were underrepresented.

CONCLUSIONS

Most participants reported their prescribers were unable to help them safely stop antidepressants, compelling them to turn to online peer-support groups instead. Our findings indicate, in keeping with previous studies, that clinicians require upskilling in safe tapering of antidepressants, and that patients need specialised services to help them stop safely.

Estimating Risk of Antidepressant Withdrawal from a Review of Published Data

Adaptation of the brain to the presence of a drug predicts withdrawal on cessation. The outcome of adaptation is often referred to as 'physical dependence' in pharmacology, as distinct from addiction, although these terms have unfortunately become conflated in some diagnostic guides. Physical dependence to antidepressants may occur in some patients, consistent with the fact that some patients experience withdrawal effects from these medications. It is thought that longer duration of use, higher dose and specific antidepressants affect the risk of antidepressant withdrawal effects as they might cause greater adaptation of the brain. We searched PubMed for relevant systematic reviews and other relevant analyses to summarise existing data on determinants of antidepressant withdrawal incidence, severity and duration. Overall, data were limited. From survey data, increased duration of use was associated with an increased incidence and severity of withdrawal effects, consistent with some evidence from data provided by drug manufacturers. Duration of use may be related to duration of withdrawal effects but data are heterogenous and sparse. Serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors and paroxetine are associated with higher risks than other antidepressants, though data for some antidepressants are lacking. Higher doses of antidepressant has some weak association with an increased risk of withdrawal, with some ceiling effects, perhaps reflecting receptor occupancy relationships. Past experience of withdrawal effects is known to predict future risk. Based on these data, we outline a preliminary rubric for determining the risk of withdrawal symptoms for a particular patient, which may have relevance for determining tapering rates. Given the limited scope of the current research, future research should aim to clarify prediction of antidepressant withdrawal risk, especially by examining the risk of withdrawal in long-term users of medication, as well as the severity and duration of effects, to improve the preliminary tool for predictive purposes. Further research into the precise adaptations in long-term antidepressant use may improve the ability to predict withdrawal effects for a particular patient.

Antidepressant use and risk of adverse outcomes: population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Antidepressants are one of the most widely prescribed drugs in the global north. However, little is known about the health consequences of long-term treatment.

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate the association between antidepressant use and adverse events.

METHOD

The study cohort consisted of UK Biobank participants whose data was linked to primary care records (N = 222 121). We assessed the association between antidepressant use by drug class (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and 'other') and four morbidity (diabetes, hypertension, coronary heart disease (CHD), cerebrovascular disease (CV)) and two mortality (cardiovascular disease (CVD) and all-cause) outcomes, using Cox's proportional hazards model at 5- and 10-year follow-up.

RESULTS

SSRI treatment was associated with decreased risk of diabetes at 5 years (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.83) and 10 years (hazard ratio 0.68, 95% CI 0.53-0.87), and hypertension at 10 years (hazard ratio 0.77, 95% CI 0.66-0.89). At 10-year follow-up, SSRI treatment was associated with increased risks of CV (hazard ratio 1.34, 95% CI 1.02-1.77), CVD mortality (hazard ratio 1.87, 95% CI 1.38-2.53) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.73, 95% CI 1.48-2.03), and 'other' class treatment was associated with increased risk of CHD (hazard ratio 1.99, 95% CI 1.31-3.01), CVD (hazard ratio 1.86, 95% CI 1.10-3.15) and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 2.20, 95% CI 1.71-2.84).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate an association between long-term antidepressant usage and elevated risks of CHD, CVD mortality and all-cause mortality. Further research is needed to assess whether the observed associations are causal, and elucidate the underlying mechanisms.

Distinguishing relapse from antidepressant withdrawal: clinical practice and antidepressant discontinuation studies

We now recognise that withdrawal symptoms from antidepressants are common, and can be severe and long-lasting in some people. Many withdrawal symptoms overlap with symptoms of anxiety or depression, making it difficult to distinguish withdrawal from relapse. We describe how their onset soon after dose reduction, the association of psychological with physical symptoms, their prompt response to reinstatement, and their typical ‘wave’ pattern of onset, peak and resolution can help distinguish withdrawal symptoms from relapse. We also examine evidence that suggests that antidepressant withdrawal symptoms are misdiagnosed as relapse in discontinuation studies aimed at demonstrating the ability of antidepressants to prevent future relapse (relapse prevention properties). In these discontinuation studies people have their antidepressants stopped abruptly, or rapidly, making withdrawal symptoms very likely, and little effort is made to measure withdrawal symptoms or distinguish them from relapse. We conclude that there is currently no robust evidence for the relapse prevention properties of antidepressants, and current guidance might need to be re-evaluated.

Off-label Uses of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs)

Psychiatric drugs have primacy for off-label prescribing. Among those, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are highly versatile and, therefore, widely prescribed. Moreover, they are commonly considered as having a better safety profile compared to other antidepressants. Thus, when it comes to off-label prescribing, SSRIs rank among the top positions. In this review, we present the state of the art of off-label applications of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, ranging from migraine prophylaxis to SARS-CoV-2 antiviral properties. Research on SSRIs provided significant evidence in the treatment of premature ejaculation, both with the on-label dapoxetine 30 mg and the off-label paroxetine 20 mg. However, other than a serotoninergic syndrome, serious conditions like increased bleeding rates, hyponatremia, hepatoxicity, and post-SSRIs sexual dysfunctions, are consistently more prominent when using such compounds. These insidious side effects might be frequently underestimated during common clinical practice, especially by nonpsychiatrists. Thus, some points must be addressed when using SSRIs. Among these, a psychiatric evaluation before every administration that falls outside the regulatory agencies-approved guidelines has to be considered mandatory. For these reasons, we aim with the present article to identify the risks of inappropriate uses and to advocate the need to actively boost research encouraging future clinical trials on this topic.

Should I, can I, dare I? Patients' view on stopping long-term antidepressant use, a qualitative study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The rise in long-term antidepressant use is concerning. Long-term antidepressant (AD) use, much longer than recommended by guidelines, can result in risk of adverse events and generate unnecessary costs. In order to mitigate these risks, patients views about their antidepressants and how to discontinue need to be taken into account. We aimed to explore patients' experiences and views of discontinuing long-term AD, barriers and facilitators of discontinuation and required support.

METHODS

Semi-structured face to face interviews were conducted with 14 patients with long-term AD use in primary care. Interviews were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Participants describe various perceptions about discontinuation. There is fear of returning to their depression, even in those who were ambivalent about the effectiveness and safety of AD continuation. Participants describe low confidence in their own coping resources, fear of stress, and previous negative experiences with stopping. This enhances their perception of AD dependence. Participants indicate the importance of the support of their GP and their social network to help them withdraw.

CONCLUSION

Discontinuation of long-term antidepressants is a complex issue for patients. More awareness of the lack of evidence and the potential risks of long-term AD continuation is required. By raising the issue and offering support during discontinuation GPs can help their patients stop AD. A greater focus on non-pharmacological approaches of depression in primary care is needed to reduce unnecessary AD use.

Dose-response effects of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor monotherapy for the treatment of depression: systematic review of reviews and meta-narrative synthesis

Objective

To assess and clarify the relations between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) dose efficacy, acceptability (early treatment discontinuation (dropouts)), and tolerability (reported adverse drug effects), and critically evaluate methods previously used to examine SSRI dose-response effects for the treatment of depression in adults.

Design

Systematic review of reviews and meta-narrative synthesis.

Data sources

Embase, Medline, PsycINFO, Scopus, and the Cochrane Collaboration library, from 1975 to December 2021. Reference lists of national depression treatment guidelines were systemically searched by hand.

Eligibility criteria for selecting studies

Reviews assessing SSRI monotherapy dose-response effects for the treatment of depression in adults (age ≥18 years) reporting efficacy, acceptability, or tolerability. Reviews meeting inclusion criteria had a high degree of heterogeneity, due to methodological diversity; therefore, a meta-narrative synthesis approach was applied. Standard daily doses were defined as 20 mg citalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine; 50 mg sertraline; and 10 mg escitalopram. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews tool, in line with Cochrane recommendations.

Results

The search identified 9138 records; 387 full text reports were assessed for eligibility, 42 of which matched the inclusion criteria. The majority, 83% (n=35), of reviews included data for studies with a duration of ≤12 weeks (ie, the acute phase of depression treatment). Of 39 reviews assessing efficacy, the majority (n=26) indicated that individual SSRIs and SSRI class demonstrated flat dose-response effects; standard doses were optimal for efficacy. Acceptability or tolerability were assessed in 28 reviews. Higher than standard daily doses were associated with higher dropout rates and a greater incidence of adverse drug effects (eg, nausea, sexual dysfunction, fatigue, anxiety). Despite a range of methods being reported, there was an overall consensus regarding SSRI dose related efficacy, dropouts, and adverse drug effects.

Conclusion

Standard daily doses of SSRIs for the treatment of depression in adults provide a favourable balance between efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability. Patients are encouraged to talk to their prescriber or community pharmacist if they experience adverse effects or have any concerns about their drug treatments.

'Never change a winning team': GPs' perspectives on discontinuation of long-term antidepressants

BACKGROUND

Long-term antidepressant use, much longer than recommended by guidelines, can harm patients and generate unnecessary costs. Most antidepressants are prescribed by general practitioners (GPs) but it remains unclear why they do not discontinue long-term use.

AIM

To explore GPs' views and experiences of discontinuing long-term antidepressants, barriers and facilitators of discontinuation and required support.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative study in Belgian GPs.

METHOD

20 semi-structured face-to-face interviews with GPs. Interviews were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

The first theme, 'Success stories' describes three strong motivators to discontinue antidepressants: patient health issues, patient requests and a new positive life event. Second, not all GPs consider long-term antidepressant use a 'problem' as they perceive antidepressants as effective and safe. GPs' main concern is the risk of relapse. Third, GPs foresee that discontinuation of antidepressants is not an easy and straightforward process. GPs weigh up whether they have the necessary skills and whether it is worth the effort to start this process.

CONCLUSION

Discontinuation of long-term antidepressants is a difficult and uncertain process for GPs, especially in the absence of a facilitating life-event or patient demand. The absence of a compelling need for discontinuation and fear of relapse of symptoms in a stable patient are important barriers for GPs when considering discontinuation. In order to increase GPs' motivation to discontinue long-term antidepressants, more emphasis on the futility of the actual effect and on potential harms related to long-term use is needed.KEY POINTSCurrent awareness:Long-term antidepressant use, much longer than recommended by guidelines, can harm patients and generate unnecessary costs.Main statements: • Discontinuation of long-term antidepressants is a difficult and uncertain process for GPs. • More emphasis on the futility of the actual effect of antidepressants and on potential harms related to long-term use is needed.

Antidepressant medication to prevent depression relapse in primary care: the ANTLER RCT

BACKGROUND

There has been a steady increase in the number of primary care patients receiving long-term maintenance antidepressant treatment, despite limited evidence of a benefit of this treatment beyond 8 months.

OBJECTIVE

The ANTidepressants to prevent reLapse in dEpRession (ANTLER) trial investigated the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of antidepressant medication in preventing relapse in UK primary care.

DESIGN

This was a Phase IV, double-blind, pragmatic, multisite, individually randomised parallel-group controlled trial, with follow-up at 6, 12, 26, 39 and 52 weeks. Participants were randomised using minimisation on centre, type of antidepressant and baseline depressive symptom score above or below the median using Clinical Interview Schedule - Revised (two categories). Statisticians were blind to allocation for the outcome analyses.

SETTING

General practices in London, Bristol, Southampton and York.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals aged 18-74 years who had experienced at least two episodes of depression and had been taking antidepressants for ≥ 9 months but felt well enough to consider stopping their medication. Those who met an International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision, diagnosis of depression or with other psychiatric conditions were excluded.

INTERVENTION

At baseline, participants were taking citalopram 20 mg, sertraline 100 mg, fluoxetine 20 mg or mirtazapine 30 mg. They were randomised to either remain on their current medication or discontinue medication after a tapering period.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the time, in weeks, to the beginning of the first depressive episode after randomisation. This was measured by a retrospective Clinical Interview Schedule - Revised that assessed the onset of a depressive episode in the previous 12 weeks, and was conducted at 12, 26, 39 and 52 weeks. The depression-related resource use was collected over 12 months from medical records and patient-completed questionnaires. Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated using the EuroQol-5 Dimensions, five-level version.

RESULTS

Between 9 March 2017 and 1 March 2019, we randomised 238 participants to antidepressant continuation (the maintenance group) and 240 participants to antidepressant discontinuation (the discontinuation group). The time to relapse of depression was shorter in the discontinuation group, with a hazard ratio of 2.06 (95% confidence interval 1.56 to 2.70; p < 0.0001). By 52 weeks, relapse was experienced by 39% of those who continued antidepressants and 56% of those who discontinued antidepressants. The secondary analysis revealed that people who discontinued experienced more withdrawal symptoms than those who remained on medication, with the largest difference at 12 weeks. In the discontinuation group, 37% (95% confidence interval 28% to 45%) of participants remained on their randomised medication until the end of the trial. In total, 39% (95% confidence interval 32% to 45%) of participants in the discontinuation group returned to their original antidepressant compared with 20% (95% confidence interval 15% to 25%) of participants in maintenance group. The health economic evaluation demonstrated that participants randomised to discontinuation had worse utility scores at 3 months (-0.037, 95% confidence interval -0.059 to -0.015) and fewer quality-adjusted life-years over 12 months (-0.019, 95% confidence interval -0.035 to -0.003) than those randomised to continuation. The discontinuation pathway, besides giving worse outcomes, also cost more [extra £2.71 per patient over 12 months (95% confidence interval -£36.10 to £37.07)] than the continuation pathway, although the cost difference was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who discontinue long-term maintenance antidepressants in primary care are at increased risk of relapse and withdrawal symptoms. However, a substantial proportion of patients can discontinue antidepressants without relapse. Our findings will give patients and clinicians an estimate of the likely benefits and harms of stopping long-term maintenance antidepressants and improve shared decision-making. The participants may not have been representative of all people on long-term maintenance treatment and we could study only a restricted range of antidepressants and doses. Identifying patients who will not relapse if they discontinued antidepressants would be clinically important.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN15969819 and EudraCT 2015-004210-26.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 69. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Deprescribing intervention activities mapped to guiding principles for use in general practice: a scoping review

OBJECTIVE

To identify and characterise activities for deprescribing used in general practice and to map the identified activities to pioneering principles of deprescribing.

SETTING

Primary care.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE (Ovid), CINAHL, Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), Clinicaltrials.gov, ISRCTN registry, OpenGrey, Annals of Family Medicine, BMC Family Practice, Family Practice and British Journal of General Practice (BJGP) from inception to the end of June 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Included studies were original research (randomised controlled trial, quasi-experimental, cohort study, qualitative and case studies), protocol papers and protocol registrations.

DATA EXTRACTION

Screening and data extraction was completed by one reviewer; 10% of the studies were independently reviewed by a second reviewer. Coding of full-text articles in NVivo was conducted and mapped to five deprescribing principles.

RESULTS

Fifty studies were included. The most frequently used activities were identification of appropriate patients for deprescribing (76%), patient education (50%), general practitioners (GP) education (48%), and development and use of a tapering schedule (38%). Six activities did not align with the five deprescribing principles. As such, two principles (engage practice staff in education and appropriate identification of patients, and provide feedback to staff about deprescribing occurrences within the practice) were added.

CONCLUSION

Activities and guiding principles for deprescribing should be paired together to provide an accessible and comprehensive guide to deprescribing by GPs. The addition of two principles suggests that practice staff and practice management teams may play an instrumental role in sustaining deprescribing processes within clinical practice. Future research is required to determine the most of effective activities to use within each principle and by whom.

A Digital Intervention for Primary Care Practitioners to Support Antidepressant Discontinuation (Advisor for Health Professionals): Development Study

BACKGROUND

The number of people receiving antidepressants has increased in the past 3 decades, mainly because of people staying on them longer. However, in many cases long-term treatment is not evidence based and risks increasing side effects. Additionally, prompting general practitioners (GPs) to review medication does not improve the rate of appropriate discontinuation. Therefore, GPs and other health professionals may need help to support patients discontinuing antidepressants in primary care.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to develop a digital intervention to support practitioners in helping patients discontinue inappropriate long-term antidepressants (as part of a wider intervention package including a patient digital intervention and patient telephone support).

METHODS

A prototype digital intervention called Advisor for Health Professionals (ADvisor HP) was planned and developed using theory, evidence, and a person-based approach. The following elements informed development: a literature review and qualitative synthesis, an in-depth qualitative study, the development of guiding principles for design elements, and theoretical behavioral analyses. The intervention was then optimized through think-aloud qualitative interviews with health professionals while they were using the prototype intervention.

RESULTS

Think-aloud qualitative interviews with 19 health professionals suggested that the digital intervention contained useful information and was readily accessible to practitioners. The development work highlighted a need for further guidance on drug tapering schedules for practitioners and clarity about who is responsible for broaching the subject of discontinuation. Practitioners highlighted the need to have information in easily and quickly accessible formats because of time constraints in day-to-day practice. Some GPs felt that some information was already known to them but understood why this was included. Practitioners differed in their ideas about how they would use ADvisor HP in practice, with some preferring to read the resource in its entirety and others wanting to dip in and out as needed. Changes were made to the wording and structure of the intervention in response to the feedback provided.

CONCLUSIONS

ADvisor HP is a digital intervention that has been developed using theory, evidence, and a person-based approach. The optimization work suggests that practitioners may find this tool to be useful in supporting the reduction of long-term antidepressant use. Further quantitative and qualitative evaluation through a randomized controlled trial is needed to examine the feasibility, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of the intervention.

Approaches for discontinuation versus continuation of long-term antidepressant use for depressive and anxiety disorders in adults

BACKGROUND

Depression and anxiety are the most frequent indication for which antidepressants are prescribed. Long-term antidepressant use is driving much of the internationally observed rise in antidepressant consumption. Surveys of antidepressant users suggest that 30% to 50% of long-term antidepressant prescriptions had no evidence-based indication. Unnecessary use of antidepressants puts people at risk of adverse events. However, high-certainty evidence is lacking regarding the effectiveness and safety of approaches to discontinuing long-term antidepressants.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of approaches for discontinuation versus continuation of long-term antidepressant use for depressive and anxiety disorders in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched all databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) until January 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing approaches to discontinuation with continuation of antidepressants (or usual care) for people with depression or anxiety who are prescribed antidepressants for at least six months. Interventions included discontinuation alone (abrupt or taper), discontinuation with psychological therapy support, and discontinuation with minimal intervention. Primary outcomes were successful discontinuation rate, relapse (as defined by authors of the original study), withdrawal symptoms, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, quality of life, social and occupational functioning, and severity of illness.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures as expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 33 studies involving 4995 participants. Nearly all studies were conducted in a specialist mental healthcare service and included participants with recurrent depression (i.e. two or more episodes of depression prior to discontinuation). All included trials were at high risk of bias. The main limitation of the review is bias due to confounding withdrawal symptoms with symptoms of relapse of depression. Withdrawal symptoms (such as low mood, dizziness) may have an effect on almost every outcome including adverse events, quality of life, social functioning, and severity of illness. Abrupt discontinuation Thirteen studies reported abrupt discontinuation of antidepressant. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that abrupt discontinuation without psychological support may increase risk of relapse (hazard ratio (HR) 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59 to 2.74; 1373 participants, 10 studies) and there is insufficient evidence of its effect on adverse events (odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.99; 1012 participants, 7 studies; I² = 37%) compared to continuation of antidepressants, without specific assessment of withdrawal symptoms. Evidence about the effects of abrupt discontinuation on withdrawal symptoms (1 study) is very uncertain. None of these studies included successful discontinuation rate as a primary endpoint. Discontinuation by "taper" Eighteen studies examined discontinuation by "tapering" (one week or longer). Most tapering regimens lasted four weeks or less. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that "tapered" discontinuation may lead to higher risk of relapse (HR 2.97, 95% CI 2.24 to 3.93; 1546 participants, 13 studies) with no or little difference in adverse events (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.38; 1479 participants, 7 studies; I² = 0%) compared to continuation of antidepressants, without specific assessment of withdrawal symptoms. Evidence about the effects of discontinuation on withdrawal symptoms (1 study) is very uncertain. Discontinuation with psychological support Four studies reported discontinuation with psychological support. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that initiation of preventive cognitive therapy (PCT), or MBCT, combined with "tapering" may result in successful discontinuation rates of 40% to 75% in the discontinuation group (690 participants, 3 studies). Data from control groups in these studies were requested but are not yet available. Low-certainty evidence suggests that discontinuation combined with psychological intervention may result in no or little effect on relapse (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.19; 690 participants, 3 studies) compared to continuation of antidepressants. Withdrawal symptoms were not measured. Pooling data on adverse events was not possible due to insufficient information (3 studies). Discontinuation with minimal intervention Low-certainty evidence from one study suggests that a letter to the general practitioner (GP) to review antidepressant treatment may result in no or little effect on successful discontinuation rate compared to usual care (6% versus 8%; 146 participants, 1 study) or on relapse (relapse rate 26% vs 13%; 146 participants, 1 study). No data on withdrawal symptoms nor adverse events were provided. None of the studies used low-intensity psychological interventions such as online support or a changed pharmaceutical formulation that allows tapering with low doses over several months. Insufficient data were available for the majority of people taking antidepressants in the community (i.e. those with only one or no prior episode of depression), for people aged 65 years and older, and for people taking antidepressants for anxiety.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, relatively few studies have focused on approaches to discontinuation of long-term antidepressants. We cannot make any firm conclusions about effects and safety of the approaches studied to date. The true effect and safety are likely to be substantially different from the data presented due to assessment of relapse of depression that is confounded by withdrawal symptoms. All other outcomes are confounded with withdrawal symptoms. Most tapering regimens were limited to four weeks or less. In the studies with rapid tapering schemes the risk of withdrawal symptoms may be similar to studies using abrupt discontinuation which may influence the effectiveness of the interventions. Nearly all data come from people with recurrent depression.   There is an urgent need for trials that adequately address withdrawal confounding bias, and carefully distinguish relapse from withdrawal symptoms. Future studies should report key outcomes such as successful discontinuation rate and should include populations with one or no prior depression episodes in primary care, older people, and people taking antidepressants for anxiety and use tapering schemes longer than 4 weeks.

The 'patient voice': patients who experience antidepressant withdrawal symptoms are often dismissed, or misdiagnosed with relapse, or a new medical condition

BACKGROUND

Stopping antidepressants commonly causes withdrawal symptoms, which can be severe and long-lasting. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance has been recently updated to reflect this; however, for many years withdrawal (discontinuation) symptoms were characterised as 'usually mild and self-limiting over a week'. Consequently, withdrawal symptoms might have been misdiagnosed as relapse of an underlying condition, or new onset of another medical illness, but this has never been studied.

METHOD

This paper outlines the themes emerging from 158 respondents to an open invitation to describe the experience of prescribed psychotropic medication withdrawal for petitions sent to British parliaments. The accounts include polypharmacy (mostly antidepressants and benzodiazepines) but we focus on antidepressants because of the relative lack of awareness about their withdrawal effects compared with benzodiazepines. Mixed method analysis was used, including a 'lean thinking' approach to evaluate common failure points.

RESULTS

The themes identified include: a lack of information given to patients about the risk of antidepressant withdrawal; doctors failing to recognise the symptoms of withdrawal; doctors being poorly informed about the best method of tapering prescribed medications; patients being diagnosed with relapse of the underlying condition or medical illnesses other than withdrawal; patients seeking advice outside of mainstream healthcare, including from online forums; and significant effects on functioning for those experiencing withdrawal.

DISCUSSION

Several points for improvement emerge: the need for updating of guidelines to help prescribers recognise antidepressant withdrawal symptoms and to improve informed consent processes; greater availability of non-pharmacological options for managing distress; greater availability of best practice for tapering medications such as antidepressants; and the vital importance of patient feedback. Although the patients captured in this analysis might represent medication withdrawal experiences that are more severe than average, they highlight the current inadequacy of health care systems to recognise and manage prescribed drug withdrawal, and patient feedback in general.

Strategies to reduce use of antidepressants

Antidepressant prescribing has increased year on year since the introduction of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in the 1980s. More than 10% of adults in England are now taking antidepressants for depression/anxiety, with a median length of treatment of more than 2 years, but antidepressants can cause side effects and withdrawal symptoms which increase with longer use. Surveys of antidepressant users suggest 30-50% have no evidence-based indication to continue, but coming off antidepressants is often difficult due to fears of relapse, withdrawal symptoms and a lack of psychological treatments to replace maintenance treatment and prevent relapse. GPs should not prescribe antidepressants routinely for mild depressive/anxiety symptoms. Patients starting antidepressants should be advised that they are to be taken for a limited period only, and that there is a risk of withdrawal problems on stopping them. Prescribers should actively review long-term antidepressant use and suggest coming off them slowly to patients who are well. The relationship between SSRI dose and serotonin transporter receptor occupancy suggests that hyperbolic tapering regimes may be helpful for patients with troubling withdrawal symptoms who cannot stop treatment within 4-8 weeks, and tapering strips can allow carefully titrated slower dose reduction over some months. Internet and telephone support to patients wanting to reduce their antidepressants is being trialled in the REDUCE programme. More research is needed to establish the incidence of withdrawal symptoms in representative samples of patients coming off antidepressants, and large randomised controlled trials are needed to test different tapering strategies.

REDUCE (Reviewing long-term antidepressant use by careful monitoring in everyday practice) internet and telephone support to people coming off long-term antidepressants: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Around one in ten adults take antidepressants for depression in England, and their long-term use is increasing. Some need them to prevent relapse, but 30-50% could possibly stop them without relapsing and avoid adverse effects and complications of long-term use. However, stopping is not always easy due to withdrawal symptoms and a fear of relapse of depression. When general practitioners review patients on long-term antidepressants and recommend to those who are suitable to stop the medication, only 6-8% are able to stop. The Reviewing long-term antidepressant use by careful monitoring in everyday practice (REDUCE) research programme aims to identify safe and cost-effective ways of helping patients taking long-term antidepressants taper off treatment when appropriate.

METHODS

Design: REDUCE is a two-arm, 1:1 parallel group randomised controlled trial, with randomisation clustered by participating family practices.

SETTING

England and north Wales.

POPULATION

patients taking antidepressants for longer than 1 year for a first episode of depression or longer than 2 years for repeated episodes of depression who are no longer depressed and want to try to taper off their antidepressant use.

INTERVENTION

provision of 'ADvisor' internet programmes to general practitioners or nurse practitioners and to patients designed to support antidepressant withdrawal, plus three patient telephone calls from a psychological wellbeing practitioner. The control arm receives usual care. Blinding of patients, practitioners and researchers is not possible in an open pragmatic trial, but statistical and health economic data analysts will remain blind to allocation.

OUTCOME MEASURES

the primary outcome is self-reported nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire at 6 months for depressive symptoms.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

depressive symptoms at other follow-up time points, anxiety, discontinuation of antidepressants, social functioning, wellbeing, enablement, quality of life, satisfaction, and use of health services for costs.

SAMPLE SIZE

402 patients (201 intervention and 201 controls) from 134 general practices recruited over 15-18 months, and followed-up at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. A qualitative process evaluation will be conducted through interviews with 15-20 patients and 15-20 practitioners in each arm to explore why the interventions were effective or not, depending on the results.

DISCUSSION

Helping patients reduce and stop antidepressants is often challenging for practitioners and time-consuming for very busy primary care practices. If REDUCE provides evidence showing that access to internet and telephone support enables more patients to stop treatment without increasing depression we will try to implement the intervention throughout the National Health Service, publishing practical guidance for professionals and advice for patients to follow, publicised through patient support groups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN:12417565. Registered on 7 October 2019.

How effective are antidepressants for depression over the long term? A critical review of relapse prevention trials and the issue of withdrawal confounding

The aim of this article is to discuss the validity of relapse prevention trials and the issue of withdrawal confounding in these trials. Recommendations for long-term antidepressant treatment are based almost exclusively on discontinuation trials. In these relapse prevention trials, participants with remitted depression are randomised either to have the antidepressant abruptly discontinued and replaced by inert placebo or to continue active treatment. The drug-placebo difference in relapse rates at the end of the maintenance phase is then interpreted as a prophylactic drug effect. These trials consistently produce remarkable benefits for maintenance treatment. However, the internal validity of this trial protocol is compromised, as research has shown that abruptly stopping antidepressants can cause severe withdrawal reactions that lead to (or manifest as) depression relapses. That is, there is substantial withdrawal confounding in discontinuation trials, which renders their findings uninterpretable. It is not clear to what degree the drug-placebo separation in relapse prevention (discontinuation) trials is due to withdrawal reactions, but various estimations suggest that it is presumably the majority. A review of findings based on other methodologies, including real-world long-term effectiveness trials like STAR*D and various naturalistic cohort studies, do not indicate that antidepressants have considerable prophylactic effects. As absence of evidence does not imply evidence of absence, no definitive conclusions can be drawn from the literature. To enable a thorough risk-benefit evaluation, real-world effectiveness trials should not only focus on relapse prevention, but also assess antidepressants' long-term effects on social functioning and quality of life. Thus far, reliable long-term data on these outcome domains are lacking.

Supporting antidepressant discontinuation: the development and optimisation of a digital intervention for patients in UK primary care using a theory, evidence and person-based approach

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to develop a digital intervention to support antidepressant discontinuation in UK primary care that is scalable, accessible, safe and feasible. In this paper, we describe the development using a theory, evidence and person-based approach.

DESIGN

Intervention development using a theory, evidence and person-based approach.

SETTING

Primary Care in the South of England.

PARTICIPANTS

Fifteen participants with a range of antidepressant experience took part in 'think aloud' interviews for intervention optimisation.

INTERVENTION

Our digital intervention prototype (called 'ADvisor') was developed on the basis of a planning phase consisting of qualitative and quantitative reviews, an in-depth qualitative study, the development of guiding principles and a theory-based behavioural analysis. Our optimisation phase consisted of 'think aloud' interviews where the intervention was iteratively refined.

RESULTS

The qualitative systematic review and in-depth qualitative study highlighted the centrality of fear of depression relapse as a key barrier to discontinuation. The quantitative systematic review showed that psychologically informed approaches such as cognitive-behavioural therapy were associated with greater rates of discontinuation than simple advice to reduce. Following a behavioural diagnosis based on the behaviour change wheel, social cognitive theory provided a theoretical basis for the intervention. The intervention was optimised on the basis of think aloud interviews, where participants suggested they like the flexibility of the system and found it reassuring. Changes were made to the tone of the material and the structure was adjusted based on this qualitative feedback.

CONCLUSIONS

'ADvisor' is a theory, evidence and person-based digital intervention designed to support antidepressant discontinuation. The intervention was perceived as helpful and reassuring in optimisation interviews. Trials are now needed to determine the feasibility, clinical and cost-effectiveness of this approach.

How common and severe are six withdrawal effects from, and addiction to, antidepressants? The experiences of a large international sample of patients

INTRODUCTION

The incidence and severity of withdrawal effects when coming off antidepressants (ADs) have recently received considerable attention. National guidelines on the topic have proven to be inaccurate. This paper reports the largest direct-to-patient international survey on these issues.

METHODS

Data generated by an online survey from 867 people from 31 countries, who had taken ADs continuously for at least one month, and had tried to come off (successfully or not) was analysed.

RESULTS

The majority (59%) had taken ADs for more than three years. Of those who were still taking them, 29% had been doing so for at least 20 years. 61% reported some degree of withdrawal effects, and 44% of these described the effects as 'severe'. The most common of six listed withdrawal effects were anxiety/panic (66%) and irritability (62%). The most common spontaneously reported 'other' withdrawal effect was suicidality (2%). 40% reported that they felt addicted, with 39% of these describing their addiction as 'severe'. Over half (55%) reported some degree of difficulty coming off, with 27% ticking 'very difficult', and 11% 'very easy'. Duration of treatment was related to withdrawal, addiction and difficulty coming off. Younger people experienced more frequent withdrawal effects. Only six people (0.7%) recalled being told anything about withdrawal, dependence or addiction by the initial prescriber.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings confirm previous studies, using a range of methodologies, finding high incidences of withdrawal effects, frequently at severe levels. National guidelines, and those of professional organisations, urgently need to be updated to reflect this evidence.

Protracted withdrawal syndrome after stopping antidepressants: a descriptive quantitative analysis of consumer narratives from a large internet forum

BACKGROUND

Protracted withdrawal syndrome (PWS) after stopping antidepressants (frequently also referred to as post-acute withdrawal syndrome or PAWS) has been described in a few case reports. However, a detailed quantitative analysis of specific symptom manifestations in antidepressant PWS is still lacking.

METHODS

We extracted patient narratives from a large English-language internet forum SurvivingAntidepressants.org, a peer support site concerned about withdrawal from antidepressants. PWS was ascertained based on diagnostic criteria proposed by Chouinard and Chouinard, specifically ⩾6 months of continuous antidepressant use, with emergence of new and/or more intense symptoms after discontinuation that last beyond the initial 6 weeks of acute withdrawal. We assessed medication history, outcome of PWS, and the prevalence of specific symptoms.

RESULTS

In total, n = 69 individual reports of protracted withdrawal were selected for analysis. At time of the subjects' most recent reports, duration of PWS ranged from 5 to 166 months, mean = 37 months, median = 26 months. Length of time on the antidepressant causing protracted withdrawal ranged from 6 to 278 months, mean = 96 months, and median = 79 months. Throughout the withdrawal experience, affective symptoms, mostly anxiety, depression, emerging suicidality and agitation, were reported by 81%. Somatic symptoms, mostly headache, fatigue, dizziness, brain zaps, visual changes, muscle aches, tremor, diarrhea, and nausea were reported by 75%. Sleep problems (44%) and cognitive impairments (32%) were mentioned less frequently. These broad symptom domains were largely uncorrelated.

CONCLUSION

PWS or PAWS from antidepressants can be severe and long-lasting, and its manifestations clinically heterogeneous. Long-term antidepressant exposure may cause multiple body system impairments. Although both somatic and affective symptoms are frequent, they are mostly unrelated in terms of occurrence. Proper recognition and detection of PWS thus requires a comprehensive assessment of medication history, duration of the withdrawal syndrome, and its various somatic, affective, sleep, and cognitive symptoms.

Barriers to discontinuing antidepressants in patients with depressive and anxiety disorders: a review of the literature and clinical recommendations

Use of antidepressants has recently increased, mainly caused by the increase of long-term users. Although evidence-based indications for long-term use are lacking, it is assumed that long-term use is unnecessary or undesirable in some patients. Perceived barriers to discontinuing antidepressants contribute to unnecessary or undesirable long-term use. Identifying barriers prior to, during and following discontinuation may enable strategies to overcome them. This narrative review summarises relevant qualitative and quantitative articles on perceived barriers to discontinuing antidepressants and provides recommendations for clinical practice. We can conclude that implications for clinical practice are diverse and the most important barriers experienced by patients and physicians include the fear of relapse or recurrence, insufficient evaluation and monitoring, withdrawal symptoms, and actual relapse or recurrence.

Management of treatment-resistant depression in primary care: a mixed-methods study

Background

Non-response to antidepressant medication is common in primary care. Little is known about how GPs manage patients with depression that does not respond to medication.

Aim

To describe usual care for primary care patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD).

Design and setting

Mixed-methods study using data from a UK primary care multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Method

In total, 235 patients with TRD randomised to continue with usual GP care were followed up at 3-month intervals for a year. Self-report data were collected on antidepressant medication, number of GP visits, and other treatments received. In addition, 14 semi-structured face-to-face interviews were conducted with a purposive sample after the 6-month follow-up and analysed thematically.

Results

Most patients continued on the same dose of a single antidepressant between baseline and 3 months (n = 147/186 at 3 months, 79% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 73 to 85%)). Figures were similar for later follow-ups (for example, 9–12 months: 72% (95% CI = 63 to 79%). Medication changes (increasing dose; switching to a different antidepressant; adding a second antidepressant) were uncommon. Participants described usual care mainly as taking antidepressants, with consultations focused on other (physical) health concerns. Few accessed other treatments or were referred to secondary care.

Conclusion

Usual care in patients with TRD mainly entailed taking antidepressants, and medication changes were uncommon. The high prevalence of physical and psychological comorbidity means that, when these patients consult, their depression may not be discussed. Strategies are needed to ensure the active management of this large group of patients whose depression does not respond to antidepressant medication.

Releasing GP capacity with pharmacy prescribing support and New Ways of Working: a prospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

General practice in the UK is experiencing a workforce crisis. However, it is unknown what impact prescribing support teams may have on freeing up GP capacity and time for clinical activities.

AIM

To release GP time by providing additional prescribing resources to support general practices between April 2016 and March 2017.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective observational cohort study in 16 urban general practices that comprise Inverclyde Health and Social Care Partnership in Scotland.

METHOD

GPs recorded the time they spent dealing with special requests, immediate discharges, outpatient requests, and other prescribing issues for 2 weeks prior to the study and for two equivalent periods during the study. Specialist clinical pharmacists performed these key prescribing activities to release GP time and Read coded their activities. GP and practice staff were surveyed to assess their expectations at baseline and their experiences during the final data-collection period. Prescribing support staff were also surveyed during the study period.

RESULTS

GP time spent on key prescribing activities significantly reduced by 51% (79 hours, P<0.001) per week, equating to 4.9 hours (95% confidence interval = 3.4 to 6.4) per week per practice. The additional clinical pharmacist resource was well received and appreciated by GPs and practices. As well as freeing up GP capacity, practices and practitioners also identified improvements in patient safety, positive effects on staff morale, and reductions in stress. Prescribing support staff also indicated that the initiative had a positive impact on job satisfaction and was considered sustainable, although practice expectations and time constraints created new challenges.

CONCLUSION

Specialist clinical pharmacists are safe and effective in supporting GPs and practices with key prescribing activities in order to directly free GP capacity. However, further work is required to assess the impact of such service developments on prescribing cost-efficiency and clinical pharmacist medication review work.

A systematic review into the incidence, severity and duration of antidepressant withdrawal effects: Are guidelines evidence-based?

INTRODUCTION

The U.K.'s current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the American Psychiatric Association's depression guidelines state that withdrawal reactions from antidepressants are 'self-limiting' (i.e. typically resolving between 1 and 2weeks). This systematic review assesses that claim.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was undertaken to ascertain the incidence, severity and duration of antidepressant withdrawal reactions. We identified 24 relevant studies, with diverse methodologies and sample sizes.

RESULTS

Withdrawal incidence rates from 14 studies ranged from 27% to 86% with a weighted average of 56%. Four large studies of severity produced a weighted average of 46% of those experiencing antidepressant withdrawal effects endorsing the most extreme severity rating on offer. Seven of the ten very diverse studies providing data on duration contradict the U.K. and U.S.A. withdrawal guidelines in that they found that a significant proportion of people who experience withdrawal do so for more than two weeks, and that it is not uncommon for people to experience withdrawal for several months. The findings of the only four studies calculating mean duration were, for quite heterogeneous populations, 5days, 10days, 43days and 79weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend that U.K. and U.S.A. guidelines on antidepressant withdrawal be urgently updated as they are clearly at variance with the evidence on the incidence, severity and duration of antidepressant withdrawal, and are probably leading to the widespread misdiagnosing of withdrawal, the consequent lengthening of antidepressant use, much unnecessary antidepressant prescribing and higher rates of antidepressant prescriptions overall. We also recommend that prescribers fully inform patients about the possibility of withdrawal effects.

Discontinuation of antidepressant medication in primary care supported by monitoring plus mindfulness-based cognitive therapy versus monitoring alone: design and protocol of a cluster randomized controlled trial

Background

Antidepressant use continues to rise, mainly explained by an increase in the proportion of patients receiving long term treatment. Although treatment guidelines recommend discontinuation after sustained remission, discontinuing antidepressants appears to be challenging for both patients and general practitioners (GPs). Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT) is an effective intervention that reduces the risk of relapse in recurrent depression and might facilitate discontinuation by teaching patients to cope with withdrawal symptoms and fear of relapse. The current study aims to investigate the effectiveness of the combination of Supported Protocolized Discontinuation (SPD) and MBCT in comparison with SPD alone in successful discontinuation of long-term use of antidepressants in primary care.

Methods

This study involves a cluster-randomized controlled trial conducted in primary care patients with long-term use antidepressants with baseline and 6, 9 and 12 months follow-up assessments. Patients choosing to discontinue their medication will be offered a combination of SPD and MBCT or SPD alone. Our primary outcome will be full discontinuation of antidepressant medication (= 0 mg) within 6 months after baseline assessment. Secondary outcome measures will be the severity of withdrawal symptoms, symptoms of depression and anxiety, psychological well-being, quality of life and medical and societal costs.

Discussion

In theory, stopping antidepressant medication seems straightforward. In practice however, patients and their GPs appear reluctant to initiate and accomplish this process. Both patients and professionals are in need of appropriate tools and information to better support the process of discontinuing antidepressant medication.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov PRS ID: NCT03361514 retrospectively registered October 2017.

Helping people discontinue long-term antidepressants: views of health professionals in UK primary care

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this paper were to identify, characterise and explain clinician factors that shape decision-making around antidepressant discontinuation in UK primary care.

DESIGN

Four focus groups and three interviews were conducted and analysed using thematic analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty-one general practitioners (GPs), four GP assistants, seven nurses and six community mental health team workers and psychotherapists took part in focus groups and interviews.

SETTING

Participants were recruited from seven primary care regions and two National Health Service Trusts providing community mental health services in the South of England.

RESULTS

Participants highlighted a number of barriers and enablers to discussing discontinuation with patients. They held a range of views around responsibility, with some suggesting it was the responsibility of the health professional (HP) to broach the subject, and others suggesting responsibility rested with the patients. HPs were concerned about destabilising the current situation, discussed how continuity and knowing the patient facilitated discontinuation talks, and discussed how confidence in their professional skills and knowledge affected whether they elected to raise discontinuation in consultations.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate a need to consider support for HPs in the management of antidepressant medication and discussions of discontinuation in particular. They may also benefit from support around their fears of patient relapse and awareness of when and how to initiate discussions about discontinuation with their patients.

Tapering of SSRI treatment to mitigate withdrawal symptoms

All classes of drug that are prescribed to treat depression are associated with withdrawal syndromes. SSRI withdrawal syndrome occurs often and can be severe, and might compel patients to recommence their medication. Although the withdrawal syndrome can be differentiated from recurrence of the underlying disorder, it might also be mistaken for recurrence, leading to long-term unnecessary medication. Guidelines recommend short tapers, of between 2 weeks and 4 weeks, down to therapeutic minimum doses, or half-minimum doses, before complete cessation. Studies have shown that these tapers show minimal benefits over abrupt discontinuation, and are often not tolerated by patients. Tapers over a period of months and down to doses much lower than minimum therapeutic doses have shown greater success in reducing withdrawal symptoms. Other types of medication associated with withdrawal, such as benzodiazepenes, are tapered to reduce their biological effect at receptors by fixed amounts to minimise withdrawal symptoms. These dose reductions are done with exponential tapering programmes that reach very small doses. This method could have relevance for tapering of SSRIs. We examined the PET imaging data of serotonin transporter occupancy by SSRIs and found that hyperbolically reducing doses of SSRIs reduces their effect on serotonin transporter inhibition in a linear manner. We therefore suggest that SSRIs should be tapered hyperbolically and slowly to doses much lower than those of therapeutic minimums, in line with tapering regimens for other medications associated with withdrawal symptoms. Withdrawal symptoms will then be minimised.

Ongoing initiatives within the Scottish National Health Service to affect the prescribing of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and their influence

Aim: Increasing use of selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in Scotland, coupled with safety concerns with some SSRIs, and the increasing availability of generic SSRIs, have resulted in multiple initiatives to improve the quality and efficiency of their prescribing in Scotland. Our aim is to assess their influence to provide future direction. Materials & methods: The prescription costs analysis database was used to document utilization and expenditure on SSRIs between 2001 and 2017 alongside documenting the initiatives. Results: Multiple interventions over the years increased international nonproprietary name prescribing up to 99.9% lowering overall costs. This, coupled with initiatives to limit escitalopram prescribing due to concerns with its value, resulted in a 73.7% reduction in SSRI expenditure between 2001 and 2017 despite a 2.34-fold increase in utilization. Safety warnings resulted in a significant reduction in the prescribing of paroxetine, citalopram and escitalopram alongside a significant increase in sertraline Conclusion: Multiple initiatives have increased the quality and efficiency of SSRI prescribing in Scotland providing direction to others.

Pharmaco-epidemiology of antidepressant exposure in a UK cohort record-linkage study

OBJECTIVES

Antidepressants are the most commonly prescribed psychiatric medication but concern has been raised about significant increases in their usage in high income countries. We aimed to quantify antidepressant prevalence, incidence, adherence and predictors of use in the adult population.

METHODS

The study record-linked administrative prescribing and morbidity data to the Generation Scotland cohort ( N = 11,052), between 2009 and 2016. Prevalence and incidence of any antidepressant use was determined. Antidepressant adherence was measured using Proportion of Days Covered and Medication Possession Ratio. Time-to-event analysis for incident antidepressant use within 5 years of Generation Scotland: Scottish Family Health Study (GS:SFHS) recruitment was performed to reveal patient-level predictors of use.

RESULTS

Almost one-third (28.0%, 95%CI 26.9-29.1) of the adults in our sample were prescribed at least one antidepressant in the 5-year period 2012-2016. There was a 36.2% increase in annual prevalence between 2010 and 2016. Incidence was 2.4(2.1-2.7)% per year. The majority of antidepressant episodes (57.6%) were greater than 9 months duration and adherence was generally high (69.0% with Proportion of Days Covered >80%). Predictors of new antidepressant use included history of affective disorder, being female, physical comorbidities, higher neuroticism scores, and lower cognitive function scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Antidepressant prevalence is greater than previously reported but incidence remains relatively stable. We found the majority of antidepressant episodes to be of relatively long duration with good estimated adherence. Our study supports the hypothesis that increased long-term use among existing (and returning) users, along with wider ranges of indications for antidepressants, has significantly increased the prevalence of these medications.

Managing Antidepressant Discontinuation: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

We aimed to determine the effectiveness of interventions to manage antidepressant discontinuation, and the outcomes for patients.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review with narrative synthesis and meta-analysis of studies published to March 2017. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, or observational studies assessing interventions to facilitate discontinuation of antidepressants for depression in adults. Our primary outcomes were antidepressant discontinuation and discontinuation symptoms. Secondary outcomes were relapse/recurrence; quality of life; antidepressant reduction; and sexual, social, and occupational function.

RESULTS

Of 15 included studies, 12 studies (8 randomized controlled trials, 2 single-arm trials, 2 retrospective cohort studies) were included in the synthesis. None were rated as having high risk for selection or detection bias. Two studies prompting primary care clinician discontinuation with antidepressant tapering guidance found 6% and 7% of patients discontinued, vs 8% for usual care. Six studies of psychological or psychiatric treatment plus tapering reported cessation rates of 40% to 95%. Two studies reported a higher risk of discontinuation symptoms with abrupt termination. At 2 years, risk of relapse/recurrence was lower with cognitive behavioral therapy plus taper vs clinical management plus taper (15% to 25% vs 35% to 80%: risk ratio = 0.34; 95% CI, 0.18-0.67; 2 studies). Relapse/recurrence rates were similar for mindfulness-based cognitive therapy with tapering and maintenance antidepressants (44% to 48% vs 47% to 60%; 2 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Cognitive behavioral therapy or mindfulness-based cognitive therapy can help patients discontinue antidepressants without increasing the risk of relapse/recurrence, but are resource intensive. More scalable interventions incorporating psychological support are needed.

Staying on, and coming off, antidepressants: The experiences of 752 UK adults

INTRODUCTION

Prescription rates for antidepressants (ADs) are high and continue to increase, despite evidence of significant adverse effects, including withdrawal symptoms, and marginal benefit relative to placebo only for short-term treatment of major depression. Such high rates seem to be explicable more in terms of long term usage and repeat prescribing rather than by increases in depression or new patients.

METHOD

This paper reports the responses of a convenience sample of 752 people who had taken antidepressants, but no other psychiatric drugs, 'within the last two years' and completed the Medications for Mental Health Survey online in the UK.

RESULTS

Most participants had either come off antidepressants (34%) or had tried and failed (36%). Of those still taking them 76% had been doing so for at least a year and 36% for five years or more. 26% expected to take them forever. About half (48%) did not have their drugs reviewed at least every three months. Most (65%) had never had a discussion with the prescriber about coming off. Nearly half (45%) of those who had stopped the drugs had done so without consulting their doctor. However, of those who came off after consulting their doctor, the majority (65%) experienced the doctor to be supportive.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings are consistent with the idea that high rates are largely explicable by chronic usage, which in turn is partially explained by withdrawal symptoms. Prescribers should strive to establish collaborative relationships in which patients are fully informed about withdrawal effects and their views, about starting and finishing medication, should be explored and valued.

Association of Focused Medication Review With Optimization of Psychotropic Drug Prescribing: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Medication review has been proposed to achieve improved use of psychotropic drugs, but benefits have not been confirmed.

OBJECTIVE

To synthesize evidence for focused psychotropic medication review in medication optimization.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and CINAHL Plus were searched from inception to February 2018 using the index terms "drug utilization review" and "psychotropic drugs" and synonyms. Additional articles were retrieved using citation tracking and reference checking.

STUDY SELECTION

Full-length, peer-reviewed articles that reported focused psychotropic medication review were included. Inclusion was determined against prespecified criteria and assessed independently.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Study quality was assessed using National Institutes for Health appraisal tools and informed a structured synthesis of results. Meta-analysis using a random effects model was conducted.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Change in the number or dosage of psychotropic medications, change in clinical parameters, change in patient-reported outcomes, and economic data were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies met the inclusion criteria. Four studies were randomized clinical trials (n = 712 participants), while the remainder were before-after studies (n = 7844 participants). Most studies were conducted in elderly individuals, people with dementia, and adults with intellectual disability. Focused psychotropic medication review is a complex intervention; the professional(s) involved, target drug, degree of integration with usual care, and participant involvement varied greatly among the studies. Meta-analysis included 3 studies (n = 652 participants). Psychotropic medication review was associated with a reduction in prescribing of psychotropic drugs compared with control (pooled odds ratio, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.14-0.39) in elderly participants with cognitive impairment living in nursing homes. Before-after studies consistently reported a change in psychotropic drug prescribing after medication review, regardless of the population. Studies that reported the effects of psychotropic medication review on clinical outcomes failed to demonstrate benefit. Economic implications of focused psychotropic medication review were not adequately assessed. The quality of evidence is poor and studies are at risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Focused psychotropic medication review was associated with a reduction in prescribing of psychotropic drugs, but has not been shown to improve clinical outcomes or to provide economic benefit. More robust evidence is needed before programs of focused psychotropic medication review can be recommended as part of routine care for any patient group.

Long-Term and Short-Term Antidepressant Use in General Practice: Data from a Large Cohort in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Antidepressant use is highly prevalent. Research has mainly focused on efficacy during short periods of use for depression and anxiety. There is a relative paucity of data regarding the frequency of long-term use.

METHODS

To determine the prevalence and possible increase of long-term use of antidepressants over recent years, we analyzed routine general practice care data in a large cohort of patients (n = 156,620) in and around Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Additionally, predictors of long-term use were studied.

RESULTS

Prevalence of long-term use of antidepressants is substantial, and such use appears to be increasing: 30.3% of use was long-term over the period 1995-2005 compared to 43.7% for the period 2005-2015. Higher age, a registered diagnosis of anxiety or depression, and the use of SSRIs or SNRIs were associated with long-term use in multivariate analysis. In addition, specific antidepressants were differentially associated with long-term use.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term antidepressant use is substantial and appears to be on the rise. Awareness of this phenomenon should be increased, such use should be prevented when possible, and reasons for long-term use need to be examined.

Antidepressant prescriptions and mental health nurses: an observational study in Dutch general practice from 2011 to 2015

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate developments in antidepressant prescriptions by Dutch general practitioners, alongside the national introduction of mental health nurses. Antidepressant prescriptions are very common in general practice, but are often not in line with recommendations. The recent introduction of mental health nurses may have decreased antidepressant prescriptions, as general practitioners (GPs) have greater potential to offer psychological treatment as a first choice option instead of medication.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Anonymised data from the medical records of general practices participating in the NIVEL Primary Care Database in 2011-2015 were analysed in an observational study. We used multilevel logistic regression analyses to determine whether total antidepressant prescriptions and antidepressants prescribed within one week of diagnosing anxiety or depression decreased in the period 2011-2015. We analysed whether changes in antidepressant prescriptions were associated with the employment or consultation of mental health nurses.

RESULTS

Antidepressants were prescribed in 30.3% of all anxiety or depression episodes; about half were prescribed within the first week. Antidepressants prescriptions for anxiety or depression increased slightly in the period 2011-2015. The employment of mental health nurses was not associated with a decreased number of prescriptions of antidepressants. Patients who had at least one mental health nurse consultation had fewer immediate prescriptions of antidepressants, but not fewer antidepressants in general.

CONCLUSIONS

Antidepressant prescriptions are still common in general practice. So far, the introduction of mental health nurses has not decreased antidepressant prescriptions, but it may have a postponing effect.

Psychotropic medication use in Australia, 2007 to 2015: Changes in annual incidence, prevalence and treatment exposure

OBJECTIVE

To examine changes in annual patterns of psychotropic medication use in Australia from 2007 to 2015.

METHODS

We used a 10% sample of individual-level nationwide dispensing claims for concessional beneficiaries dispensed psychotropic medications (stratified by class, subclass) to investigate annual trends and changes in the incidence and prevalence of use, median annual duration of exposure, proportion of people with single psychotropic dispensing and median defined daily doses per person dispensed each medicine per year.

RESULTS

Over the study period, there was a 26.1% decrease in the incidence and a 2.6% increase in the prevalence of all psychotropic medicine use. We observed a decrease in the annual incidence and prevalence of antidepressants (11.6% and 16.8%, respectively) but increases in the median annual duration of exposure (7.4%). Amitriptyline had the highest proportion of single dispensings of all antidepressants throughout the study period (26.5% in 2015) and defined daily doses per person dispensed each medicine per year increased by 20% for antidepressants overall. Benzodiazepine use decreased across all measures over the study period apart from long-term use (exposure for >240 days of the year), which in 2015 was 23.6% of those dispensed a benzodiazepine. We observed a relative increase in the incidence and prevalence of antipsychotic use (14.2% and 26.8%, respectively), and haloperidol had the highest proportion of single dispensings of any antipsychotic throughout the study period (47.5% in 2015). We observed a relative increase in the incidence and prevalence of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder medication use of 114.0% and 101.8%, respectively, over the study period.

CONCLUSION

Increasing doses and treatment durations of antidepressants warrants further investigation due to concerns about overuse. Single dispensings of amitriptyline and haloperidol may indicate off-label use and long-term use of benzodiazepines remains problematic. Despite increases in attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder medication use, prevalence of use is still much lower than the estimated prevalence of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in the adult population.

Risk of relapse after antidepressant discontinuation in anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder: systematic review and meta-analysis of relapse prevention trials

Objectives To examine the risk of relapse and time to relapse after discontinuation of antidepressants in patients with anxiety disorder who responded to antidepressants, and to explore whether relapse risk is related to type of anxiety disorder, type of antidepressant, mode of discontinuation, duration of treatment and follow-up, comorbidity, and allowance of psychotherapy.Design Systematic review and meta-analyses of relapse prevention trials.Data sources PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and clinical trial registers (from inception to July 2016).Study selection Eligible studies included patients with anxiety disorder who responded to antidepressants, randomised patients double blind to either continuing antidepressants or switching to placebo, and compared relapse rates or time to relapse.Data extraction Two independent raters selected studies and extracted data. Random effect models were used to estimate odds ratios for relapse, hazard ratios for time to relapse, and relapse prevalence per group. The effect of various categorical and continuous variables was explored with subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses respectively. Bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool.Results The meta-analysis included 28 studies (n=5233) examining relapse with a maximum follow-up of one year. Across studies, risk of bias was considered low. Discontinuation increased the odds of relapse compared with continuing antidepressants (summary odds ratio 3.11, 95% confidence interval 2.48 to 3.89). Subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses showed no statistical significance. Time to relapse (n=3002) was shorter when antidepressants were discontinued (summary hazard ratio 3.63, 2.58 to 5.10; n=11 studies). Summary relapse prevalences were 36.4% (30.8% to 42.1%; n=28 studies) for the placebo group and 16.4% (12.6% to 20.1%; n=28 studies) for the antidepressant group, but prevalence varied considerably across studies, most likely owing to differences in the length of follow-up. Dropout was higher in the placebo group (summary odds ratio 1.31, 1.06 to 1.63; n=27 studies).Conclusions Up to one year of follow-up, discontinuation of antidepressant treatment results in higher relapse rates among responders compared with treatment continuation. The lack of evidence after a one year period should not be interpreted as explicit advice to discontinue antidepressants after one year. Given the chronicity of anxiety disorders, treatment should be directed by long term considerations, including relapse prevalence, side effects, and patients' preferences.

'Doing the right thing': factors influencing GP prescribing of antidepressants and prescribed doses

BACKGROUND

Antidepressant prescribing continues to increase, with 5-16% of adults receiving antidepressants annually. Total prescribing growth is due in part to increased long-term use, greater selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor (SSRI) use and the use of higher SSRI doses. Evidence does not support routine use of higher SSRI doses for depression treatment, and factors influencing the use of such doses are not well known. The aim of this study was to explore factors influencing GPs' use of antidepressants and their doses to treat depression.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 28 practising GPs; sampled by antidepressant prescribing volume, practice size and deprivation level. A topic guide drawing on past literature was used with enough flexibility to allow additional themes to emerge. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Framework analysis was employed. Constant comparison and disconfirmation were carried out across transcripts, with data collection being interspersed with analysis by three researchers. The thematic framework was then systematically applied to the data and conceptualised into an overarching explanatory model.

RESULTS

Depression treatment involved ethical and professional imperatives of 'doing the right thing' for individuals by striving to achieve the 'right care fit'. This involved medicalised and non-medicalised patient-centred approaches. Factors influencing antidepressant prescribing and doses varied over time from first presentation, to antidepressant initiation and longer-term treatment. When faced with distressed patients showing symptoms of moderate to severe depression GPs were confident prescribing SSRIs which they considered as safe and effective medicines, and ethically and professionally appropriate. Many GPs were unaware that higher doses lacked greater efficacy and onset of action occurred within 1-2 weeks, preferring to wait 8-12 weeks before increasing or switching. Ongoing pressures to maintain prescribing (e.g. fear of depression recurrence), few perceived continuation problems (e.g. lack of safety concerns) and lack of proactive medication review (e.g. patients only present in crisis), all combine to further drive antidepressant prescribing growth over time.

CONCLUSIONS

GPs strive to 'do the right thing' to help people. Antidepressants are only a single facet of depression treatment. However, increased awareness of drug limitations and regular proactive reviews may help optimise care.

Average duration of treatment with antidepressants among concession card holders in Australia

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the average treatment duration with antidepressants that are reimbursed for concession card holders under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in Australia.

METHOD

This pharmacoepidemiological study was based on a representative 10% sample of patients receiving Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme prescriptions. Antidepressants redeemed by concession card holders in the period from 2010 to 2013 were analysed. A 5-year baseline period was used to exclude prevalent users from incident users. Estimation of treatment duration was based on the epidemiological equation: prevalence/incidence = average duration. The mean value for prevalence and incidence over the studied period was used in the equation.

RESULTS

The number of prevalent and incident users increased from 90,475 to 103,305 and from 25,006 to 26,289, respectively. The epidemiological average treatment duration in the period was about 4 years. When considered by age-bands, average treatment duration was 2 years in patients under 24 years, 3 years in patients 35 to 44 years and up to 5 years in the 55 to 64 year age group. Of new users of antidepressants reimbursed under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, 86% received their first prescription from general practitioners, 4.3% from psychiatrists and 9.7% from other physicians.

CONCLUSION

While recommendations have underlined the importance of giving antidepressants for a sufficient period of time, the results from this study show that it is as important to remind general practitioners to review patients on antidepressant treatment regularly, and try to cease drug treatment when timely.

Long-term antidepressant use: a qualitative study on perspectives of patients and GPs in primary care

BACKGROUND

Antidepressant use is often prolonged in patients with anxiety and/or depressive disorder(s) compared with recommendations in treatment guidelines to discontinue after sustained remission.

AIM

To unravel the motivations of patients and GPs causing long-term antidepressant use and to gain insight into possibilities to prevent unnecessary long-term use.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Qualitative study using semi-structured, in-depth interviews with patients and GPs in the Netherlands.

METHOD

Patients with anxiety and/or depressive disorder(s) (n = 38) and GPs (n = 26) were interviewed. Innovatively, the interplay between patients and their GPs was also investigated by means of patient-GP dyads (n = 20).

RESULTS

The motives and barriers of patients and GPs to continue or discontinue antidepressants were related to the availability of supportive guidance during discontinuation, the personal circumstances of the patient, and considerations of the patient or GP. Importantly, dyads indicated a large variation in policies of general practices around long-term use and continuation or discontinuation of antidepressants. Dyads further indicated that patients and GPs seemed unaware of each other's (mismatching) expectations regarding responsibility to initiate discussing continuation or discontinuation.

CONCLUSION

Although motives and barriers to antidepressant continuation or discontinuation were related to the same themes for patients and GPs, dyads indicated discrepancies between them. Discussion between patients and GPs about antidepressant use and continuation or discontinuation may help clarify mutual expectations and opinions. Agreements between a patient and their GP can be included in a patient-tailored treatment plan.

Did NICE guidelines and the Quality Outcomes Framework change GP antidepressant prescribing in England? Observational study with time trend analyses 2003-2013

BACKGROUND

Both the 2004 NICE depression guidelines and 2006 general practice Quality Outcomes Framework (QOF) encouraged improved targeting of antidepressant treatment for depression.

METHODS

Possible effects of the NICE guideline from January 2005, and QOF from April 2006, on rates of GP antidepressant prescribing were examined using time trend analyses of anonymised data from 142 English practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), 2003-2013.

RESULTS

Sustained reductions were found in the proportion of first-ever depression episodes treated within 12 months, of 4.2% (95% C.I. 1.0-7.3%) following introduction of the NICE guideline, and 4.4% (2.3-6.5%) following introduction of the QOF. Treatment rates for first-ever episodes fell from 72.5% (70.8-74.1%) in Quarter 2 (Q2) 2003 to 61.0% (59.3-62.7%) in Q1 2012, but treatment rates for recurrent episodes increased from 74.3% (72.8-75.8%) to 77.8% (76.5-79.1%), so overall rates remained around 70%. Mean prescriptions per patient per year doubled from 2.06 (2.05-2.07) to 3.98 (3.97-3.99).

LIMITATIONS

Participating practices were larger than average and not representative across regions. Inferences of cause and effect from time trend analyses are subject to the possibility of unidentified confounders. No data were available on depression severity or appropriateness of prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of GP antidepressant treatment for patients with incident depression fell following introduction of NICE depression guidelines and the QOF, but treatment rates for recurrent depression increased. Prescription numbers increased due to longer treatment courses. To impact on antidepressant prescribing rates, guidelines and performance indicators must address recurrent and long-term prescribing, rather than initial treatment decisions.