This afternoon’s symposium, ‘Mental Health Economics’, was a fusion of psychiatric and economic minds.
Tardy treatment
Economist Dominic Hodgkin presented a convincing argument on the prevalence of ‘clinical inertia’ in the context of bipolar treatment, which he defined as ‘failure of healthcare providers to initiate or intensify therapy when indicated’.
Mr Hodgkin and his team analysed data from the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) study, identifying five situations where a treatment adjustment is indicated, including:
- Presence of severe side effects
- Non-response to treatment
- ‘Roughening’ or worsening of symptoms
- New or more severe psychotic symptoms
- New acute episode
No treatment change occurred in 19% of visits where a treatment adjustment was indicated, suggesting that clinical inertia could be an problem, though he stressed the need for more in-depth studies in the area.
To this correspondent, Mr Hodgkin’s research is a good example of using a multidisciplinary approach to uncover unmet needs in bipolar treatment.
Over and out
So marked the end of thought-provoking WPA conference here for me in Madrid. It’s been a whirlwind of all things new in the research, treatment and management of bipolar, highlighting to this correspondent at least, what an exciting time it is to be involved the field.
Until next year!
Continue the conversation on Twitter at #wpa2014
Our correspondent’s highlights from the symposium are meant as a fair representation of the scientific content presented. The views and opinions expressed on this page do not necessarily reflect those of Lundbeck.
