This study aims to explore the prevalence and associated risk factors for potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) in prescriptions among outpatients with depression, and report the widespread relevant drug interactions. The cross-sectional retrospective study was conducted on outpatients in a psychiatric hospital. We included prescriptions of outpatients with a principal diagnosis of depression from April 1st to June 30th in 2021. The patients were ≥ 18 years old and treated with two or more drugs including at least one psychotropic drug. pDDIs were detected and identified mainly using Medscape's drug interactions checker. Gender, the number of concomitant drugs, age and diagnosis were analysed as potential risk factors for the occurrence of pDDIs by logistic regression. A total of 13,617 prescriptions were included in the present analysis, and 4222 prescriptions (31.0%) were at risk of 8557 pDDIs. The risk of pDDIs in patients who were prescribed 4-6 drugs (OR: 3.49, 95% CI: 3.11-3.91, p < 0.001) or 7 or more drugs simultaneously (OR: 7.86, 95% CI: 1.58-39.04, p < 0.05) increased compared with patients prescribed 2-3 drugs. Patients with recurrent depressive disorders (OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.02-1.36, p < 0.05) had an increased risk of pDDIs compared with patients with depressive episodes. In terms of severity of pDDIs identified by Medscape's drug interactions checker, 0.7%, 16.4%, 77.5% and 5.4% of pDDIs were classified as contraindicated, serious, monitor closely and minor, respectively. The most common pDDI was escitalopram + quetiapine (374 prescriptions), which was classified as serious and monitor closely due to different mechanisms of interaction. Increased central nervous system (CNS)-depressant effect was the most frequent potential clinical adverse outcome of the identified pDDIs. pDDIs in outpatients with depression were prevalent in this retrospective study. The number of concomitant drugs and severity of the disease were important risk factors for pDDIs. The pDDIs of the category monitor closely were the most common, and the CNS-depressant effect was the most frequent potential clinical adverse outcome.

Family accommodation is a phenomenon that has been associated with worse treatment outcome of patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and greater severity of symptoms and levels of functional impairment. Yet, there are no Chinese scales to assess family accommodation in OCD among family members. The present study aimed to illustrate the steps of translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Chinese versions of the Family Accommodation Scale (FAS). After obtaining authorization of the developers, the Chinese versions of the FAS were translated and adapted from the English versions based on a standard protocol, following six steps: forward translation, pilot administration, language adjustment and cultural adaptation, back-translation, review and minor edit, and final approval of the developer. Thirty-five pairs of patients and corresponding relatives with different education levels were administered the FAS in the pretest stage. This study found that the semantic, idiomatic, and conceptual equivalence were obtained between the Chinese versions and original English scales, and the Chinese versions of FAS were well translated and culturally adapted. We also found that the Chinese versions of the FAS can be easily understood by people of different socioeconomic statuses.

Background: Family accommodation (FA) in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) means that the relatives of patients are involved in, help or facilitate patients' ritual behaviors and avoidance, which is a frequent occurrence and underresearched phenomenon in China. Recent studies have suggested that FA is adversely associated with treatment response, contradictory to the goal of cognitive behavior therapy, a contributor to the maintenance of symptoms and increased symptom severity, and associated with low levels of family and social functioning. There is increasing interest and focus on establishing a family-based intervention for OCD treatment based on the inclusion of relatives by decreasing FA. The present study explored the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Family Accommodation Scale for OCD Interviewer-Rated (FAS-IR). Method: A total of 109 patients with OCD and 91 primary relatives were assessed in corresponding patient and family measures, and the FAS-IR was administered to relatives by trained interviewers. Results: More than 90% of the relatives accommodated patients' symptoms with at least one kind of FA behavior over the previous week, and the incidence of extreme or everyday routines was as high as 59.3%. Exploratory factor analysis demonstrated two-factor structure for the whole scale, including (1) modification and facilitation, and (2) participation. Cronbach's alpha was 0.798 for the whole scale, and the interrater and test-retest reliability coefficients were 0.835 (95%CI: 0.603-0.937) and 0.882 (95%CI: 0.685-0.959), respectively. Convergent validity was supported in exploring FA and was associated with symptom severity, level of functional impairment and family functioning related to OCD. The FA was not significantly correlated with depressive symptoms rated by the patients, as evidence of acceptable divergent validity. There was no significant difference in FA total score based on patient gender, patient age, or relationship with patients. Conclusions: The Chinese version of the FAS-IR demonstrated excellent psychometric properties for assessing the degree of FA, suggesting that it is a useful and valuable instrument in clinical and research settings. (C) 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc.