Johanna Seifert

Dr. Johanna Seifert

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

7Years (2020-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
12 January 2024 in Sports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MARC NIERINGMARC NIERING
MARC NIERING
NWNacera Wolf-Belala
Nacera Wolf-Belala
JSJohanna Seifert
Johanna Seifert
OTOle Tovar
Ole Tovar
JCJacqueline Coldewey
Jacqueline Coldewey
TMThomas Muehlbauer
Thomas Muehlbauer
Maximal strength is a significant factor in achieving peak performance and injury prevention in athletes. In individualization strategies for the efficient development of athletes, it is necessary to consider the respective components separately. The purpose of this study was to systematically examine the effects of the different cycle phases on isometric, isokinetic, and dynamic maximum strength. A systematic literature review was conducted; databases were searched from January 1960 to September 2023. The included studies focused on the expression of maximal strength in the earlier follicular phase as well as at least one comparative phase. Of the initial 707 articles identified, 22 met the selection criteria and were included. The studies considered a total of 433 subjects. Our results revealed medium effects (weighted mean standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.60; seven studies) for isometric maximal strength in favor of the late follicular phase, small effects (weighted mean SMD = 0.39; five studies) for isokinetic maximal strength in favor of the ovulation phase, and small effects (weighted mean SMD = 0.14; three studies) for dynamic maximal strength in favor of the late follicular phase. The results indicate that the early follicular phase is unfavorable for all strength classes. Peak performance in isometric strength is seen in the late follicular phase, whereas isokinetic strength peaks during ovulation. Dynamic strength is optimal in the late follicular phase.

27 May 2021 in Pharmaceuticals
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
NMNicole Moschny
Nicole Moschny
GHGudrun Hefner
Gudrun Hefner
RGRenate Grohmann
Renate Grohmann
GEGabriel Eckermann
Gabriel Eckermann
HMHannah Maier
Hannah Maier
CMCatharina Meissner
Catharina Meissner
Both inflammation and smoking can influence a drug’s pharmacokinetic properties, i.e., its liberation, absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination. Depending on, e.g., pharmacogenetics, these changes may alter treatment response or cause serious adverse drug reactions and are thus of clinical relevance. Antipsychotic drugs, used in the treatment of psychosis and schizophrenia, should be closely monitored due to multiple factors (e.g., the narrow therapeutic window of certain psychotropic drugs, the chronicity of most mental illnesses, and the common occurrence of polypharmacotherapy in psychiatry). Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) aids with drug titration by enabling the quantification of patients’ drug levels. Recommendations on the use of TDM during treatment with psychotropic drugs are presented in the Consensus Guidelines for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Neuropsychopharmacology; however, data on antipsychotic drug levels during inflammation or after changes in smoking behavior—both clinically relevant in psychiatry—that can aid clinical decision making are sparse. The following narrative review provides an overview of relevant literature regarding TDM in psychiatry, particularly in the context of second- and third-generation antipsychotic drugs, inflammation, and smoking behavior. It aims to spread awareness regarding TDM (most pronouncedly of clozapine and olanzapine) as a tool to optimize drug safety and provide patient-tailored treatment.

7 November 2023 in Behavioral Sciences
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
MARC NIERINGMARC NIERING
MARC NIERING
TMTeresa Monsberger
Teresa Monsberger
JSJohanna Seifert
Johanna Seifert
TMThomas Muehlbauer
Thomas Muehlbauer
Levels of state and trait anxiety are relevant for performing artists and professional athletes to obtain optimal performance outcomes. However, evidence-based knowledge regarding the effectiveness of psychological interventions on performance anxiety is currently minimal. Thus, the objective of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to characterize, aggregate, and quantify intervention effects on measures of state and trait performance anxiety in performing artists and professional athletes. A systematic search of the literature according to the PRISMA guidelines was conducted on the databases PubMed, Medline, SPORTDiscus, PsycInfo, Embase, and Web of Science from 1 January 1960 to 9 November 2022. The search only included controlled studies employing pre–post measures and excluded performing arts fields that do not depend on fine motor skills. Initially, 1022 articles were identified; after removing duplicates and assessing abstracts and full texts, 20 articles were used to calculate weighted standardized mean differences (SMDs). In terms of state performance anxiety, our results revealed a large overall effect (SMD = 0.88), a medium effect (SMD = 0.62) for studies using scales with total scores (i.e., MPAI-A, STAI), and large effects (cognitive anxiety: SMD = 0.93, somatic anxiety: SMD = 0.92, self-confidence: SMD = 0.97) for studies applying scales with sub-scores (i.e., CSAI-2R)—all in favour of the intervention groups. Regarding trait performance anxiety (e.g., SCAT), we detected a small effect (SMD = 0.32), also favouring the intervention groups. Interventions to reduce performance anxiety in performing artists and professional athletes revealed varying levels of effectiveness ranging from small (trait) to large (state). Therefore, future studies should investigate modalities to increase intervention efficacy, especially for the small-sized changes in trait performance anxiety.

1 July 2021 in Journal of Neural Transmission
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JSJohanna Seifert
Johanna Seifert
MLMartin Letmaier
Martin Letmaier
TGTimo Greiner
Timo Greiner
MSMichael Schneider
Michael Schneider
MDMaximilian Deest
Maximilian Deest
STSermin Toto
Sermin Toto
Hyponatremia (HN) is the most common electrolyte imbalance (defined as a serum sodium concentration Na(S) of < 130 mmol/l) and often induced by drugs including psychotropic drugs. AMSP (Arzneimittelsicherheit in der Psychiatrie) is a multicenter drug surveillance program that assesses severe or unusual adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occurring during treatment with psychotropic drugs. This study presents data from 462,661 psychiatric inpatients treated in participating hospitals between 1993 and 2016 and serves as an update of a previous contribution by Letmaier et al. (JAMA 15(6):739–748, 2012). A total of 210 cases of HN were observed affecting 0.05% of patients. 57.1% of cases presented symptomatically; 19.0% presented with severe symptoms (e.g., seizures, vomiting). HN occurred after a median of 7 days following the first dose or dose increase. Incidence of HN was highest among the two antiepileptic drugs oxcarbazepine (1.661% of patients treated) and carbamazepine (0.169%), followed by selective serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SSNRIs, 0.088%) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (0.071%). Antipsychotic drugs, tricyclic antidepressants, and mirtazapine exhibited a significantly lower incidence of HN. The risk of HN was 16–42 times higher among patients concomitantly treated with other potentially HN-inducing drugs such as diuretic drugs, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, and proton pump inhibitors. Female SSNRI-users aged ≥ 65 years concomitantly using other HN-inducing drugs were the population subgroup with the highest risk of developing HN. The identification of high-risk drug combinations and vulnerable patient subgroups represents a significant step in the improvement of drug safety and facilitates the implementation of precautionary measures.

5 February 2021 in European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JSJohanna Seifert
Johanna Seifert
CMCatharina Meissner
Catharina Meissner
ABAnna Birkenstock
Anna Birkenstock
SBStefan Bleich
Stefan Bleich
STSermin Toto
Sermin Toto
TZTristan Zindler
Tristan Zindler
On March 11th, 2020, the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic. Governments took drastic measures in an effort to reduce transmission rates and virus-associated morbidity. This study aims to present the immediate effects of the pandemic on patients presenting in the psychiatric emergency department (PED) of Hannover Medical School. Patients presenting during the same timeframe in 2019 served as a control group. A decrease in PED visits was observed during the COVID-19 pandemic with an increase in repeat visits within 1 month (30.2 vs. 20.4%, pBA = 0.001). Fewer patients with affective disorders utilized the PED (15.2 vs. 22.2%, pBA = 0.010). Suicidal ideation was stated more frequently among patients suffering from substance use disorders (47.4 vs. 26.8%, pBA = 0.004), while patients with schizophrenia more commonly had persecutory delusions (68.7 vs. 43.5%, pBA = 0.023) and visual hallucinations (18.6 vs. 3.3%, pBA = 0.011). Presentation rate of patients with neurotic, stress-related, and somatoform disorders increased. These patients were more likely to be male (48.6 vs. 28.9%, pBA = 0.060) and without previous psychiatric treatment (55.7 vs. 36.8%, pBA = 0.089). Patients with personality/behavioral disorders were more often inhabitants of psychiatric residencies (43.5 vs. 10.8%, pBA = 0.008). 20.1% of patients stated an association between psychological well-being and COVID-19. Most often patients suffered from the consequences pertaining to social measures or changes within the medical care system. By understanding how patients react to such a crisis situation, we can consider how to improve care for patients in the future and which measures need to be taken to protect these particularly vulnerable patients.

11 May 2021 in Journal of Neural Transmission
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JSJohanna Seifert
Johanna Seifert
FFFabienne Führmann
Fabienne Führmann
MRMatthias A. Reinhard
Matthias A. Reinhard
RERolf R. Engel
Rolf R. Engel
XBXueqiong Bernegger
Xueqiong Bernegger
WGWaldemar Greil
Waldemar Greil
Data on drug prescription for outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) suggest women are more likely to be treated with psychotropic drugs, while data on sex differences regarding pharmacological treatment of psychiatric inpatients are currently not available. Drug utilization data from the program “Drug Safety in Psychiatry” (German: Arzneimittelsicherheit in der Psychiatrie, AMSP) of 44,418 psychiatric inpatients with MDD were analyzed for sex differences between 2001 and 2017. Sex differences were analyzed using relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). Time trends were analyzed by comparing the first (2001–2003) with the last time period (2015–2017). In general, men and women were equally likely to use psychotropic drugs. Monotherapy was more common in men. Women were more likely to utilize ≥ 4 psychotropic drugs. Antidepressant drugs (ADDs) were the most prescribed drug class. Men had a higher utilization of noradrenergic and specific serotonergic antidepressants (RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.12–1.19), especially mirtazapine (RR 1.16; 95% CI 1.12–1.19), but also of other ADDs such as bupropion (RR 1.50; 95% CI 1.35–1.68). Males had a slightly higher utilization of second-generation antipsychotic drugs (RR 1.06; 95% CI 1.03–1.09) and were less often treated with low-potency first-generation antipsychotic drugs (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.83–0.90). Tranquilizing (e.g., benzodiazepines; RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.86–0.92) and hypnotic drugs (e.g., Z-drugs; RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.81–0.89) were less utilized in the treatment of male patients. Not all sex differences were stable over time. More sex differences were detectable in 2015–2017 than in 2001–2003. Findings suggest that certain psychotropic drugs are preferred in the treatment of men vs. women, however, sex differences found in this study are not as large as in ambulatory settings. To make evidence-based sex-specific recommendations in the treatment of MDD, differences in drug response and tolerability need to be further researched.