This state-of-the-art review explores the relationship between depression and diabetes, highlighting the two-way influences that make treatment challenging and worsen the outcomes of both conditions. Depression and diabetes often co-occur and share genetic, lifestyle, and psychosocial risk factors. Lifestyle elements such as diet, physical activity, and sleep patterns play a role on the development and management of both conditions, highlighting the need for integrated treatment strategies. The evidence suggests that traditional management strategies focusing on either condition in isolation fall short of addressing the intertwined nature of diabetes and depression. Instead, integrated care models encompassing psychological support and medical management are recommended to improve treatment efficacy and patient adherence. Such models require collaboration across multiple healthcare disciplines, including endocrinology, psychiatry, and primary care, to offer a holistic approach to patient care. This review also identifies significant patient-related barriers to effective management, such as stigma, psychological resistance, and health literacy, which need to be addressed through patient-centered education and support systems. Future directions for research include longitudinal studies in diverse populations to further elucidate causal relationships and the exploration of novel therapeutic targets, as well as the effectiveness of healthcare models aimed at preventing the onset of one condition in individuals diagnosed with the other.
There are numerous definitions of polypharmacy to describe the use of many medications among older adults, but there is a need to clarify if they are purposive and meaningful. By means of a systematic review, we identified definitions of polypharmacy used in multimorbid older adults (≥65 years). We evaluated if the definitions align among the domains of research, clinical practice, and public health and appraised whether concepts of polypharmacy are based on strong foundations. More than 46 definitions of polypharmacy were retrieved from 348 publications (research: n = 243; clinical practice: n = 88; public health: n = 17). Several thresholds based on the number of medications were mentioned. The majority of the publications (n = 202, 58%) used a minimal threshold of five medications. Heterogeneous qualitative definitions were identified, mostly stating that polypharmacy is “more drugs than needed”. There was no significant divergence between domains as to the type of definitions used, although qualitative definitions were more common in clinical practice. Nearly half (n = 156, 47%) of the publications provided no justification for the polypharmacy definition used. The wide variety of definitions for polypharmacy precludes comparisons, appropriate identification and management of polypharmacy in multimorbid older adults. Standardized definitions would allow more coherent judgments regarding the individual and collective stakes of polypharmacy.
Purpose: To conduct a systematic review of the economic impact of interventions intended at optimizing medication use in older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. Methods: We searched Ovid-Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Ageline, Cochrane, and Web of Science, for articles published between 2004 and 2020 that studied older adults with multimorbidity and polypharmacy. The intervention studied had to be aimed at optimizing medication use and present results on costs. Results: Out of 3,871 studies identified by the search strategy, eleven studies were included. The interventions involved different provider types, with a majority described as a multidisciplinary team involving a pharmacist and a general practitioner, in the decision-making process. Interventions were generally associated with a reduction in medication expenditure. The benefits of the intervention in terms of clinical outcomes remain limited. Five studies were cost-benefit analyses, which had a net benefit that was either null or positive. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses resulted in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios that were generally within the willingness-to-pay thresholds of the countries in which the studies were conducted. However, the quality of the studies was generally low. Omission of key cost elements of economic evaluations, including intervention cost and payer perspective, limited interpretability. Conclusion: Interventions to optimize medication use may provide benefits that outweigh their implementation costs, but the evidence remains limited. There is a need to identify and address barriers to the scaling-up of such interventions, starting with the current incentive structures for pharmacists, physicians, and patients.
Purpose: Antidepressant consumption has risen in recent years, driven by longer treatment duration. The objective of this study was to measure the prevalence of antidepressant long-term and chronic use in the Bologna area, Italy, and to identify their main determinants. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective claims-based cohort study by using the Bologna Local Health Authority data. A cohort of 18,307 incident users of antidepressant drugs in 2013 was selected, and subjects were followed for three years. A long-term utilization was defined as having at least one prescription claimed during each year of follow-up, while chronic utilization was defined as claiming at least 180 defined daily doses per year. Factors associated with chronic and long-term use were identified by univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. Results: In our cohort, 5448 (29.8%) and 1817 (9.9%) subjects were dispensed antidepressants for a long-term course and in a chronically way, respectively. Older age, antidepressant polytherapy, polypharmacy, and being prescribed the first antidepressant by a hospital physician were all factors independently associated with chronic and long-term prescriptions of antidepressant drugs. Results were reported separately for men and women. Conclusion: Antidepressant long-term and chronic prescriptions are common in the Bologna area. Because longer treatment should be clinically motivated, these results strongly prompt the need to evaluate the actual relevance, as they may indicate potentially inappropriate prescription patterns.
We assessed the association between the use of medications for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and the risk of all-cause mortality and unintentional injuries leading to emergency department (ED) or hospital admission in individuals aged ≤24 years with ADHD. We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study between 2000 and 2021 using Quebec health administrative data. Individuals were followed from the first ADHD diagnosis or ADHD medication claim until turning 25, death, or study end. Exposure was defined as mutually exclusive episodes of ADHD medication use and/or coverage under the public provincial drug plan (PDP): 1) covered and not treated with ADHD medication; 2) covered and treated with ADHD medication; and 3) not covered under the PDP. The risk of all-cause mortality and unintentional injuries associated with exposure episodes was estimated using multivariable survival analyses. The cohort included n = 217 192 individuals aged 1–24 years with a male to female ratio of close to 2:1. Compared to non-medication use, episodes of ADHD medication use, overall, were associated with reduced all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48–0.76) and unintentional injury leading to ED (0.75, 0.74–0.77) or hospitalisation (0.71, 0.68–0.75). Episodes of stimulants were associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality and reduced risk of unintentional injuries, while episodes with non-stimulants and with both stimulants and non-stimulants concomitantly were associated with reduced risk of unintentional injuries, but not of all-cause mortality. Although residual confounding cannot be excluded, stimulants may have a protective effect in terms of risk of all-cause mortality and both stimulants and non-stimulants for ADHD may reduce the risk of unintentional injuries. The findings of the current study should inform clinical decision making on the choice of starting a pharmacological treatment for ADHD, when a balance needs to be struck between expected benefits and possible risks.