RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: According to guidelines, psychotic depression should be treated with both antipsychotics and antidepressants, but current practice is largely unknown. We investigated the prevalence of antipsychotic and antidepressant use in first-episode psychotic depression and factors related to antipsychotic use after the diagnosis. METHODS: We identified individuals aged 16-65 with a first-episode diagnosis of psychotic depression (ICD-10 codes F32.3, F33.3) from nationwide data linkage of Finnish healthcare and population registers during 2000-2018. Point prevalence was measured as 2-week time windows every 3 months, investigating whether the individual had a modeled drug use period ongoing during the window or not, censoring to death and end of data linkage. RESULTS: The study population included 18,490 individuals (58.0% women; mean age 39.9 years, standard deviation 14.7). The prevalence of use for antidepressants (75.0%), antipsychotics (56.4%), and both (50.0%) were highest at 3 months after the diagnosis. The prevalence declined to 51.8%, 34.1%, and 28.7%, respectively, at 3 years after the diagnosis. In a logistic regression analysis, younger age (adjusted odds ratio < 25 vs. ≥55, 0.82 [95% confidence interval 0.73-0.91]), eating disorders (0.78 [0.66-0.92]), substance use disorders (0.80 [0.73-0.87]), and occupational inactivity (0.80 [0.73-0.87]) were associated with decreased odds of using antipsychotics at 3 months after diagnosis. Increased odds were found for diagnosis from inpatient care (1.74 [1.62-1.86]), and later year of cohort entry (2010-2014 vs. 2000-2004, 1.56 [1.42-1.70]). CONCLUSION: At most, half of the individuals with newly diagnosed psychotic depression used both antidepressants and antipsychotics. This likely has a negative impact on treatment success.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic differences in alcohol-related mortality and hospitalisations, as based on register data, are larger than socioeconomic differences in various types of harmful drinking, as based on survey data. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to use a follow-up study to examine whether differential drinking patterns between socioeconomic groups explain the observed differences in alcohol-related mortality and hospitalisations, or whether similar drinking patterns predict higher mortality among lower socioeconomic groups. METHOD: The study population included Finns who participated in cross-sectional surveys on drinking habits in 1969, 1976 or 1984 when aged 25-69 (n = 6406). They were followed up for alcohol-related mortality and hospitalisations (n = 180) for 16 years. Drinking patterns were measured by total consumption, frequency of subjective intoxication and of drinking different amounts of alcohol at a time, and by volume of consumption that was drunk in heavy drinking occasions and non-heavy drinking occasions. RESULTS: Compared with non-manual workers, manual workers had a 2.06-fold hazard of alcohol-related death or hospitalisation. Adjustment for drinking patterns explained only a small fraction of the excess hazard among manual workers. Additionally, in each category of total consumption and in each level of the volume drunk in heavy drinking occasions, the risk of alcohol-related death and hospitalisation was higher for manual than for non-manual workers. CONCLUSIONS: Consequences of similar drinking patterns are more severe for those with lower socioeconomic status. Future studies are needed to explain how higher socioeconomic groups manage to escape the consequences of drinking that others have to face.