Leena Mittal

Bio: Leena Mittal is an academic researcher from Brigham and Women's Hospital. The author has contributed to research in topics: Mental health & Medicine. The author has an hindex of 10, co-authored 28 publications receiving 403 citations. Previous affiliations of Leena Mittal include Harvard University.

Risk factors for depression, anxiety, and PTSD symptoms in perinatal women during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Abstract: Background Pregnant women and women who recently gave birth are vulnerable to COVID-19-related psychosocial stresses. Methods We assessed COVID-19-related health worries and grief, and current mental health symptoms (depression, generalized anxiety, and PTSD) in 1,123 U.S. women during the COVID-19 pandemic (May 21 to August 17, 2020) through a cross-sectional study design. Results Among our respondents, 36.4% reported clinically significant levels of depression, 22.7% for generalized anxiety, and 10.3% for PTSD. Women with pre-existing mental health diagnoses based on their self-reported history were 1.6-to-3.7 more likely to score at clinically significant levels of depression, generalized anxiety, and PTSD. Approximately 18% reported high levels of COVID-19-related health worries and were 2.6-to-4.2 times more likely to score above the clinical threshold for mental health symptoms. Approximately 9% reported high levels of grief and were 4.8-to-5.5 times more likely to score above the clinical threshold for mental health symptoms. Conclusions Perinatal women with pre-existing mental health diagnoses show elevated symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although causation cannot be inferred, COVID-19-related health worries and grief experiences may increase the likelihood of mental health symptoms among those without pre-existing mental health concerns. Providers should develop strategies for addressing health-related worry and grief within their practice.

Extent and management of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with type 2 diabetes and serious mental illness.

Abstract: Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in Type 2 diabetes, which commonly occurs in patients with serious mental illnesses (SMIs). We determined the extent to which patients with diabetes and SMI, relative to diabetes patients without SMI, met American Diabetes Association goals for cholesterol and blood pressure, met criteria for the metabolic syndrome, and were prescribed medications known to reduce cardiovascular events. We found that less than half of diabetes patients, both with and without SMI, met recommended goals for cholesterol levels; even fewer had adequate blood pressure control. In addition, a substantial proportion of all diabetes patients met metabolic syndrome criteria. However, diabetes patients with SMI were less likely to be prescribed cholesterol-lowering statin medications, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and angiotensin receptor blocking agents than diabetes patients without SMI. Patients with both diabetes and SMI are treated less aggressively for high cardiovascular risk than diabetes patients without mental disorders.

Screening for bipolar disorder during pregnancy.

Abstract: Bipolar disorder is a high-risk condition during pregnancy. In women receiving prenatal care, this study addresses the proportion screening positive for bipolar disorder with or without also screening positive for depression. This is a pilot study using chart abstraction of Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) and Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) scores from patients’ initial prenatal visits. Among 342 participants, 289 (87.1 %) completed the EPDS, 277 (81.0 %) completed the MDQ, and 274 (80.1 %) completed both. Among EPDS screens, 49 (16.4 %) were positive. Among MDQ screens, 14 (5.1 %) were positive. Nine (21.4 %) of the 42 participants with a positive EPDS also had a positive MDQ. Of the 14 patients with a positive MDQ, five (35.7 %) had a negative EPDS. The prevalence of positive screens for bipolar disorder in an obstetric population is similar to gestational diabetes and hypertension, which are screened for routinely. Without screening for bipolar disorder, there is a high risk of misclassifying bipolar depression as unipolar depression. If only women with current depressive symptoms are screened for bipolar disorder, approximately one third of bipolar disorder cases would be missed. If replicated, these findings support simultaneous screening for both depression and bipolar disorder during pregnancy.

Initiating buprenorphine treatment for hospitalized patients with opioid dependence: A case series.

Abstract: Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse, McLean Hospital, Belmont, MassachusettsBackground and Objectives: Opioid dependent patients arehospitalized frequently. We aimed to determine if initiation ofbuprenorphine treatment during hospitalization facilitates entry intotreatment following discharge.Methods: Retrospective case series (n¼47).Results: Twenty‐two (46.8%) patients successfully initiated bupre-norphine treatment within 2 months of discharge. Those patientsobtaining a referral to a specific program were more successful incontinuing treatment, but this difference did not reach statisticalsignificance (59.1% vs 39.1%, p¼0.18).Discussion and Conclusions: Hospitalization may be an importantopportunity to engage opioid dependent patients to initiatebuprenorphine treatment.Scientific Significance: This study provides provisional support forutilizingbuprenorphineforhospitalizedpatients.(AmJAddict2014:XX: XX–XX)

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder

Abstract: The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) previously published treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder in 2005, along with international commentaries and subsequent updates in 2007, 2009, and 2013. The last two updates were published in collaboration with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD). These 2018 CANMAT and ISBD Bipolar Treatment Guidelines represent the significant advances in the field since the last full edition was published in 2005, including updates to diagnosis and management as well as new research into pharmacological and psychological treatments. These advances have been translated into clear and easy to use recommendations for first, second, and third- line treatments, with consideration given to levels of evidence for efficacy, clinical support based on experience, and consensus ratings of safety, tolerability, and treatment-emergent switch risk. New to these guidelines, hierarchical rankings were created for first and second- line treatments recommended for acute mania, acute depression, and maintenance treatment in bipolar I disorder. Created by considering the impact of each treatment across all phases of illness, this hierarchy will further assist clinicians in making evidence-based treatment decisions. Lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, asenapine, aripiprazole, paliperidone, risperidone, and cariprazine alone or in combination are recommended as first-line treatments for acute mania. First-line options for bipolar I depression include quetiapine, lurasidone plus lithium or divalproex, lithium, lamotrigine, lurasidone, or adjunctive lamotrigine. While medications that have been shown to be effective for the acute phase should generally be continued for the maintenance phase in bipolar I disorder, there are some exceptions (such as with antidepressants); and available data suggest that lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, lamotrigine, asenapine, and aripiprazole monotherapy or combination treatments should be considered first-line for those initiating or switching treatment during the maintenance phase. In addition to addressing issues in bipolar I disorder, these guidelines also provide an overview of, and recommendations for, clinical management of bipolar II disorder, as well as advice on specific populations, such as women at various stages of the reproductive cycle, children and adolescents, and older adults. There are also discussions on the impact of specific psychiatric and medical comorbidities such as substance use, anxiety, and metabolic disorders. Finally, an overview of issues related to safety and monitoring is provided. The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope that these guidelines become a valuable tool for practitioners across the globe.

Guideline concordant monitoring of metabolic risk in people treated with antipsychotic medication: systematic review and meta-analysis of screening practices

Abstract: Background Despite increased cardiometabolic risk in individuals with mental illness taking antipsychotic medication, metabolic screening practices are often incomplete or inconsistent. Method We undertook a systematic search and a PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) meta-analysis of studies examining routine metabolic screening practices in those taking antipsychotics both for patients in psychiatric care before and following implementation of monitoring guidelines. Results We identified 48 studies ( n =290 534) conducted between 2000 and 2011 in five countries; 25 studies examined predominantly schizophrenia-spectrum disorder populations; 39 studies ( n =218 940) examined routine monitoring prior to explicit guidelines; and nine studies ( n =71 594) reported post-guideline monitoring. Across 39 studies, routine baseline screening was generally low and above 50% only for blood pressure [69.8%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 50.9–85.8] and triglycerides (59.9%, 95% CI 36.6–81.1). Cholesterol was measured in 41.5% (95% CI 18.0–67.3), glucose in 44.3% (95% CI 36.3–52.4) and weight in 47.9% (95% CI 32.4–63.7). Lipids and glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) were monitored in less than 25%. Rates were similar for schizophrenia patients, in US and UK studies, for in-patients and out-patients. Monitoring was non-significantly higher in case-record versus database studies and in fasting samples. Following local/national guideline implementation, monitoring improved for weight (75.9%, CI 37.3–98.7), blood pressure (75.2%, 95% CI 45.6–95.5), glucose (56.1%, 95% CI 43.4–68.3) and lipids (28.9%, 95% CI 20.3–38.4). Direct head-to-head pre–post-guideline comparison showed a modest but significant (15.4%) increase in glucose testing ( p =0.0045). Conclusions In routine clinical practice, metabolic monitoring is concerningly low in people prescribed antipsychotic medication. Although guidelines can increase monitoring, most patients still do not receive adequate testing.

Objectives, design and main findings until 2020 from the Rotterdam Study.

Abstract: The Rotterdam Study is an ongoing prospective cohort study that started in 1990 in the city of Rotterdam, The Netherlands. The study aims to unravel etiology, preclinical course, natural history and potential targets for intervention for chronic diseases in mid-life and late-life. The study focuses on cardiovascular, endocrine, hepatic, neurological, ophthalmic, psychiatric, dermatological, otolaryngological, locomotor, and respiratory diseases. As of 2008, 14,926 subjects aged 45 years or over comprise the Rotterdam Study cohort. Since 2016, the cohort is being expanded by persons aged 40 years and over. The findings of the Rotterdam Study have been presented in over 1700 research articles and reports. This article provides an update on the rationale and design of the study. It also presents a summary of the major findings from the preceding 3 years and outlines developments for the coming period.

Quality of medical care for people with and without comorbid mental illness and substance misuse: systematic review of comparative studies

Abstract: Background There has been long-standing concern about the quality of medical care offered to people with mental illness. Aims To investigate whether the quality of medical care received by people with mental health conditions, including substance misuse, differs from the care received by people who have no comparable mental disorder. Method A systematic review of studies that examined the quality of medical care in those with and without mental illness was conducted using robust critical appraisal techniques. Results Of 31 valid studies, 27 examined receipt of medical care in those with and without mental illness and 10 examined medical care in those with and without substance use disorder (or dual diagnosis). Nineteen of 27 and 10 of 10, respectively, suggested inferior quality of care in at least one domain. Twelve studies found no appreciable differences in care or failed to detect a difference in at least one key area. Several studies showed an increase in healthcare utilisation but without any increase in quality. Three studies found superior care for individuals with mental illness in specific subdomains. There was inadequate information concerning patient satisfaction and structural differences in healthcare delivery. There was also inadequate separation of delivery of care from uptake in care on which to base causal explanations. Conclusions Despite similar or more frequent medical contacts, there are often disparities in the physical healthcare delivered to those with psychiatric illness although the magnitude of this effect varies considerably.