anxiety

Treatment of Anxiety for Adults in Primary Care Settings: A Review

Author/s: 
Robyn L. Shepardson, Jeffrey S. Khan, Katherine A. Buckheit

Importance Anxiety disorders and symptoms are prevalent and burdensome, and patients are most likely to seek treatment in primary care settings. However, anxiety is underdetected and undertreated. This narrative review details behavioral and pharmacological treatment options that are feasible and effective in primary care.

Observations Screening for anxiety is recommended for primary care patients younger than 65 years. Given that anxiety often involves somatic symptoms, assessment should include patient-reported symptom measures, clinical interview, physical examination, and appropriate laboratory tests. For subthreshold symptoms (those that do not meet diagnostic criteria for anxiety disorders) and adjustment-related anxiety, starting with self-help and behavioral treatment is recommended. When deciding between behavioral, pharmacological, or combined treatment for anxiety disorders, consider the presentation, patient preferences, potential adverse effects, and treatment history, and engage in shared decision-making. Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) is the first-line behavioral treatment for anxiety. Brief CBT in primary care delivered by embedded behavioral health clinicians is effective. First-line pharmacotherapy for anxiety disorders includes several selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, which tend to be well tolerated without considerable long-term adverse effects. The main decision for pharmacological treatment is between a daily medication and a short-acting medication taken as needed for intermittent symptoms or while awaiting the effect of a daily medication. Benzodiazepines are not recommended due to risk of adverse effects, especially with long-term use. The Collaborative Care Management model, which involves collaboration between primary care clinicians, consulting psychiatrists, and care managers who monitor patient progress and provide behavioral treatment, improves anxiety outcomes compared to usual primary care.

Conclusions and Relevance Clinicians should recognize common anxiety presentations and understand how to differentiate between anxiety and other psychiatric or medical conditions. Referring patients to behavioral health specialists for CBT and/or prescribing recommended pharmacotherapy with Collaborative Care Management can help to reduce patient morbidity and improve functioning.

I’m Concerned About Anxiety—What Do I Need to Know?

Author/s: 
Robyn L. Shepardson, Jeffrey S. Khan, Jennifer S. Funderburk

What Is Anxiety?
Anxiety is a normal experience of worry or fear about something the body or mind interprets as threatening. Anxiety may show up in your thoughts, emotions, body sensations, or behaviors (like worrying, feeling nervous, sweaty palms, and avoiding certain situations).

I’m Concerned About Anxiety—What Do I Need to Know?

Author/s: 
Robyn L. Shepardson, Jeffrey S. Khan, Jennifer S. Funderburk

What Is Anxiety?
Anxiety is a normal experience of worry or fear about something the body or mind interprets as threatening. Anxiety may show up in your thoughts, emotions, body sensations, or behaviors (like worrying, feeling nervous, sweaty palms, and avoiding certain situations).

Practical Recommendations for Minimizing Pain and Anxiety with IUD Insertion

Author/s: 
Viktoriya Ovsepyan, Petra Kelsey, Ann E Evensen

Background: Intrauterine devices (IUDs) are one of the most effective, long-lasting, and convenient contraceptive methods available in the United States. Unfortunately, the anticipated pain and anxiety associated with an IUD insertion procedure deter many people from using this contraceptive method.

Methods: A literature review was conducted on PubMed by searching the terms “IUD insertion”, “pain management”, “anxiety”, “gynecologic procedures”. The Cochrane database was also searched for reviews about pain management methods during IUD insertions. Findings were summarized using the American Academy of Family Physicians’ Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) scale.

Results: Pharmacologic methods that can be used to reduce pain with IUD insertion include naproxen, tramadol, lidocaine paracervical blocks, 10% lidocaine spray, lidocaine-prilocaine cream, and EMLA cream. Non-pharmacologic methods for reducing pain or anxiety during gynecologic procedures include pre-insertion counseling, “verbal analgesia”, lavender aromatherapy, distraction with music or television, using Valsalva maneuver instead of tenaculum during IUD insertion, and use of heating pad during procedure.

Conclusion: Moderately effective pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic methods exist for reducing pain and anxiety with IUD insertion. These treatment methods should be offered to create a more comfortable experience for patients. Additional research is needed to determine the comparative efficacy of these methods.

A GUIDE to help patients and families better understand serious illnesses: Mnemonic device provides way to teach learners about advance care planning

Author/s: 
Helen James, Warren Harris Lewin

Advance care planning (ACP) was identified as a priority in the 2006 final report of the Public Information and Awareness Working Group of the Canadian Strategy on Palliative and End-of-Life Care.1 An important component of ACP is patients’ understanding of their prognoses, which might include expectations related to future function, symptoms, and life expectancy.2-4 Without realistic prognostic information, patients are at risk of not engaging in ACP that would otherwise help them gain control over their illnesses, reduce anxiety, and avoid unwanted treatments.2,3,5 Moreover, lack of that information might lead to challenging downstream goals-of-care conversations. In guidance published in 2023 regarding a physician’s duty to discuss a patient’s medical condition and prognosis during a goals-of-care discussion when the physician deems cardiopulmonary resuscitation not to be indicated, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario highlighted the importance of physicians being able to communicate prognoses skillfully.6

Effect of Psychological and Medication Therapies for Insomnia on Daytime Functions: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Author/s: 
Charles M Morin, Si-Jing Chen, Hans Ivers, Simon Beaulieu-Bonneau, Andrew D Krystal, Bernard Guay, Lynda Bélanger, Ann Cartwright, Bryan Simmons, Manon Lamy, Mindy Busby, Jack D Edinger

Importance: Daytime functional impairments are the primary reasons for patients with insomnia to seek treatment, yet little is known about what the optimal treatment is for improving daytime functions and how best to proceed with treatment for patients whose insomnia has not remitted.

Objectives: To compare the efficacy of behavioral therapy (BT) and zolpidem as initial therapies for improving daytime functions among patients with insomnia and evaluate the added value of a second treatment for patients whose insomnia has not remitted.

Design, setting, and participants: In this sequential multiple-assignment randomized clinical trial conducted at institutions in Canada and the US, 211 adults with chronic insomnia disorder were enrolled between May 1, 2012, and December 31, 2015, and followed up for 12 months. Statistical analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis in April and October 2023.

Interventions: Participants were randomly assigned to either BT or zolpidem as first-stage therapy, and those whose insomnia had not remitted received a second-stage psychological therapy (BT or cognitive therapy) or medication therapy (zolpidem or trazodone).

Main outcomes and measures: Study outcomes were daytime symptoms of insomnia, including mood disturbances, fatigue, functional impairments of insomnia, and scores on the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical and mental health components.

Results: Among 211 adults with insomnia (132 women [63%]; mean [SD] age, 45.6 [14.9] years), 104 were allocated to BT and 107 to zolpidem at the first stage. First-stage treatment with BT or zolpidem yielded significant and equivalent benefits for most of the daytime outcomes, including depressive symptoms (Beck Depression Inventory-II mean score change, -3.5 [95% CI, -4.7 to -2.3] vs -4.3 [95% CI, -5.7 to -2.9]), fatigue (Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory mean score change, -4.7 [95% CI, -7.3 to -2.2] vs -5.2 [95% CI, -7.9 to -2.5]), functional impairments (Work and Social Adjustment Scale mean score change, -5.0 [95% CI, -6.7 to -3.3] vs -5.1 [95% CI, -7.2 to -2.9]), and mental health (SF-36 mental health subscale mean score change, 3.5 [95% CI, 1.9-5.1] vs 2.5 [95% CI, 0.4-4.5]), while BT produced larger improvements for anxiety symptoms relative to zolpidem (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory mean score change, -4.1 [95% CI, -5.8 to -2.4] vs -1.2 [95% CI, -3.0 to 0.5]; P = .02; Cohen d = 0.55). Second-stage therapy produced additional improvements for the 2 conditions starting with zolpidem at posttreatment in fatigue (Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory mean score change: zolpidem plus BT, -3.8 [95% CI, -7.1 to -0.4]; zolpidem plus trazodone, -3.7 [95% CI, -6.3 to -1.1]), functional impairments (Work and Social Adjustment Scale mean score change: zolpidem plus BT, -3.7 [95% CI, -6.4 to -1.0]; zolpidem plus trazodone, -3.3 [95% CI, -5.9 to -0.7]) and mental health (SF-36 mental health subscale mean score change: zolpidem plus BT, 5.3 [95% CI, 2.7-7.9]; zolpidem plus trazodone, 2.0 [95% CI, 0.1-4.0]). Treatment benefits achieved at posttreatment were well maintained throughout the 12-month follow-up, and additional improvements were noted for patients receiving the BT treatment sequences.

Conclusions and relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of adults with insomnia disorder, BT and zolpidem produced improvements for various daytime symptoms of insomnia that were no different between treatments. Adding a second treatment offered an added value with further improvements of daytime functions.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01651442.

Postpartum Depression-New Screening Recommendations and Treatments

Author/s: 
Tiffany A Moore Simas, Anna Whelan, Nancy Byatt

Perinatal mental health conditions are those that occur during pregnancy and the year following childbirth, whether onset of the condition(s) predates pregnancy or occurs in the perinatal period. Perinatal mental health conditions are the leading cause of overall and preventable maternal mortality and include a wide array of mental health conditions including anxiety, depression, and substance use disorders. Perinatal depression specifically affects 1 in 7 perinatal individuals. While commonly referred to as postpartum depression, it is more accurately called perinatal depression because its onset corresponds with prepregnancy (27%), pregnancy (33%), and postpartum (40%) time frames.

Screening for Anxiety Disorders in Adults: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement

Author/s: 
US Preventive Services Task Force, Barry, M. J., Nicholson, W. K., Silverstein, M., Coker, T. R., Davidson, K. W., Davis, E. M., Donahue, K. E., Jaén, C. R., Li, L., Ogedegbe, G., Pbert, L., Roa, G., Ruiz, J. M., Stevermer, J., Tsevat, J., Underwood, S. M., Wong, J. B.

Importance: Anxiety disorders are commonly occurring mental health conditions. They are often unrecognized in primary care settings and substantial delays in treatment initiation occur.

Objective: The US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) commissioned a systematic review to evaluate the benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in asymptomatic adults.

Population: Asymptomatic adults 19 years or older, including pregnant and postpartum persons. Older adults are defined as those 65 years or older.

Evidence assessment: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that screening for anxiety disorders in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons, has a moderate net benefit. The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient on screening for anxiety disorders in older adults.

Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends screening for anxiety disorders in adults, including pregnant and postpartum persons. (B recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for anxiety disorders in older adults. (I statement).

The frequency and impact of undiagnosed benign paroxysmal positional vertigo in outpatients with high falls risk

Author/s: 
Hawke, L. J., Barr, C. J., McLoughlin, J. V.

Background
The frequency and impact of undiagnosed benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) in people identified with high falls risk has not been investigated.

Objective
To determine the frequency and impact on key psychosocial measures of undiagnosed BPPV in adult community rehabilitation outpatients identified with a high falls risk.

Design
A frequency study with cross-sectional design.

Setting
A Community Rehabilitation Program in Melbourne, Australia.

Subjects
Adult community rehabilitation outpatients with a Falls Risk for Older People in the Community Screen score of four or higher.

Methods
BPPV was assessed in 34 consecutive high falls risk rehabilitation outpatients using the Dix–Hallpike test and supine roll test. Participants were assessed for anxiety, depression, fear of falls, social isolation and loneliness using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Falls Efficacy Scale-International and De Jong Gierveld 6-Item Loneliness Scale.

Results
A total of 18 (53%; 95% confidence interval: 36, 70) participants tested positive for BPPV. There was no significant difference between those who tested positive for BPPV and those who did not for Falls Risk for Older People in the Community Screen scores (P = 0.555), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (Anxiety) scores (P = 0.627), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (Depression) scores (P = 0.368) or Falls Efficacy Scale-International scores (P = 0.481). Higher scores for the De Jong Gierveld 6-Item Loneliness Scale in participants with BPPV did not reach significance (P = 0.056).

Conclusions
Undiagnosed BPPV is very common and associated with a trend towards increased loneliness in adult rehabilitation outpatients identified as having a high falls risk.

Incidence, co-occurrence, and evolution of long-COVID features: A 6-month retrospective cohort study of 273,618 survivors of COVID-19

Author/s: 
Taquet, M., Dercon, Q., Luciano, S., Geddes, J. R., Husain, M., Harrison, P. J.

Background
Long-COVID refers to a variety of symptoms affecting different organs reported by people following Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. To date, there have been no robust estimates of the incidence and co-occurrence of long-COVID features, their relationship to age, sex, or severity of infection, and the extent to which they are specific to COVID-19. The aim of this study is to address these issues.

Methods and findings
We conducted a retrospective cohort study based on linked electronic health records (EHRs) data from 81 million patients including 273,618 COVID-19 survivors. The incidence and co-occurrence within 6 months and in the 3 to 6 months after COVID-19 diagnosis were calculated for 9 core features of long-COVID (breathing difficulties/breathlessness, fatigue/malaise, chest/throat pain, headache, abdominal symptoms, myalgia, other pain, cognitive symptoms, and anxiety/depression). Their co-occurrence network was also analyzed. Comparison with a propensity score–matched cohort of patients diagnosed with influenza during the same time period was achieved using Kaplan–Meier analysis and the Cox proportional hazard model. The incidence of atopic dermatitis was used as a negative control.

Among COVID-19 survivors (mean [SD] age: 46.3 [19.8], 55.6% female), 57.00% had one or more long-COVID feature recorded during the whole 6-month period (i.e., including the acute phase), and 36.55% between 3 and 6 months. The incidence of each feature was: abnormal breathing (18.71% in the 1- to 180-day period; 7.94% in the 90- to180-day period), fatigue/malaise (12.82%; 5.87%), chest/throat pain (12.60%; 5.71%), headache (8.67%; 4.63%), other pain (11.60%; 7.19%), abdominal symptoms (15.58%; 8.29%), myalgia (3.24%; 1.54%), cognitive symptoms (7.88%; 3.95%), and anxiety/depression (22.82%; 15.49%). All 9 features were more frequently reported after COVID-19 than after influenza (with an overall excess incidence of 16.60% and hazard ratios between 1.44 and 2.04, all p < 0.001), co-occurred more commonly, and formed a more interconnected network. Significant differences in incidence and co-occurrence were associated with sex, age, and illness severity. Besides the limitations inherent to EHR data, limitations of this study include that (i) the findings do not generalize to patients who have had COVID-19 but were not diagnosed, nor to patients who do not seek or receive medical attention when experiencing symptoms of long-COVID; (ii) the findings say nothing about the persistence of the clinical features; and (iii) the difference between cohorts might be affected by one cohort seeking or receiving more medical attention for their symptoms.

Conclusions
Long-COVID clinical features occurred and co-occurred frequently and showed some specificity to COVID-19, though they were also observed after influenza. Different long-COVID clinical profiles were observed based on demographics and illness severity.

Author summary
Why was this study done?
Long-COVID has been described in recent studies. But we do not know the risk of developing features of this condition and how it is affected by factors such as age, sex, or severity of infection.
We do not know if the risk of having features of long-COVID is more likely after Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) than after influenza.
We do not know about the extent to which different features of long-COVID co-occur.
What did the researchers do and find?
This research used data from electronic health records of 273,618 patients diagnosed with COVID-19 and estimated the risk of having long-COVID features in the 6 months after a diagnosis of COVID-19. It compared the risk of long-COVID features in different groups within the population and also compared the risk to that after influenza.
The research found that over 1 in 3 patients had one or more features of long-COVID recorded between 3 and 6 months after a diagnosis of COVID-19. This was significantly higher than after influenza.
For 2 in 5 of the patients who had long-COVID features in the 3- to 6-month period, they had no record of any such feature in the previous 3 months.
The risk of long-COVID features was higher in patients who had more severe COVID-19 illness, and slightly higher among females and young adults. White and non-white patients were equally affected.
What do these findings mean?
Knowing the risk of long-COVID features helps in planning the relevant healthcare service provision.
The fact that the risk is higher after COVID-19 than after influenza suggests that their origin might, in part, directly involve infection with SARS-CoV-2 and is not just a general consequence of viral infection. This might help in developing effective treatments against long-COVID.
The findings in the subgroups, and the fact that the majority of patients who have features of long-COVID in the 3- to 6-month period already had symptoms in the first 3 months, may help in identifying those at greatest risk.

Subscribe to anxiety