These up-to-date recommendations provide an evidence-based framework that incorporates clinical wisdom and consideration of individual factors in the management of depression. Further, the novel style and practical approach should promote uptake and implementation.

These up-to-date recommendations provide an evidence-based framework that incorporates clinical wisdom and consideration of individual factors in the management of bipolar disorder. Further, the novel style and practical approach should promote their uptake and implementation.

Lithium is a unique and effective psychotropic agent with a long-standing history of clinical use yet it is increasingly overlooked in lieu of newer agents. The purpose of the present paper was to succinctly review the therapeutic profile of lithium particularly with respect to the treatment of mood disorders and consider its unique properties and clinical utility. A comprehensive literature review pertaining to lithium was undertaken using electronic database search engines to identify relevant clinical trials, meta-analyses and Cochrane reviews. In addition articles and book chapters known to the authors were carefully reviewed, and the authors appraised published guidelines. The evidence from these sources was rated using National Health and Medical Research Council evidence levels and synthesized according to phenotype and mood states. In addition, the authors have drawn upon published guidelines and their own clinical experience. Lithium has specificity for mood disorders with proven efficacy in the treatment of both unipolar depression and bipolar disorder. The recommendations are based predominantly on Level I evidence, but its clinical use has to be tempered against potential side-effects and the need for ongoing monitoring. In practice, lithium should be considered a first-line option in bipolar disorder, especially in prophylaxis and when onset of action is not an imperative. Lithium has been in use in modern medicine for 60 years and as such has been tried and tested across the full range of mood disorders. Arguably, lithium is the only true mood stabilizer and because of its unique properties is in a class of its own.

Objectives:  Bipolar depression is a core feature of bipolar disorder, a phase in which many patients spend the majority of time and one that confers a significant degree of burden and risk. The purpose of this paper is to briefly review the evidence base for the pharmacotherapy of bipolar depression and to discuss the recommendations for its optimal management.Methods:  A detailed literature review was undertaken with a particular emphasis on pharmacological treatment strategies for bipolar depression across the acute and maintenance phases of the illness. Electronic library and Web‐based searches were performed using recognised tools (MEDLINE, PubMED, EMBASE and PsychINFO) to identify the pertinent literature. A summary of the evidence base is outlined and then distilled into broad clinical recommendations to guide the pharmacological management of bipolar depression.Results:  Partitioning treatment into acute and maintenance therapy is difficult based on the paucity of current evidence. The evidence from treatment trials favours the use of lithium and lamotrigine as first‐line treatment in preference to valproate, and indicates that, for acute episodes, quetiapine and olanzapine have perhaps achieved equivalence at least in terms of efficacy. However, the effectiveness of the atypical antipsychotics in maintenance therapy is constrained by the potential for significant side effects of individual agents and the lack of both long‐term research data and clinical experience in treating bipolar disorder as compared to other agents. Conversely, lithium and the anticonvulsants are generally slower to effect symptomatic change, and this limits their usefulness.Conclusions:  There has been a tendency for research trials of bipolar depression to differentiate the illness cross‐sectionally into the acute and maintenance phases of bipolar depression; however, in clinical terms, bipolar depression invariably follows a longitudinal course in which the phases of illness are inextricably linked, and useful acute treatments are typically continued in maintenance. Therefore, when medicating mood in acute bipolar depression it is imperative to keep maintenance in mind as it is this aspect of treatment that determines long‐term success.

No abstract

Bipolar disorder is a common, debilitating, chronic illness that emerges early in life and has serious consequences such as long-term unemployment and suicide. It confers considerable functional disability to the individual, their family and society as a whole and yet it is often undetected, misdiagnosed and treated poorly. In the past decade, many new treatment strategies have been trialled in the management of bipolar disorder with variable success. The emerging evidence, for pharmacological agents in particular, is promising but when considered alone does not directly translate to real-world clinical populations of bipolar disorder. Data from drug trials are largely based on findings that identify differences between groups determined in a time-limited manner, whereas clinical management concerns the treatment of individuals over the life-long course of the illness. Considering the findings in the context of the individual and their particular needs perhaps best bridges the gap between the evidence from research studies and their application in clinical practice. Specifically, only lithium and valproate have moderate or strong evidence for use across all three phases of bipolar disorder. Anticonvulsants, such as lamotrigine, have strong evidence in maintenance; whereas antipsychotics largely have strong evidence in acute mania, with the exception of quetiapine, which has strong evidence in bipolar depression. Maintenance data for antipsychotics is emerging but at present remains weak. Combinations have strong evidence in acute phases of illness but maintenance data is urgently needed. Conventional antidepressants only have weak evidence in bipolar depression and do not have a role in maintenance therapy. Therefore, this paper summarizes the efficacy data for treating bipolar disorder and also applies clinical considerations to these data when formulating recommendations for the management of bipolar disorder.

We propose a comprehensive integrated model of community mental health service. Clarity of role, required outputs and expected outcomes will assist the development of effective and appropriate community mental health services. Outreach to the community is a key success factor for these services and their associated inpatient services. Gap analysis can assist in the planning and costing of community mental health services.

Objective: To provide a practical overview of the pharmacological management of adults with bipolar disorder in primary care and the role of general practitioners in the pharmacotherapy of this complex disorder. Data sources: Published guidelines for the treatment of bipolar disorder, plus Cochrane reviews, meta‐analyses, review articles and reports from randomised controlled trials that were published up to May 2009. Study selection: Over 500 articles on the treatment of bipolar disorder were reviewed, with an emphasis on meta‐analyses and systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. Where evidence was more limited, open trials and non‐controlled data were also reviewed. Data extraction: Key recommendations relevant to GPs were synthesised and rated according to National Health and Medical Research Council levels of evidence. Data synthesis: Lithium, valproate and atypical antipsychotics are first‐line treatment options for acute mania, and monotherapy is ideal if it produces an adequate response. For depressive episodes, recommendations are less definitive and the use of antidepressants is controversial. Most patients require maintenance treatment, during which pharmacotherapy should be used to prevent relapse, and psychological and social interventions should be considered. Conclusions: Bipolar disorder is a lifelong episodic illness that affects 1%–2% of the population, many of whom are principally managed by their GPs. Pharmacological treatment with mood‐stabilising agents is the primary form of management, although this is ideally provided in conjunction with psychosocial interventions.