BackgroundThe aim of this work is to estimate the French frequencies of dispensed psychotropic prescriptions in children and adolescents. Prevalence estimations of dispensed prescriptions are compared to the frequencies of use of psychotropic reported by 17 year-old adolescents.MethodsPrescription data is derived from national health insurance databases. Frequencies of dispensed prescriptions are extrapolated to estimate a range for the 2004 national rates. Self-report data is derived from the 2003 and 2005 ESCAPAD study, an epidemiological study based on a questionnaire focused on health and drug consumption.ResultsThe prevalence estimation shows that the prevalence of prescription of a psychotropic medication to young persons between 3 and 18 years is about 2.2%.In 2005, the self-report study (ESCAPAD) shows that 14.9% of 17 year-old adolescents took medication for "nerves" or "to sleep" during the previous 12 months. The same study in 2003 also shows that 62.3% of adolescents aged 17 and 18 reporting psychotropic use, took the medication for anxiety and 56.8% to sleep. Only 49.7% of these medications are suggested by a doctor.ConclusionThis study underlines a similar range of prevalence of psychotropic prescriptions in France to that observed in other European countries. Nevertheless, the proportion of antipsychotics and benzodiazepines seems to be higher, whereas the proportion of methylphenidate is lower.Secondly, a disparity between the prevalence of dispensed prescriptions and the self-report of actual use of psychotropics has been highlighted by the ESCAPAD study which shows that these treatments are widely used as "self-medication".
This nationwide, population-based, drug-used study showed for the first time that older patients with dementia are chronically overexposed not only to antipsychotics but also to psychotropics.
Among a non-selected population of ambulatory outpatients, the number of quarterly prescriptions with contra-indications with potentially harmful drug interaction was 27 in 10,000 prescriptions. This would extrapolate to nearly 200,000 contra-indications on the same-prescription sheets in France in the first quarter of 1999.
Seventy-four species, forms and varieties of Cubitermes Wasmann, 1906 have been studied, including taxa placed in synonymy with other species. Within this group of taxa, the enteric valve, mainly of the workers and soldiers, provided the best and the only clear-cut criteria for distinguishing some major subsets that are proposed here as species groups.The genus Cubitermes is re-described; the morphologies of the enteric valves are described in detail including the number of spatulae at the downstream end of the primary cushions; the possible presence of crests or bulges near the downstream end of the primary cushions; the overall shape of the primary cushions; the number of lateral supporting bristles; the kind of symmetry of the valve; and the structure of the secondary cushions. These characteristics are used to define nine species groups. For now, these groups have no taxonomic ranking but are helpful as regards species recognition. Identification keys for species groups are provided for soldiers and workers together with a partial key for imagines. Geographical ranges of the groups are also provided. On the basis of enteric valve morphology, some synonymies can no longer be validated: (a) C. planifrons Sjöstedt, 1924 is not a synonym of C. fungifaber (Sjöstedt, 1896); (b) C. kemneri Emerson, 1928 is not a synonym of C. zenkeri (Desneux, 1904); and (c) C. fungifaber var. elongata Sjöstedt, 1924 does not belong to the species C. fungifaber. Cubitermes planifrons and C. kemneri become valid again and C. fungifaber var. elongata is an invalid name.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.