Pregnancy termination: What psychiatrists need to know

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 08/01/2022 - 12:15
Display Headline
Pregnancy termination: What psychiatrists need to know

Approximately half of pregnancies in the United States are unplanned, and approximately one-fifth of pregnancies end in elective termination.1 Psychiatrists who treat women of childbearing potential should understand critical aspects of abortion that could affect their patients’ mental health.

Discuss the potential for pregnancy with your patients. Individuals with psychiatric illness are less likely to adhere to contraceptive methods and are more likely to have unplanned pregnancies and detect pregnancies late.2 Women receiving psychiatric care could be at risk of not detecting pregnancy early enough to meet state laws that restrict the time frames in which abortions are allowed.

Understand that patients face barriers to abortion. Almost immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade in June 2022, abortion became illegal in several states. Even if abortion remains legal and available in your jurisdiction, patients could face barriers, including strict limits on abortion timing, monetary and travel challenges, preabortion counseling mandates, and timely access to an abortion provider.

Know that most patients can provide informed consent. Most patients with psychiatric illness have capacity to make medical decisions, including whether to consent to an abortion. Pro forma assessment is not necessary. Assessing capacity to consent to abortion should be the same as any other capacity assessment. If a woman lacks medical decision-making capacity, a substitute decision-maker must be used.

Recognize that ambivalence is normal. Even when a woman is certain about her decision to terminate a pregnancy, she might experience ambivalence. Ambivalence about important life decisions is common and should be validated and explored.3

Be aware of bias. As psychiatrists, we must ensure that our personal opinions about abortion do not impact patient care. An impartial and nondirective approach is key, and any effort to persuade or manipulate a woman’s decision is unethical. Because women with mental illness might be vulnerable to coercion, it is important to ensure that the woman’s choice is voluntary.

Accurately communicate information about mental health and abortion to your patients. Abortion does not worsen mental health. Research on abortion and mental health is rife with poorly designed studies that contain methodological flaws, including failure to control for confounding effects, such as pre-existing mental illness, and inadequate control group comparisons.4 For example, the correct comparison group in which to consider mental health outcomes for women who are seeking an abortion is those who sought an abortion but were not able to have one—not women with planned and desired pregnancies. The best predictor of postabortion mental wellness is preabortion mental health.5 Well-designed studies, such as the Turnaway Study, have demonstrated that abortion does not cause a significant increase in mental illness.6 The Turnaway Study was a well-designed, prospective study of thousands of women who obtained a wanted abortion. It compared many outcomes, including mental health, among women who wanted an abortion vs women who could not obtain a wanted abortion.

Continue to: Know that patients might not receive accurate information about the risks and impact of abortion

 

 

Know that patients might not receive accurate information about the risks and impact of abortion. A number of states have requirements—known as “informed consent laws”—that mandate physicians to provide state-authored informational packets about the risks and alternatives to abortion to patients seeking abortions. Some of this information is scientifically inaccurate, which poses a significant ethical dilemma for doctors who must choose between legal requirements and an obligation to scientific integrity.7

Recognize that abortion being illegal could negatively impact mental health. The consequences of being forced to carry out an unwanted pregnancy are profound. Women unable to obtain an abortion are more likely to have adverse health and pregnancy outcomes, live in poverty, stay with an abusive partner, and have difficulty bonding with the child.6 Abortion is highly stigmatized in the United States, and belonging to a stigmatized group is a risk factor for adverse mental health sequalae, including anxiety, depression, substance use, and cognitive deficits.4-6

Stay up-to-date on your state’s abortion laws. The legal landscape regarding abortion is changing rapidly, and it is important to stay abreast of these changes.

Restrictions on abortion likely will significantly affect women with psychiatric illness. As psychiatrists, we must be aware of the impact of the country’s changing laws will have on our patients and their mental health.

References

1. Guttmacher Institute. Accessed July 21, 2022. https://www.guttmacher.org/
2. Miller LJ. Sexuality, reproduction, and family planning in women with schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull. 1997;23(4):623-635. doi:10.1093/schbul/23.4.623
3. Brody BD, Chaudhry SK, Penzner JB, et al. A woman with major depression with psychotic features requesting a termination of pregnancy. Am J Psychiatry. 2016;173(1):12-15. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.15030380
4. Major B, Appelbaum M, Beckman L, et al. Abortion and mental health: Evaluating the evidence. Am Psychol. 2009;64(9):863-890. doi:10.1037/a0017497
5. Steinberg JR, Tschann JM, Furgerson D, et al. Psychosocial factors and pre-abortion psychological health: the significance of stigma. Soc Sci Med. 2016;150:67-75. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.12.007
6. ANSIRH. The Turnaway Study. Accessed June 29, 2022. https://www.ansirh.org/research/ongoing/turnaway-study
7. Daniels CR, Ferguson J, Howard G, et al. Informed or misinformed consent? Abortion policy in the United States. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2016;41(2):181-209. doi:10.1215/03616878-3476105

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Ross is Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Landess is Clinical Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Dr. Kaempf is Clinical Associate Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of Arizona Medical Center, Tuscon, Arizona. Dr. Hatters Friedman is the Phillip Resnick Professor of Forensic Psychiatry, and Professor, Pediatrics, Reproductive Biology, and Law, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(8)
Publications
Page Number
8-9
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Ross is Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Landess is Clinical Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Dr. Kaempf is Clinical Associate Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of Arizona Medical Center, Tuscon, Arizona. Dr. Hatters Friedman is the Phillip Resnick Professor of Forensic Psychiatry, and Professor, Pediatrics, Reproductive Biology, and Law, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Dr. Ross is Assistant Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Landess is Clinical Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Dr. Kaempf is Clinical Associate Professor, Department of Psychiatry, University of Arizona Medical Center, Tuscon, Arizona. Dr. Hatters Friedman is the Phillip Resnick Professor of Forensic Psychiatry, and Professor, Pediatrics, Reproductive Biology, and Law, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Approximately half of pregnancies in the United States are unplanned, and approximately one-fifth of pregnancies end in elective termination.1 Psychiatrists who treat women of childbearing potential should understand critical aspects of abortion that could affect their patients’ mental health.

Discuss the potential for pregnancy with your patients. Individuals with psychiatric illness are less likely to adhere to contraceptive methods and are more likely to have unplanned pregnancies and detect pregnancies late.2 Women receiving psychiatric care could be at risk of not detecting pregnancy early enough to meet state laws that restrict the time frames in which abortions are allowed.

Understand that patients face barriers to abortion. Almost immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade in June 2022, abortion became illegal in several states. Even if abortion remains legal and available in your jurisdiction, patients could face barriers, including strict limits on abortion timing, monetary and travel challenges, preabortion counseling mandates, and timely access to an abortion provider.

Know that most patients can provide informed consent. Most patients with psychiatric illness have capacity to make medical decisions, including whether to consent to an abortion. Pro forma assessment is not necessary. Assessing capacity to consent to abortion should be the same as any other capacity assessment. If a woman lacks medical decision-making capacity, a substitute decision-maker must be used.

Recognize that ambivalence is normal. Even when a woman is certain about her decision to terminate a pregnancy, she might experience ambivalence. Ambivalence about important life decisions is common and should be validated and explored.3

Be aware of bias. As psychiatrists, we must ensure that our personal opinions about abortion do not impact patient care. An impartial and nondirective approach is key, and any effort to persuade or manipulate a woman’s decision is unethical. Because women with mental illness might be vulnerable to coercion, it is important to ensure that the woman’s choice is voluntary.

Accurately communicate information about mental health and abortion to your patients. Abortion does not worsen mental health. Research on abortion and mental health is rife with poorly designed studies that contain methodological flaws, including failure to control for confounding effects, such as pre-existing mental illness, and inadequate control group comparisons.4 For example, the correct comparison group in which to consider mental health outcomes for women who are seeking an abortion is those who sought an abortion but were not able to have one—not women with planned and desired pregnancies. The best predictor of postabortion mental wellness is preabortion mental health.5 Well-designed studies, such as the Turnaway Study, have demonstrated that abortion does not cause a significant increase in mental illness.6 The Turnaway Study was a well-designed, prospective study of thousands of women who obtained a wanted abortion. It compared many outcomes, including mental health, among women who wanted an abortion vs women who could not obtain a wanted abortion.

Continue to: Know that patients might not receive accurate information about the risks and impact of abortion

 

 

Know that patients might not receive accurate information about the risks and impact of abortion. A number of states have requirements—known as “informed consent laws”—that mandate physicians to provide state-authored informational packets about the risks and alternatives to abortion to patients seeking abortions. Some of this information is scientifically inaccurate, which poses a significant ethical dilemma for doctors who must choose between legal requirements and an obligation to scientific integrity.7

Recognize that abortion being illegal could negatively impact mental health. The consequences of being forced to carry out an unwanted pregnancy are profound. Women unable to obtain an abortion are more likely to have adverse health and pregnancy outcomes, live in poverty, stay with an abusive partner, and have difficulty bonding with the child.6 Abortion is highly stigmatized in the United States, and belonging to a stigmatized group is a risk factor for adverse mental health sequalae, including anxiety, depression, substance use, and cognitive deficits.4-6

Stay up-to-date on your state’s abortion laws. The legal landscape regarding abortion is changing rapidly, and it is important to stay abreast of these changes.

Restrictions on abortion likely will significantly affect women with psychiatric illness. As psychiatrists, we must be aware of the impact of the country’s changing laws will have on our patients and their mental health.

Approximately half of pregnancies in the United States are unplanned, and approximately one-fifth of pregnancies end in elective termination.1 Psychiatrists who treat women of childbearing potential should understand critical aspects of abortion that could affect their patients’ mental health.

Discuss the potential for pregnancy with your patients. Individuals with psychiatric illness are less likely to adhere to contraceptive methods and are more likely to have unplanned pregnancies and detect pregnancies late.2 Women receiving psychiatric care could be at risk of not detecting pregnancy early enough to meet state laws that restrict the time frames in which abortions are allowed.

Understand that patients face barriers to abortion. Almost immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade in June 2022, abortion became illegal in several states. Even if abortion remains legal and available in your jurisdiction, patients could face barriers, including strict limits on abortion timing, monetary and travel challenges, preabortion counseling mandates, and timely access to an abortion provider.

Know that most patients can provide informed consent. Most patients with psychiatric illness have capacity to make medical decisions, including whether to consent to an abortion. Pro forma assessment is not necessary. Assessing capacity to consent to abortion should be the same as any other capacity assessment. If a woman lacks medical decision-making capacity, a substitute decision-maker must be used.

Recognize that ambivalence is normal. Even when a woman is certain about her decision to terminate a pregnancy, she might experience ambivalence. Ambivalence about important life decisions is common and should be validated and explored.3

Be aware of bias. As psychiatrists, we must ensure that our personal opinions about abortion do not impact patient care. An impartial and nondirective approach is key, and any effort to persuade or manipulate a woman’s decision is unethical. Because women with mental illness might be vulnerable to coercion, it is important to ensure that the woman’s choice is voluntary.

Accurately communicate information about mental health and abortion to your patients. Abortion does not worsen mental health. Research on abortion and mental health is rife with poorly designed studies that contain methodological flaws, including failure to control for confounding effects, such as pre-existing mental illness, and inadequate control group comparisons.4 For example, the correct comparison group in which to consider mental health outcomes for women who are seeking an abortion is those who sought an abortion but were not able to have one—not women with planned and desired pregnancies. The best predictor of postabortion mental wellness is preabortion mental health.5 Well-designed studies, such as the Turnaway Study, have demonstrated that abortion does not cause a significant increase in mental illness.6 The Turnaway Study was a well-designed, prospective study of thousands of women who obtained a wanted abortion. It compared many outcomes, including mental health, among women who wanted an abortion vs women who could not obtain a wanted abortion.

Continue to: Know that patients might not receive accurate information about the risks and impact of abortion

 

 

Know that patients might not receive accurate information about the risks and impact of abortion. A number of states have requirements—known as “informed consent laws”—that mandate physicians to provide state-authored informational packets about the risks and alternatives to abortion to patients seeking abortions. Some of this information is scientifically inaccurate, which poses a significant ethical dilemma for doctors who must choose between legal requirements and an obligation to scientific integrity.7

Recognize that abortion being illegal could negatively impact mental health. The consequences of being forced to carry out an unwanted pregnancy are profound. Women unable to obtain an abortion are more likely to have adverse health and pregnancy outcomes, live in poverty, stay with an abusive partner, and have difficulty bonding with the child.6 Abortion is highly stigmatized in the United States, and belonging to a stigmatized group is a risk factor for adverse mental health sequalae, including anxiety, depression, substance use, and cognitive deficits.4-6

Stay up-to-date on your state’s abortion laws. The legal landscape regarding abortion is changing rapidly, and it is important to stay abreast of these changes.

Restrictions on abortion likely will significantly affect women with psychiatric illness. As psychiatrists, we must be aware of the impact of the country’s changing laws will have on our patients and their mental health.

References

1. Guttmacher Institute. Accessed July 21, 2022. https://www.guttmacher.org/
2. Miller LJ. Sexuality, reproduction, and family planning in women with schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull. 1997;23(4):623-635. doi:10.1093/schbul/23.4.623
3. Brody BD, Chaudhry SK, Penzner JB, et al. A woman with major depression with psychotic features requesting a termination of pregnancy. Am J Psychiatry. 2016;173(1):12-15. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.15030380
4. Major B, Appelbaum M, Beckman L, et al. Abortion and mental health: Evaluating the evidence. Am Psychol. 2009;64(9):863-890. doi:10.1037/a0017497
5. Steinberg JR, Tschann JM, Furgerson D, et al. Psychosocial factors and pre-abortion psychological health: the significance of stigma. Soc Sci Med. 2016;150:67-75. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.12.007
6. ANSIRH. The Turnaway Study. Accessed June 29, 2022. https://www.ansirh.org/research/ongoing/turnaway-study
7. Daniels CR, Ferguson J, Howard G, et al. Informed or misinformed consent? Abortion policy in the United States. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2016;41(2):181-209. doi:10.1215/03616878-3476105

References

1. Guttmacher Institute. Accessed July 21, 2022. https://www.guttmacher.org/
2. Miller LJ. Sexuality, reproduction, and family planning in women with schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull. 1997;23(4):623-635. doi:10.1093/schbul/23.4.623
3. Brody BD, Chaudhry SK, Penzner JB, et al. A woman with major depression with psychotic features requesting a termination of pregnancy. Am J Psychiatry. 2016;173(1):12-15. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2015.15030380
4. Major B, Appelbaum M, Beckman L, et al. Abortion and mental health: Evaluating the evidence. Am Psychol. 2009;64(9):863-890. doi:10.1037/a0017497
5. Steinberg JR, Tschann JM, Furgerson D, et al. Psychosocial factors and pre-abortion psychological health: the significance of stigma. Soc Sci Med. 2016;150:67-75. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.12.007
6. ANSIRH. The Turnaway Study. Accessed June 29, 2022. https://www.ansirh.org/research/ongoing/turnaway-study
7. Daniels CR, Ferguson J, Howard G, et al. Informed or misinformed consent? Abortion policy in the United States. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2016;41(2):181-209. doi:10.1215/03616878-3476105

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(8)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(8)
Page Number
8-9
Page Number
8-9
Publications
Publications
Article Type
Display Headline
Pregnancy termination: What psychiatrists need to know
Display Headline
Pregnancy termination: What psychiatrists need to know
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media

Managing bipolar disorder in women who are pregnant

Article Type
Changed
Mon, 05/02/2022 - 00:15
Display Headline
Managing bipolar disorder in women who are pregnant

Psychiatrists who treat women of childbearing age should consider that those women may become pregnant, and that women with psychiatric illness are more likely to have unplanned pregnancies.1 Thus, thoughtful perinatal medication choices should begin before pregnancy. Pregnancy is a time of vulnerability to psychiatric illness for many reasons, including physiologic changes that can affect mental status; changes in medication efficacy; and numerous stressors, such as new responsibilities and limited sleep.1,2 For the treatment of pregnant—or potentially pregnant—patients, we recommend the following.

Do not panic! Knee-jerk medication changes in response to learning a patient is pregnant can lead to an exacerbation of psychiatric symptoms, as well as decrease trust in clinicians.2 Switching to a medication with a purportedly “safer” reproductive profile may worsen psychiatric illness, while also exposing the fetus to a medication of unknown benefit. 2

Recognize the risk of untreated or undertreated psychiatric illness, either of which has the potential to harm both the woman and her fetus. For example, a pregnant woman in a manic state may be more likely to engage in risky behaviors, such as drug use or risky sexual activity, which can lead to adverse fetal outcomes. They may also present with a higher risk of suicide. Compared to nonpregnant women, pregnant women for whom lithium was discontinued were equally likely to experience illness recurrence and significantly more likely to experience postpartum illness recurrence.3 In addition, the risk of recurrence was greater after rapid discontinuation compared with gradual discontinuation.3

Accurately communicate research findings. Pregnancy risk categories are no longer used. A nuanced interpretation of the potential adverse effects of a medication, such as malformations, impaired fetal growth, birth outcomes (such as preterm birth), and neurodevelopmental sequelae is necessary. Physicians must accurately convey information about risks to their patients, including both the absolute risk of an adverse event and the possible range of severity. For example, lithium use during pregnancy confers a higher relative risk of Ebstein’s anomaly (a cardiac defect).4 However, the absolute incidence of this risk remains low: 0.6% of lithium-exposed infants vs 0.18% among unexposed infants.4 Ebstein’s anomaly also varies significantly in severity—serious cases may require surgery, but less serious cases need only monitoring. A reliable database that compiles the latest evidence may help in staying abreast of the latest data.

Treat the psychiatric illness. Consider the optimal treatment for the psychiatric illness. Lithium remains the gold standard treatment for bipolar I disorder, regardless of reproductive status. Olanzapine and quetiapine are also commonly used and effective during pregnancy. This is an opportunity to conduct a detailed review of the patient’s previous medication regimens, including a review of medication trials and efficacy. Keep in mind that untreated bipolar disorder also carries an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes.5

Consider pregnancy timing. Most organs form between weeks 3 to 8 of pregnancy. For example, if a medication potentially affects heart formation, but the patient is in the third trimester, explain to her that the heart has already been formed. Consider that medication may be required long-term and affect future pregnancies. Pregnant women require more frequent monitoring, because blood volume changes in pregnancy and postpartum can affect medication levels and efficacy. In addition, note whether a woman plans to breastfeed and be mindful of a medication’s profile in breastfeeding.

Ensure the patient can provide informed consent. Communicate your diagnostic formulation and treatment options. Consider involving the patient’s partner and/or support system in the discussion, if the patient consents. If a patient cannot provide informed consent, a surrogate decision-maker should be identified.6

Continue to: Collaborate with other clinicians

 

 

Collaborate with other clinicians, such as the patient’s OB/GYN and family medicine physician when possible. This will ensure that all clinicians are on the same page.

Plan for future pregnancies. Psychiatric medications can be long-term. Even patients who say they do not wish to become pregnant may someday become pregnant. Having discussions about medication choices, and their reproductive implications, prior to pregnancy allows patients to take an active role in their health.1,2

Consult a reproductive psychiatrist when indicated, and as early in the pregnancy as possible.

References

1. Friedman SH. The ethics of treating depression in pregnancy. J Prim Health Care. 2015;7(1):81-83.
2. Friedman SH, Reed E. Treating psychosis in pregnant women: a measured approach. Current Psychiatry. 2021; 20(7):34-35.
3. Viguera AC, Nonacs R, Cohen LS, et al. Risk of recurrence of bipolar disorder in pregnant and nonpregnant women after discontinuing lithium maintenance. Am J Psychiatry. 2000;157(2):179-184.
4. Patorno E, Huybrechts KF, Bateman BT, et al. Lithium use in pregnancy and the risk of cardiac malformations. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(23):2245-2254.
5. Bodén R, Lundgren M, Brandt L, et al. Risks of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes in women treated or not treated with mood stabilisers for bipolar disorder: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2012;345:e7085. doi:10.1136/bmj.e7085
6. Ross NE, Webster TG, Tastenhoye CA, et al. Reproductive decision-making capacity in women with psychiatric illness: a systematic review. J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry. 2022:63(1);61-70.

Article PDF
Author and Disclosure Information

Drs. Ross and Reed are Assistant Professors, Department of Psychiatry, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Hatters Friedman is the Phillip Resnick Professor of Forensic Psychiatry, and Professor of Pediatrics and Reproductive Biology, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(5)
Publications
Topics
Page Number
37-38
Sections
Author and Disclosure Information

Drs. Ross and Reed are Assistant Professors, Department of Psychiatry, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Hatters Friedman is the Phillip Resnick Professor of Forensic Psychiatry, and Professor of Pediatrics and Reproductive Biology, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Author and Disclosure Information

Drs. Ross and Reed are Assistant Professors, Department of Psychiatry, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. Dr. Hatters Friedman is the Phillip Resnick Professor of Forensic Psychiatry, and Professor of Pediatrics and Reproductive Biology, University Hospitals/Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio.

Disclosures
The authors report no financial relationships with any companies whose products are mentioned in this article, or with manufacturers of competing products.

Article PDF
Article PDF

Psychiatrists who treat women of childbearing age should consider that those women may become pregnant, and that women with psychiatric illness are more likely to have unplanned pregnancies.1 Thus, thoughtful perinatal medication choices should begin before pregnancy. Pregnancy is a time of vulnerability to psychiatric illness for many reasons, including physiologic changes that can affect mental status; changes in medication efficacy; and numerous stressors, such as new responsibilities and limited sleep.1,2 For the treatment of pregnant—or potentially pregnant—patients, we recommend the following.

Do not panic! Knee-jerk medication changes in response to learning a patient is pregnant can lead to an exacerbation of psychiatric symptoms, as well as decrease trust in clinicians.2 Switching to a medication with a purportedly “safer” reproductive profile may worsen psychiatric illness, while also exposing the fetus to a medication of unknown benefit. 2

Recognize the risk of untreated or undertreated psychiatric illness, either of which has the potential to harm both the woman and her fetus. For example, a pregnant woman in a manic state may be more likely to engage in risky behaviors, such as drug use or risky sexual activity, which can lead to adverse fetal outcomes. They may also present with a higher risk of suicide. Compared to nonpregnant women, pregnant women for whom lithium was discontinued were equally likely to experience illness recurrence and significantly more likely to experience postpartum illness recurrence.3 In addition, the risk of recurrence was greater after rapid discontinuation compared with gradual discontinuation.3

Accurately communicate research findings. Pregnancy risk categories are no longer used. A nuanced interpretation of the potential adverse effects of a medication, such as malformations, impaired fetal growth, birth outcomes (such as preterm birth), and neurodevelopmental sequelae is necessary. Physicians must accurately convey information about risks to their patients, including both the absolute risk of an adverse event and the possible range of severity. For example, lithium use during pregnancy confers a higher relative risk of Ebstein’s anomaly (a cardiac defect).4 However, the absolute incidence of this risk remains low: 0.6% of lithium-exposed infants vs 0.18% among unexposed infants.4 Ebstein’s anomaly also varies significantly in severity—serious cases may require surgery, but less serious cases need only monitoring. A reliable database that compiles the latest evidence may help in staying abreast of the latest data.

Treat the psychiatric illness. Consider the optimal treatment for the psychiatric illness. Lithium remains the gold standard treatment for bipolar I disorder, regardless of reproductive status. Olanzapine and quetiapine are also commonly used and effective during pregnancy. This is an opportunity to conduct a detailed review of the patient’s previous medication regimens, including a review of medication trials and efficacy. Keep in mind that untreated bipolar disorder also carries an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes.5

Consider pregnancy timing. Most organs form between weeks 3 to 8 of pregnancy. For example, if a medication potentially affects heart formation, but the patient is in the third trimester, explain to her that the heart has already been formed. Consider that medication may be required long-term and affect future pregnancies. Pregnant women require more frequent monitoring, because blood volume changes in pregnancy and postpartum can affect medication levels and efficacy. In addition, note whether a woman plans to breastfeed and be mindful of a medication’s profile in breastfeeding.

Ensure the patient can provide informed consent. Communicate your diagnostic formulation and treatment options. Consider involving the patient’s partner and/or support system in the discussion, if the patient consents. If a patient cannot provide informed consent, a surrogate decision-maker should be identified.6

Continue to: Collaborate with other clinicians

 

 

Collaborate with other clinicians, such as the patient’s OB/GYN and family medicine physician when possible. This will ensure that all clinicians are on the same page.

Plan for future pregnancies. Psychiatric medications can be long-term. Even patients who say they do not wish to become pregnant may someday become pregnant. Having discussions about medication choices, and their reproductive implications, prior to pregnancy allows patients to take an active role in their health.1,2

Consult a reproductive psychiatrist when indicated, and as early in the pregnancy as possible.

Psychiatrists who treat women of childbearing age should consider that those women may become pregnant, and that women with psychiatric illness are more likely to have unplanned pregnancies.1 Thus, thoughtful perinatal medication choices should begin before pregnancy. Pregnancy is a time of vulnerability to psychiatric illness for many reasons, including physiologic changes that can affect mental status; changes in medication efficacy; and numerous stressors, such as new responsibilities and limited sleep.1,2 For the treatment of pregnant—or potentially pregnant—patients, we recommend the following.

Do not panic! Knee-jerk medication changes in response to learning a patient is pregnant can lead to an exacerbation of psychiatric symptoms, as well as decrease trust in clinicians.2 Switching to a medication with a purportedly “safer” reproductive profile may worsen psychiatric illness, while also exposing the fetus to a medication of unknown benefit. 2

Recognize the risk of untreated or undertreated psychiatric illness, either of which has the potential to harm both the woman and her fetus. For example, a pregnant woman in a manic state may be more likely to engage in risky behaviors, such as drug use or risky sexual activity, which can lead to adverse fetal outcomes. They may also present with a higher risk of suicide. Compared to nonpregnant women, pregnant women for whom lithium was discontinued were equally likely to experience illness recurrence and significantly more likely to experience postpartum illness recurrence.3 In addition, the risk of recurrence was greater after rapid discontinuation compared with gradual discontinuation.3

Accurately communicate research findings. Pregnancy risk categories are no longer used. A nuanced interpretation of the potential adverse effects of a medication, such as malformations, impaired fetal growth, birth outcomes (such as preterm birth), and neurodevelopmental sequelae is necessary. Physicians must accurately convey information about risks to their patients, including both the absolute risk of an adverse event and the possible range of severity. For example, lithium use during pregnancy confers a higher relative risk of Ebstein’s anomaly (a cardiac defect).4 However, the absolute incidence of this risk remains low: 0.6% of lithium-exposed infants vs 0.18% among unexposed infants.4 Ebstein’s anomaly also varies significantly in severity—serious cases may require surgery, but less serious cases need only monitoring. A reliable database that compiles the latest evidence may help in staying abreast of the latest data.

Treat the psychiatric illness. Consider the optimal treatment for the psychiatric illness. Lithium remains the gold standard treatment for bipolar I disorder, regardless of reproductive status. Olanzapine and quetiapine are also commonly used and effective during pregnancy. This is an opportunity to conduct a detailed review of the patient’s previous medication regimens, including a review of medication trials and efficacy. Keep in mind that untreated bipolar disorder also carries an increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes.5

Consider pregnancy timing. Most organs form between weeks 3 to 8 of pregnancy. For example, if a medication potentially affects heart formation, but the patient is in the third trimester, explain to her that the heart has already been formed. Consider that medication may be required long-term and affect future pregnancies. Pregnant women require more frequent monitoring, because blood volume changes in pregnancy and postpartum can affect medication levels and efficacy. In addition, note whether a woman plans to breastfeed and be mindful of a medication’s profile in breastfeeding.

Ensure the patient can provide informed consent. Communicate your diagnostic formulation and treatment options. Consider involving the patient’s partner and/or support system in the discussion, if the patient consents. If a patient cannot provide informed consent, a surrogate decision-maker should be identified.6

Continue to: Collaborate with other clinicians

 

 

Collaborate with other clinicians, such as the patient’s OB/GYN and family medicine physician when possible. This will ensure that all clinicians are on the same page.

Plan for future pregnancies. Psychiatric medications can be long-term. Even patients who say they do not wish to become pregnant may someday become pregnant. Having discussions about medication choices, and their reproductive implications, prior to pregnancy allows patients to take an active role in their health.1,2

Consult a reproductive psychiatrist when indicated, and as early in the pregnancy as possible.

References

1. Friedman SH. The ethics of treating depression in pregnancy. J Prim Health Care. 2015;7(1):81-83.
2. Friedman SH, Reed E. Treating psychosis in pregnant women: a measured approach. Current Psychiatry. 2021; 20(7):34-35.
3. Viguera AC, Nonacs R, Cohen LS, et al. Risk of recurrence of bipolar disorder in pregnant and nonpregnant women after discontinuing lithium maintenance. Am J Psychiatry. 2000;157(2):179-184.
4. Patorno E, Huybrechts KF, Bateman BT, et al. Lithium use in pregnancy and the risk of cardiac malformations. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(23):2245-2254.
5. Bodén R, Lundgren M, Brandt L, et al. Risks of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes in women treated or not treated with mood stabilisers for bipolar disorder: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2012;345:e7085. doi:10.1136/bmj.e7085
6. Ross NE, Webster TG, Tastenhoye CA, et al. Reproductive decision-making capacity in women with psychiatric illness: a systematic review. J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry. 2022:63(1);61-70.

References

1. Friedman SH. The ethics of treating depression in pregnancy. J Prim Health Care. 2015;7(1):81-83.
2. Friedman SH, Reed E. Treating psychosis in pregnant women: a measured approach. Current Psychiatry. 2021; 20(7):34-35.
3. Viguera AC, Nonacs R, Cohen LS, et al. Risk of recurrence of bipolar disorder in pregnant and nonpregnant women after discontinuing lithium maintenance. Am J Psychiatry. 2000;157(2):179-184.
4. Patorno E, Huybrechts KF, Bateman BT, et al. Lithium use in pregnancy and the risk of cardiac malformations. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(23):2245-2254.
5. Bodén R, Lundgren M, Brandt L, et al. Risks of adverse pregnancy and birth outcomes in women treated or not treated with mood stabilisers for bipolar disorder: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2012;345:e7085. doi:10.1136/bmj.e7085
6. Ross NE, Webster TG, Tastenhoye CA, et al. Reproductive decision-making capacity in women with psychiatric illness: a systematic review. J Acad Consult Liaison Psychiatry. 2022:63(1);61-70.

Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(5)
Issue
Current Psychiatry - 21(5)
Page Number
37-38
Page Number
37-38
Publications
Publications
Topics
Article Type
Display Headline
Managing bipolar disorder in women who are pregnant
Display Headline
Managing bipolar disorder in women who are pregnant
Sections
Disallow All Ads
Content Gating
No Gating (article Unlocked/Free)
Alternative CME
Disqus Comments
Default
Use ProPublica
Hide sidebar & use full width
render the right sidebar.
Conference Recap Checkbox
Not Conference Recap
Clinical Edge
Display the Slideshow in this Article
Medscape Article
Display survey writer
Reuters content
Disable Inline Native ads
WebMD Article
Article PDF Media