ArticleDer Nervenarzt2020
[Analysis of risk factors, etiology and treatment standard of lithium poisoning].
Article in Der Nervenarzt, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Despite unlimited access to therapeutic drug monitoring lithium poisoning is still a common and potentially life-threatening but in most cases preventable complication of lithium treatment; however, it is still considered to be the gold standard in the treatment of affective disorders. The necessity of drug monitoring and potential lithium toxicity substantiate the skepticism of many therapists with respect to this often very effective treatment. This therefore limits the use of lithium although the unique therapeutic effects and high efficiency are well known. This retrospective data analysis of risk factors and etiology of lithium poisoning cases identified 58 cases of lithium poisoning, which were treated internally in this hospital between 2010 and 2014. Of the patients 67.2% were female and the majority were classified as chronic poisoning (66.1%). The most relevant patient-related risk factor seemed to be insufficient self-management as 26% of cases of lithium poisoning occurred during febrile infections or exsiccosis. Regarding practitioner-related risk factors, an insufficient consideration of drug interactions, insufficient therapeutic drug monitoring after dose increase and a paucity of experience and knowledge concerning lithium treatment were most relevant. This study illustrates the most important risk factors for lithium poisoning and their frequencies and contributes to raise awareness for this highly relevant topic. These data can help to prevent further cases of lithium poisoning. Furthermore, the results enable a comparison between the actual treatment reality and currently available evidence for the treatment of lithium poisoning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.