Introduction

The WHO warned that the COVID-19 pandemic could have psychiatric consequences such as elevated levels depression, increased alcohol and drug use, and other behaviours that exert a strong influence on health. In Latvia a state of emergency was announced on March 12^th, was extended twice and lifted on June 10th.

Objectives

To estimate the prevalence of depression and distress in the general population of Latvia and association with substance use during the state of emergency.

Methods

The nationwide representative online study in the general population of Latvia was conducted in July 2020 during three week period. The Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) was used to determine the presence of distress/depression. The structured questionnaire to determine psychoactive substance use was applied. Proportions of independent variables across the study groups were compared using Chi-square test.

Results

The study sample included 2608 respondents. The prevalence of depression and distress was estimated at 5.7% (95%CI 4.92 – 6.71) and 13.5% (95%CI 6.85 – 8.91), respectively. Patients with depression (28% vs. 7.4%, p <0.001) and distress (30.9% vs. 7.4% p <0.05) smoked more tobacco compared to respondents without distress/depression. Those with depression or distress were significantly more likely to consume more alcohol during the emergency state than people without depression or distress (14.0% and 17.7% vs. 6.6%, p <0.001). The changes in the use of other psychoactive substances in those who had depression or distress were not statistically significant.

Conclusions

Preparing support systems to mitigate mental health consequences is needed urgently.

Abstract Body

Certain percentage of the first-episode schizophrenia patients presents with negative symptoms, which persists over the year and influence treatment outcomes (Galderisi et al. 2013). Treatment of negative symptoms has been a significant continuous clinical challenge.

Majority of recently published guidelines recommend antipsychotic monotherapy as the standard of care, recommending antipsychotic combination therapy only after a failed trial with clozapine (George A. Keepers et al. 2020; Faden et al. 2020). However, real-life forces clinicians to look for possible combinations of medications early on, especially to tackle negative symptoms.

The systematic review of global prescribing practices covering four decades found the pooled median rate of antipsychotic combination therapy approximately 20% (Gallego et al. 2012). One of the largest retrospective studies every conducted (n = 62,250) assessed rehospitalisation rates and the long-term use of antipsychotic polypharmacy in schizophrenia. Antipsychotic combination treatment was associated with an approximate 10% lower relative risk of psychiatric rehospitalisation compared with antipsychotic monotherapy (Tiihonen et al. 2019). Real-world effectiveness study of antipsychotic monotherapy vs. polypharmacy in schizophrenia from Eastern Europe is also supporting this approach (Katona, Czobor, and Bitter 2014).

At the same time antipsychotic combination therapy can increase the total antipsychotic dose burden, frequency of adverse effects, potential drug-drug interactions and incur additional costs.

In our recent naturalistic study in schizophrenia outpatients (n=120) with insufficient effectiveness of previous antipsychotics therapy on negative symptoms, we were able successfully switch therapy form several different antipsychotic combinations to monotherapy and gain clinical benefits (Rancans et al, 2020).