Volume 195 - Issue 2
In Other Journals
Author: Sophie McNamara
Med J Aust 2011; 195 (2): 98. || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2011.tb03222.x
Published online: 18 July 2011
Published online: 18 July 2011
Autism linked to SSRIs
Exposure to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) during pregnancy may increase the risk of autism spectrum disorders (ASD), according to a study of 298 children with ASD and 1507 control children. The population-based, case-controlled study is the first to systematically address the association between prenatal SSRIs and ASD risk. The researchers found that children whose mothers took SSRI antidepressants in the year before delivery were twice as likely to develop ASD. SSRI use in the first trimester was associated with a threefold increased risk.
The results held after controlling for the underlying mental health indication. No increased risk was found in children whose mothers had a history of mental health treatment but hadn’t taken SSRIs during pregnancy. Despite the significant association between SSRI use and autism, the researchers cautioned that only a small number of women were exposed to SSRIs in the study, and called for further research on the topic. The potential risk of SSRIs also needs to be balanced with the risks to the mother or fetus of untreated mental illness, the researchers added.
Arch Gen Psychiatry 2011; 4 July (online)
Pregnancy safe in MS
Between one-fifth and one-third of women with multiple sclerosis (MS) bear children after disease onset, but research on the effect of MS on pregnancy outcomes has had conflicting results. A new study using information from a large Canadian database, which captures 99% of births in British Columbia, may be reassuring for women with MS and their doctors. The research found that MS was not associated with a significantly different mean gestational age or birthweight, nor was it associated with higher rates of assisted vaginal delivery or caesarean section. However mothers with more severe MS had slightly higher odds of caesareans and assisted vaginal births but this did not reach statistical significance. Researchers said this warranted further study.
Ann Neurol 2011; 27 June (online)
Grog on the job
It seems that bar staff are taking a “one for you, one for me” approach to service, with 18.6% of Australian hospitality workers reporting that they usually drink alcohol at work. The secondary analysis of a large, nationally representative survey found that overall, 8.7% of Australian workers usually drink alcohol at work and 0.9% usually take drugs at work. The analysis of data on 9828 Australian workers aged 14 or older also found that 5.6% reported attending work under the influence of alcohol, and 2% attended work under the influence of drugs. Hospitality workers were the most likely to drink at work (18.6%), followed by financial services workers (14.7%) and construction workers (10.6%). “In general, workers who were younger, male, never married, frequent drinkers and had no dependent children were more likely to drink at work or attend work under the influence of alcohol than other workers”, the researchers wrote.
Addiction 2011; 27 June (online)
Do the fat potato
If you’re trying to lose weight, put down the potatoes. Using three large population studies, US researchers examined the association between increased intake of various foods and long-term weight gain among 120 877 men and women. Within each 4-year period, the participants gained an average of 1.5 kg. Weight gain was most strongly associated with increased intake of potato chips, potatoes and sugar-sweetened beverages. Increased intake of yoghurt was associated with the largest weight loss, followed by nuts, fruits and whole grains. The researchers suggest that weight loss strategies may be more effective when specific foods are targeted for increased or decreased consumption.
N Engl J Med 2011; 364: 2392-2404
Trial by marketing
The pharmaceutical industry plays a major role in supporting scientific research, but new research suggests that commercial interests may sometimes outweigh the scientific goals. A recent review of documentation relating to a trial of an epilepsy drug, gabapentin (Neurontin), concluded that it was a “seeding trial” designed to promote the drug.1 A related editorial describes a seeding trial as an “important and expensive form of marketing” where the primary objective is to introduce a new product and induce clinicians to use it, rather than to answer a scientific question.2 The researchers, who had access to trial documents because they were consultants in a lawsuit involving the drug, discovered that documents consistently described the trial itself as a marketing tactic. The researchers also said the study’s validity was undermined by its poor trial design, which used an uncontrolled, unblinded methodology.
1 Arch Intern Med 2011; 171: 1100-1106
2 Arch Intern Med 2011; 171: 1107-1108
Sophie McNamara, MJA