Severe Mental Illness — MCQs
On this page
A 34-year-old man with paranoid schizophrenia presents with a 4-week history of decreased motivation, social withdrawal, and neglect of self-care. He describes feeling empty and lacking energy. He denies low mood, anhedonia, or suicidal ideation. He has been stable on risperidone 4mg daily for 2 years with good control of positive symptoms. Mental state examination reveals blunted affect and poverty of speech but no hallucinations or delusions. What is the most likely explanation for his current presentation?
A 26-year-old woman with bipolar affective disorder type I presents to the emergency department with a 2-day history of productive cough, fever, and general malaise. She has been stable on lithium carbonate 800mg daily for 3 years. Examination reveals temperature 38.5°C, respiratory rate 24/min, and coarse crepitations in the right lung base. Chest X-ray confirms right lower lobe pneumonia. What is the most appropriate management of her lithium therapy?
A 42-year-old man with a 15-year history of schizophrenia is reviewed in the outpatient clinic. He has tried multiple antipsychotics with poor response and was commenced on clozapine 6 months ago. His current dose is 400mg daily. Recent bloods show: neutrophils 1.2 × 10⁹/L, WCC 3.5 × 10⁹/L, platelets 180 × 10⁹/L. He is asymptomatic with no signs of infection. What is the most appropriate management?
A 30-year-old woman with paranoid schizophrenia has been stable on aripiprazole 15mg daily for 18 months. She attends her community mental health team review reporting she wishes to start a family. She asks about the safety of continuing her current medication during pregnancy. What is the most appropriate advice regarding aripiprazole use in pregnancy?
A 39-year-old woman with bipolar affective disorder type I is admitted to hospital with severe mania. She is hostile, aggressive, refusing all oral medications, and poses significant risk to herself and others. She requires urgent treatment. She has no known drug allergies and normal renal function. Under the Mental Health Act, what is the most appropriate initial pharmacological management?
A 42-year-old woman with rapid cycling bipolar affective disorder has had 5 mood episodes in the past 12 months despite treatment with lithium carbonate 1200mg daily (lithium level 0.9 mmol/L). She has no other medical conditions. What is the most appropriate next step in pharmacological management according to current evidence?
A 25-year-old man presents to the early intervention in psychosis service with a first episode of psychosis. He has responded well to aripiprazole 15mg daily over 8 weeks, with resolution of positive symptoms. He asks about the duration of treatment. According to evidence-based guidelines, what is the recommended minimum duration of antipsychotic treatment following a first episode of psychosis with good response?
A 48-year-old woman with a 20-year history of bipolar affective disorder type I has been maintained on lithium carbonate 1000mg daily. She has been stable for 18 months. Routine blood tests show: lithium level 0.8 mmol/L, creatinine 156 μmol/L (baseline 85 μmol/L), eGFR 35 mL/min (previously >60), urea 9.2 mmol/L. Urinalysis shows no proteinuria or haematuria. What is the most appropriate next step in management?
A 33-year-old man with paranoid schizophrenia has been taking clozapine 450mg daily for 8 months. He presents to the emergency department with sudden onset of severe central chest pain and dyspnoea. ECG shows widespread ST elevation. Troponin T is significantly elevated at 2500 ng/L (normal <14). Echocardiography reveals global hypokinesia with reduced ejection fraction of 35%. Coronary angiography shows no significant coronary artery disease. What is the most likely diagnosis?
According to current NICE guidelines, what is the recommended first-line pharmacological treatment for acute mania in bipolar affective disorder in a patient not currently taking prophylactic medication?
Severe Mental Illness UK Medical PG Practice Questions and MCQs
Question 31: A 34-year-old man with paranoid schizophrenia presents with a 4-week history of decreased motivation, social withdrawal, and neglect of self-care. He describes feeling empty and lacking energy. He denies low mood, anhedonia, or suicidal ideation. He has been stable on risperidone 4mg daily for 2 years with good control of positive symptoms. Mental state examination reveals blunted affect and poverty of speech but no hallucinations or delusions. What is the most likely explanation for his current presentation?
- A. Comorbid depressive episode requiring antidepressant augmentation
- B. Relapse of schizophrenia with re-emergence of positive symptoms
- C. Extrapyramidal side effects from risperidone requiring anticholinergic medication
- D. Negative symptoms of schizophrenia requiring treatment modification (Correct Answer)
- E. Post-psychotic depression requiring psychological intervention
Explanation: ***Negative symptoms of schizophrenia requiring treatment modification*** - The patient exhibits core **negative symptoms** including **avolition** (decreased motivation), **asociality** (withdrawal), **blunted affect**, and **poverty of speech** (alogia). - These symptoms occur despite effective control of **positive symptoms** (hallucinations/delusions) by risperidone, requiring potential shifts to medications like **cariprazine** or **amisulpride** that target negative domains. *Comorbid depressive episode requiring antidepressant augmentation* - This patient specifically **denies low mood**, anhedonia, or **suicidal ideation**, which are essential criteria for a major depressive episode. - Clinical focus is on a lack of energy and motivation (**avolition**) rather than the cognitive symptoms of depression like **guilt** or **hopelessness**. *Relapse of schizophrenia with re-emergence of positive symptoms* - Mental state examination confirms that **hallucinations** and **delusions** are absent, and his positive symptoms have remained stable for two years. - A relapse of positive symptoms would typically involve **disorganized speech** or perceptual disturbances rather than just social withdrawal. *Extrapyramidal side effects from risperidone requiring anticholinergic medication* - While **akinesia** or **bradykinesia** can occasionally mimic negative symptoms, there is no mention of **cogwheel rigidity**, tremors, or other motor signs of **parkinsonism**. - Anticholinergics treat motor stiffness but would not address the core deficits in **motivation** and **social engagement** described here. *Post-psychotic depression requiring psychological intervention* - **Post-psychotic depression** typically presents with prominent depressive cognitions occurring after the acute psychotic phase has resolved. - This patient’s presentation is dominated by **deficit syndrome** (primary negative symptoms) rather than the **affective distress** and sadness typical of post-psychotic depression.
Question 32: A 26-year-old woman with bipolar affective disorder type I presents to the emergency department with a 2-day history of productive cough, fever, and general malaise. She has been stable on lithium carbonate 800mg daily for 3 years. Examination reveals temperature 38.5°C, respiratory rate 24/min, and coarse crepitations in the right lung base. Chest X-ray confirms right lower lobe pneumonia. What is the most appropriate management of her lithium therapy?
- A. Continue lithium at current dose and monitor levels in 1 week
- B. Temporarily stop lithium until the infection resolves then restart
- C. Continue lithium but check level immediately and monitor closely (Correct Answer)
- D. Reduce lithium dose by half until clinical improvement occurs
- E. Switch from lithium to sodium valproate during the acute illness
Explanation: ***Continue lithium but check level immediately and monitor closely*** - In the setting of an acute infection with fever, there is a significant risk of **lithium toxicity** due to potential **dehydration** and reduced renal clearance. - Immediate levels and **close monitoring** allow for early detection of rising levels while maintaining psychiatric stability in a patient who has been stable for 3 years. *Continue lithium at current dose and monitor levels in 1 week* - Waiting one week to monitor levels is dangerous because **acute physiological stress** and fever can rapidly alter renal function and lithium excretion. - A **delayed assessment** increases the risk of the patient developing severe neurological or cardiac signs of **lithium toxicity**. *Temporarily stop lithium until the infection resolves then restart* - Abruptly stopping lithium in a patient with **Bipolar I disorder** carries a high risk of **rapid relapse**, particularly into an acute manic episode. - Complete cessation should be reserved for those showing actual symptoms of toxicity or profound **renal impairment**, which is not yet confirmed here. *Reduce lithium dose by half until clinical improvement occurs* - Reducing the dose by half without checking the baseline level is **arbitrary** and may lead to **sub-therapeutic levels**, risking a mood breakthrough. - Clinical management should be guided by **serum lithium levels** and hydration status rather than preemptive blind dose reductions. *Switch from lithium to sodium valproate during the acute illness* - Switching agents during an acute physical illness adds unnecessary complexity and the risk of **drug-to-drug interactions** with new medications. - **Sodium valproate** requires dose titration and its own monitoring, making it an inappropriate choice for immediate management of an acute infection.
Question 33: A 42-year-old man with a 15-year history of schizophrenia is reviewed in the outpatient clinic. He has tried multiple antipsychotics with poor response and was commenced on clozapine 6 months ago. His current dose is 400mg daily. Recent bloods show: neutrophils 1.2 × 10⁹/L, WCC 3.5 × 10⁹/L, platelets 180 × 10⁹/L. He is asymptomatic with no signs of infection. What is the most appropriate management?
- A. Stop clozapine immediately and never rechallenge
- B. Continue clozapine but increase monitoring to twice weekly (Correct Answer)
- C. Reduce clozapine dose to 200mg daily and recheck bloods in one week
- D. Stop clozapine temporarily until neutrophils normalize then rechallenge
- E. Continue clozapine at current dose with weekly monitoring
Explanation: ***Continue clozapine but increase monitoring to twice weekly*** - The patient's neutrophil count of **1.2 × 10⁹/L** falls into the **amber zone** (neutrophils between 1.0–1.5 × 10⁹/L) of the clozapine monitoring guidelines. - Management of an amber result requires **continuing clozapine** while increasing blood count frequency to **twice weekly** until the count stabilizes or improves. *Stop clozapine immediately and never rechallenge* - Immediate cessation and a permanent ban are only indicated for **red zone** results, specifically when neutrophils fall below **0.5 × 10⁹/L** (**agranulocytosis**). - Termination at this stage would prematurely stop a vital treatment for a **treatment-resistant** patient without clinical necessity. *Reduce clozapine dose to 200mg daily and recheck bloods in one week* - **Dose reduction** is not an appropriate response to hematological toxicity; the reaction is **idiosyncratic** rather than dose-dependent. - Monitoring once a week is insufficient for an **amber zone** reading, which requires more frequent surveillance to catch further drops early. *Stop clozapine temporarily until neutrophils normalize then rechallenge* - Temporary cessation is usually reserved for **red zone** results (neutrophils <1.0 × 10⁹/L) where the risk of infection outweighs the benefit of the drug. - In the **amber range**, the drug can be safely continued with **vigilant monitoring** unless the patient becomes symptomatic. *Continue clozapine at current dose with weekly monitoring* - **Weekly monitoring** is the standard protocol for patients during months 6–12 of therapy, but it must be intensified when results transition to the **amber range**. - Maintaining the status quo monitoring frequency fails to mitigate the risk of progressing to **severe neutropenia**.
Question 34: A 30-year-old woman with paranoid schizophrenia has been stable on aripiprazole 15mg daily for 18 months. She attends her community mental health team review reporting she wishes to start a family. She asks about the safety of continuing her current medication during pregnancy. What is the most appropriate advice regarding aripiprazole use in pregnancy?
- A. Aripiprazole should be continued at the current dose as the benefits outweigh any potential risks (Correct Answer)
- B. Aripiprazole is absolutely contraindicated and must be stopped before conception
- C. Aripiprazole should be switched to haloperidol which has more safety data in pregnancy
- D. Aripiprazole can be continued but the dose should be reduced by half during pregnancy
- E. Aripiprazole should be stopped and she should remain medication-free throughout pregnancy
Explanation: ***Aripiprazole should be continued at the current dose as the benefits outweigh any potential risks*** - Maintaining **maternal mental health stability** is the priority, as **psychotic relapse** carries significant risks such as self-neglect, poor prenatal care, and potential harm to both mother and fetus. - Current clinical guidelines recommend that if a patient is stable on an **antipsychotic**, it should be continued during pregnancy because there is no evidence of aripiprazole being a major **teratogen**. *Aripiprazole is absolutely contraindicated and must be stopped before conception* - **Aripiprazole** is not categorized as absolutely contraindicated; medications are only stopped if the risk of **teratogenicity** specifically outweighs the severity of the mental illness. - Stopping treatment in a patient with **schizophrenia** carries a very high risk of relapse, which is often more dangerous than the medication itself. *Aripiprazole should be switched to haloperidol which has more safety data in pregnancy* - While **haloperidol** has been used longer, switching a patient who is currently **stable** on an effective medication increases the risk of breakthrough symptoms. - Guidelines generally advise against switching stable patients unless the current medication has a known high risk of **major malformations**, such as valproate. *Aripiprazole can be continued but the dose should be reduced by half during pregnancy* - Reducing the dose by half significantly increases the risk of **sub-therapeutic levels** and subsequent relapse of **paranoid schizophrenia**. - In fact, physiological changes in late pregnancy, such as increased **metabolism** and blood volume, may actually require a dose increase rather than a reduction. *Aripiprazole should be stopped and she should remain medication-free throughout pregnancy* - Remaining medication-free is rarely recommended for **severe mental illness** like schizophrenia due to the profound risk of acute relapse and psychiatric emergencies. - **Schizophrenia** is a chronic condition, and the postpartum period is a particularly **high-risk window** for severe psychotic episodes if medication is absent.
Question 35: A 39-year-old woman with bipolar affective disorder type I is admitted to hospital with severe mania. She is hostile, aggressive, refusing all oral medications, and poses significant risk to herself and others. She requires urgent treatment. She has no known drug allergies and normal renal function. Under the Mental Health Act, what is the most appropriate initial pharmacological management?
- A. Intramuscular lorazepam 2mg as monotherapy
- B. Intramuscular haloperidol 5mg combined with promethazine 50mg (Correct Answer)
- C. Oral olanzapine orodispersible 10mg
- D. Commence lithium carbonate via nasogastric tube
- E. Intramuscular aripiprazole 9.75mg as monotherapy
Explanation: ***Intramuscular haloperidol 5mg combined with promethazine 50mg***- For an aggressive patient refusing oral medications, **rapid tranquillisation** with IM **haloperidol** combined with **promethazine** is the gold standard for immediate risk management.- **Promethazine** is crucial here as it provides additional sedation and reduces the risk of **extrapyramidal side effects** (EPS) associated with haloperidol.*Intramuscular lorazepam 2mg as monotherapy*- While **lorazepam** is effective for calming, it serves as a sedative and lacks the **antimanic efficacy** required to treat the underlying bipolar episode.- It is often used as a second-line or adjunct, but in severe mania with high risk, the **antipsychotic combination** (haloperidol/promethazine) is more potent for rapid behavioural control.*Oral olanzapine orodispersible 10mg*- **Orodispersible tablets** require a level of cooperation that a **hostile and aggressive** patient refusing all oral medications is unlikely to provide.- There is a high risk that the patient will **spit out** or hide the medication, making it inappropriate for an **urgent, high-risk** scenario where reliable administration is paramount.*Commence lithium carbonate via nasogastric tube*- **Lithium** has a slow onset of action (taking several days to weeks) and is entirely unsuitable for the **acute management** of severe behavioral disturbance requiring immediate control.- Attempting to pass a **nasogastric tube** in an aggressive, non-consenting patient is highly distressing, impractical, and medically **unjustified** for this indication in an acute emergency.*Intramuscular aripiprazole 9.75mg as monotherapy*- Although **aripiprazole** has an IM formulation, it is generally considered less effective than haloperidol for **rapid tranquillisation** in cases of extreme aggression and acute mania.- NICE guidelines (and clinical practice) favor the combination of an **antipsychotic with promethazine** over monotherapy to ensure both rapid behavioral control and minimize adverse effects.
Question 36: A 42-year-old woman with rapid cycling bipolar affective disorder has had 5 mood episodes in the past 12 months despite treatment with lithium carbonate 1200mg daily (lithium level 0.9 mmol/L). She has no other medical conditions. What is the most appropriate next step in pharmacological management according to current evidence?
- A. Add lamotrigine to lithium
- B. Switch from lithium to sodium valproate
- C. Add quetiapine to lithium (Correct Answer)
- D. Increase lithium dose to achieve level of 1.0-1.2 mmol/L
- E. Switch from lithium to carbamazepine
Explanation: ***Add quetiapine to lithium*** - For **rapid cycling bipolar disorder** (≥4 episodes/year), combination therapy is often required when optimized monotherapy fails; lithium combined with **quetiapine** has strong evidence for efficacy. - Quetiapine provides a broad spectrum of stability by targeting both **manic and depressive poles**, making it a preferred adjunct in treatment-resistant rapid cycling cases. *Add lamotrigine to lithium* - While **lamotrigine** is effective for preventing **bipolar depression**, it lacks significant efficacy in treating or preventing **mania**, which is necessary for managing rapid cycling. - It requires a **slow titration** period to avoid Stevens-Johnson syndrome, which may not be ideal during active rapid cycling phases. *Switch from lithium to sodium valproate* - Switching to **valproate monotherapy** is unlikely to be more effective than optimized lithium (0.9 mmol/L) for a patient already experiencing frequent breakthroughs. - Current guidelines recommend **combination therapy** (adding an agent) rather than switching when a primary stabilizer is at a therapeutic level but insufficient. *Increase lithium dose to achieve level of 1.0-1.2 mmol/L* - This patient's level is already at **0.9 mmol/L**, which is within the therapeutic range (0.6–1.0 mmol/L) for maintenance; further increases significantly raise the risk of **toxicity**. - Increasing the dose is unlikely to control **rapid cycling** if the patient is already failing to respond at a high-normal therapeutic concentration. *Switch from lithium to carbamazepine* - **Carbamazepine** is generally considered a **third-line** option due to its complex drug-drug interactions via **CYP450 induction** and overall tolerability issues. - Evidence for its use as a solitary switch in rapid cycling is less robust compared to adding an **atypical antipsychotic** to an existing stabilizer.
Question 37: A 25-year-old man presents to the early intervention in psychosis service with a first episode of psychosis. He has responded well to aripiprazole 15mg daily over 8 weeks, with resolution of positive symptoms. He asks about the duration of treatment. According to evidence-based guidelines, what is the recommended minimum duration of antipsychotic treatment following a first episode of psychosis with good response?
- A. 6 months after symptom resolution
- B. 12 months after symptom resolution
- C. 24 months after symptom resolution (Correct Answer)
- D. 36 months after symptom resolution
- E. Continue indefinitely
Explanation: ***24 months after symptom resolution***- Evidence-based guidelines (including **NICE**) recommend that antipsychotic treatment for a **first episode of psychosis** should continue for **1 to 2 years** (24 months) to minimize the high risk of relapse.- Maintaining treatment for **2 years** allows for brain recovery, consolidation of psychosocial interventions, and stable reintegration into the community.*6 months after symptom resolution*- Treatment for only 6 months is insufficient and is associated with exceptionally high **relapse rates** (up to 80%) following a first episode.- This duration is more commonly associated with the acute treatment phase rather than the **maintenance phase** required for long-term stability.*12 months after symptom resolution*- While 12 months is considered the absolute minimum by some, it carries a higher risk of **recurrent symptoms** compared to the standard 24-month recommendation.- Guidelines have shifted toward the **2-year mark** to ensure a more robust protection against the neurobiological and social consequences of a second episode.*36 months after symptom resolution*- While some patients with high-risk factors may benefit from 3 years of therapy, it is not the **standard minimum duration** for a first episode with a good response.- Extending treatment to 36 months is typically a clinical decision based on **residual symptoms** or frequent precursors to relapse rather than a universal guideline.*Continue indefinitely*- Indefinite treatment is generally reserved for patients with **multiple relapses**, a diagnosis of **chronic schizophrenia**, or significant risk of harm to self or others.- For a **first episode** patient who has responded well, the goal is often to eventually trial a slow, monitored **titration/discontinuation** after the maintenance period.
Question 38: A 48-year-old woman with a 20-year history of bipolar affective disorder type I has been maintained on lithium carbonate 1000mg daily. She has been stable for 18 months. Routine blood tests show: lithium level 0.8 mmol/L, creatinine 156 μmol/L (baseline 85 μmol/L), eGFR 35 mL/min (previously >60), urea 9.2 mmol/L. Urinalysis shows no proteinuria or haematuria. What is the most appropriate next step in management?
- A. Continue lithium at current dose and recheck renal function in 3 months
- B. Reduce lithium dose to 600mg daily and monitor levels
- C. Stop lithium and switch to lamotrigine (Correct Answer)
- D. Refer to nephrology and continue lithium pending review
- E. Stop lithium immediately and switch to sodium valproate
Explanation: ***Stop lithium and switch to lamotrigine***- Lithium is **renally excreted**, and a significant decline in **eGFR below 45 mL/min** (CKD Stage 3b) necessitates discontinuation to prevent further **nephrotoxicity** and toxicity risk.- **Lamotrigine** is an appropriate alternative for bipolar prophylaxis, especially for preventing depressive episodes, and lacks the renal toxicity profile of lithium.*Continue lithium at current dose and recheck renal function in 3 months*- Continuing the current dose despite a significant rise in **creatinine** and drop in **eGFR** (35 mL/min) poses a high risk of **lithium toxicity** and further renal damage.- Guidelines mandate active intervention when renal function shows such a marked decline from **baseline (85 μmol/L to 156 μmol/L)**, not just continued monitoring.*Reduce lithium dose to 600mg daily and monitor levels*- While reducing the dose might lower serum levels, it does not address the underlying **chronic kidney disease** progression caused by long-term lithium use.- In patients with a rapid and significant decline in **estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)**, stopping the offending agent is prioritized over dose adjustment.*Refer to nephrology and continue lithium pending review*- While a **nephrology referral** is indicated for investigating renal impairment, continuing the lithium in the interim is unsafe given the severe decline to an **eGFR of 35 mL/min**.- Delaying the cessation of lithium increases the risk of irreversible **interstitial fibrosis** and permanent renal damage, and lithium should be stopped immediately.*Stop lithium immediately and switch to sodium valproate*- **Sodium valproate** is an alternative, but it carries significant risks regarding **teratogenicity** and metabolic side effects compared to lamotrigine.- Although stopping lithium is correct, **lamotrigine** is often preferred for long-term maintenance in bipolar I, especially if the patient is stable and of childbearing age.
Question 39: A 33-year-old man with paranoid schizophrenia has been taking clozapine 450mg daily for 8 months. He presents to the emergency department with sudden onset of severe central chest pain and dyspnoea. ECG shows widespread ST elevation. Troponin T is significantly elevated at 2500 ng/L (normal <14). Echocardiography reveals global hypokinesia with reduced ejection fraction of 35%. Coronary angiography shows no significant coronary artery disease. What is the most likely diagnosis?
- A. Pulmonary embolism
- B. Clozapine-induced myocarditis (Correct Answer)
- C. Acute myocardial infarction
- D. Pericarditis
- E. Anxiety-related chest pain
Explanation: ***Clozapine-induced myocarditis*** - The patient's presentation with sudden severe chest pain, dyspnoea, widespread ST elevation, significantly **elevated troponin T**, **global hypokinesia**, and reduced **ejection fraction (35%)** despite **normal coronary arteries** is highly characteristic of clozapine-induced myocarditis, a serious adverse effect. - This rare but life-threatening complication, though more common in the first few months of treatment, can occur later and necessitates immediate **cessation of clozapine**. *Pulmonary embolism* - While causing chest pain and dyspnoea, pulmonary embolism typically presents with **pleuritic chest pain** and characteristic ECG changes like **S1Q3T3** or right heart strain, not widespread ST elevation and global hypokinesia. - A massive pulmonary embolism can impact cardiac function, but it wouldn't directly cause such significant global myocardial injury and massive troponin elevation without obstructive coronary disease. *Acute myocardial infarction* - Although presenting with chest pain, ST elevation, and elevated troponin, the **normal coronary angiography** conclusively rules out **obstructive coronary artery disease** as the cause of an acute myocardial infarction. - The **global hypokinesia** is more indicative of diffuse myocardial inflammation (myocarditis) than the regional wall motion abnormalities expected with an infarction. *Pericarditis* - Pericarditis can cause widespread ST elevation and chest pain, but it rarely leads to such a dramatic **reduction in ejection fraction** or massive **troponin elevation** unless there is significant myocardial involvement (myopericarditis). - The combination of **severe myocardial dysfunction** and troponin elevation in a patient on clozapine points more specifically to drug-induced myocarditis. *Anxiety-related chest pain* - This diagnosis is inconsistent with the objective findings of widespread **ST elevation**, critically **elevated troponin T** levels, and severe **global hypokinesia** with a reduced ejection fraction. - Anxiety does not cause these significant structural and biochemical abnormalities of the heart.
Question 40: According to current NICE guidelines, what is the recommended first-line pharmacological treatment for acute mania in bipolar affective disorder in a patient not currently taking prophylactic medication?
- A. Lithium carbonate monotherapy
- B. Sodium valproate monotherapy
- C. Haloperidol, olanzapine, quetiapine, or risperidone (Correct Answer)
- D. Lamotrigine monotherapy
- E. Carbamazepine monotherapy
Explanation: ***Haloperidol, olanzapine, quetiapine, or risperidone*** - According to **NICE guidelines (CG185)**, these **antipsychotics** are the first-line pharmacological treatment for **acute mania** due to their **rapid onset of action** in controlling severe symptoms. - The choice of agent depends on the patient's **previous response**, side effect profile, and clinical preference. *Lithium carbonate monotherapy* - While highly effective for **long-term prophylaxis**, lithium has a **slower onset of action** compared to antipsychotics for acute stabilization. - It is usually considered if the patient is already taking it or after first-line antipsychotics have proven ineffective. *Sodium valproate monotherapy* - NICE recommends this as a **second-line** option rather than first-line for acute mania episodes. - It must be avoided in **women of childbearing potential** due to significant risks of **teratogenicity** and developmental disorders. *Lamotrigine monotherapy* - This medication is **not effective** for the treatment of **acute mania** episodes. - Its primary role is in the prevention of **bipolar depression** and long-term maintenance therapy. *Carbamazepine monotherapy* - This is generally considered a **third-line** option for acute mania when other mood stabilizers or antipsychotics have failed. - Its use is complicated by significant **drug-drug interactions** and the induction of cytochrome P450 enzymes.
Practice by Chapter
Want unlimited practice?
Get full access to all questions, explanations, and performance tracking.
Start For Free