Better Psychopharmacology Books than Stahl's??

[asdf123g]

Everyone always says Stahls. Has anyone compared Stahl's to others books? Any psychopharm books they thought was better?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[romanticscience]

Clinical Psychopharmacology: Principles and Practice Amazon product

The Maudsley Prescribing Guidelines in Psychiatry (The Maudsley Prescribing Guidelines Series) Amazon product

Package Inserts

DailyMed

dailymed.nlm.nih.gov

 

[hebel]

Clinical Psychopharmacology: Principles and Practice Amazon product

The Maudsley Prescribing Guidelines in Psychiatry (The Maudsley Prescribing Guidelines Series) Amazon product

Package Inserts

DailyMed

dailymed.nlm.nih.gov

I recently bought the Ghaemi book, but don't have time to read it at the moment. From some random skimming he makes some novel and interesting points at times. What did you think overall?

 

[JKinSC]

For sheer readability, it’s hard to beat Schatzberg‘s book - Link. And as said above, you can’t go wrong with Maudsley.

 

[romanticscience]

I recently bought the Ghaemi book, but don't have time to read it at the moment. From some random skimming he makes some novel and interesting points at times. What did you think overall?

IMHO, Ghaemi strays from the usual academic pack; he's pretty direct about his theses, regardless of whether they jive with big pharma or the current trends in American academic psychiatry. That's why I kind of like it. There were some things in there which I've never heard about in training. This book is about psychopharmacology but also about his style of psychiatry. I've read a lot of his stuff (eg, his blog, mood disorder book, stats book, conceptual book). This seems to be a collection of his writings in a textbook.

 

[brazilianpsych]

I always liked Maudsley too, great book.

 

[FiveTwoFifty]

I’m going to +1 the Schatzberg book. Very readable and applicable. Wish I had found it intern year.

 

[FatherPsychiatry]

For sheer readability, it’s hard to beat Schatzberg‘s book - Link. And as said above, you can’t go wrong with Maudsley.

Schatzberg is my favorite one. I use that for general reference. For quick stuff, I use Stahl's prescriber guide

 

[asdf123g]

Is there any reason to buy several of these books?? If I bought just Maudselys would I be good?

 

[brazilianpsych]

Is there any reason to buy several of these books?? If I bought just Maudselys would I be good?

For me it depends on what you want, I used like this:

Maudsleys - good, clever, and somethings different inputs about meds. I specifically remember reading a very interesting point about SSRIs and heart attacks there
Stahl - GREAT for teaching a med student or understand a concept easily
Stahl prescribers guide - quick check on meds

Those were the ones that I used, I`m sure there are many other good ones. Gotta check Schatzberg, for some reason I didn't know it

 

[Taddy Mason]

Imho, there isn’t one good “go to” source for psychopharm. I think Maudsley’s, Stahl’s, and Ghaemi compliment each other well. Stahl’s is good for a theoretical understanding of the MOA of psychotropic meds, while Ghaemi offers a more clinical approach and critical analysis of the literature. He has his biases but I feel like he’s pretty transparent with them and offers an interesting and thoughtful perspective. The Carlat psychopharm guide is also a solid prescribing guide.

 

[FiveTwoFifty]

As a resident, I found that starting with Stahl's was a good way to go (not the prescriber's guide) for theoretical understanding... although some of it should be taken with a grain of salt. Then progressing to Schatzberg felt natural and with the background in terms of mechanism, it was more understandable and applicable. I also had to go back to Stahl's several times to actually absorb what was happening and filter out the noise in the book to learn what was important.

I like Maudsley's and think it's a nice change of pace in terms of formatting, but I find it far less readable and more of a reference when I'm interested in learning more about a particular medication or treatment.

 

[Taddy Mason]

I’ve also found this book to be an excellent resource in regard to psychopharm:
Amazon product

 

[asdf123g]

Imho, there isn’t one good “go to” source for psychopharm. I think Maudsley’s, Stahl’s, and Ghaemi compliment each other well. Stahl’s is good for a theoretical understanding of the MOA of psychotropic meds, while Ghaemi offers a more clinical approach and critical analysis of the literature. He has his biases but I feel like he’s pretty transparent with them and offers an interesting and thoughtful perspective. The Carlat psychopharm guide is also a solid prescribing guide.

This is a question for everyone, but any reason to learn the specific MOA? Like drug X is an agonist 5-HT2a but antagonist on 5HT3, 5HT1 partial antagonist, agonist at H3.

As a resident, I found that starting with Stahl's was a good way to go (not the prescriber's guide) for theoretical understanding... although some of it should be taken with a grain of salt. Then progressing to Schatzberg felt natural and with the background in terms of mechanism, it was more understandable and applicable. I also had to go back to Stahl's several times to actually absorb what was happening and filter out the noise in the book to learn what was important.

I like Maudsley's and think it's a nice change of pace in terms of formatting, but I find it far less readable and more of a reference when I'm interested in learning more about a particular medication or treatment.

Same question as above quote. Any difference in the 2 stahls psychopharm books?

I’ve also found this book to be an excellent resource in regard to psychopharm:
Amazon product

Link doesnt show What is the name of the book or author??

 

[Taddy Mason]

Same question as above quote. Any difference in the 2 stahls psychopharm books?

One is a prescribing guide and one is a textbook.

Link doesnt show What is the name of the book or author??

Managing the Side Effects of Psychotropic Medications by Goldberg and Ernst - it’s an APA text.

 

[brazilianpsych]

This is a question for everyone, but any reason to learn the specific MOA? Like drug X is an agonist 5-HT2a but antagonist on 5HT3, 5HT1 partial antagonist, agonist at H3.

Oh for me I just thought it was interesting. Always liked it, since med school. At some point you do start wondering how much all that theory has a correlation with the clinical practice, and if that, in the end, is not like astrology for psych.

But still, fun tho

 

[Sikrouf]

This is a question for everyone, but any reason to learn the specific MOA? Like drug X is an agonist 5-HT2a but antagonist on 5HT3, 5HT1 partial antagonist, agonist at H3.



Link doesnt show What is the name of the book or author??

Learning the MOA is annoying but it eventally pays off imo

Its not meant to be the only way to adress a prescription but its good to have that option in your arsenal, and ive found more often then not it can be the thing tipping the scale toward a med change, especially for inpatient psychiatry

 

[JKinSC]

This is a question for everyone, but any reason to learn the specific MOA? Like drug X is an agonist 5-HT2a but antagonist on 5HT3, 5HT1 partial antagonist, agonist at H3.

Board certification

 

[romanticscience]

This is a question for everyone, but any reason to learn the specific MOA? Like drug X is an agonist 5-HT2a but antagonist on 5HT3, 5HT1 partial antagonist, agonist at H3.

May reduce polypharmacy by avoiding redundant/irrational combos.

Also, may help aid in selection by knowing peripheral actions. These may or may or be clinically validated (eg, mirtazapine being a 5-HT 3 antagonist and helpful with nausea).