- Joined
- May 20, 2011
- Messages
- 164
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 4,551
- Medical Student
Medication can't correct motivation, with the exception of true depression not confounded by chronic pain or personality disorder.
Maybe motivation is the wrong word. The patient obviously has the motivation, yet they lack the vigor.
Maybe motivation is the wrong word. The patient obviously has the motivation, yet they lack the vigor.
Agree with all the above.
Lack of motivation, in and of itself is not a pathology. Several disorders such as depression or psychosis could cause one to lose motivation. There is no medication known that simply improves motivation. If motivation is lost due to, say depression, then an antidepressant could improve the depression, and hence improve motivation that was lowered from the depression.
If the person lacks the "vigor" it could be the person has lack of energy, stamina, or focus. A whole multitude of problems could be causing this such as ADHD, the person merely not caring and really not being in a position where they have to care, hypothyroidism, etc.
I have a patient and the guy just mopes around in his dad's home, not getting a job, and the father is sick of it. All the kid does is sit in his room all day, play video games, and talk as if he's a stoner. The dad brought the kid to my office and told me to fix the kid. After several meetings...several, and I'm feeling guilty because the father paid a lot of money for each visit, I found not conventional Axis I pathology. All of his labs I can think of that would display a medical/biological reason for lack of motivation to do anything is lacking. E.g. normal TSH, Vit B, folate levels, UDS is negative, etc. Psychological testing was all invalid because the kid put no effort into the testing. The kid (actually 21 years old) gives minimal answers. E.g. "What do you want out of life?" Kid: "I don't know. (stares at the ground for a few minutes). Um....I don't know."
I'm stumped. Some of the only theories I got is this kid is in the prodrome phase of schizophrenia, or perhaps has a cluster A personality disorder. I told the father what I could come up, and I felt very disappointed in myself for having seen this kid so many times and that was all I could do. Several antidepressants were tried, no effect. I did try a stimulant thinking this my be inattentive ADHD, and oddly it made the kid tired, bur it didn't improve anything.

I have a colleague/friend with a book coming out soon that has some great exercises for procrastination. I'll try to remember to post once the book is released. Anecdotally I've tried the exercise myself with good success.
Get the dad to set up something like that.
How far behind is he in getting it published? 😀
Agree with all the above.
Lack of motivation, in and of itself is not a pathology. Several disorders such as depression or psychosis could cause one to lose motivation. There is no medication known that simply improves motivation. If motivation is lost due to, say depression, then an antidepressant could improve the depression, and hence improve motivation that was lowered from the depression.
If the person lacks the "vigor" it could be the person has lack of energy, stamina, or focus. A whole multitude of problems could be causing this such as ADHD, the person merely not caring and really not being in a position where they have to care, hypothyroidism, etc.
I have a patient and the guy just mopes around in his dad's home, not getting a job, and the father is sick of it. All the kid does is sit in his room all day, play video games, and talk as if he's a stoner. The dad brought the kid to my office and told me to fix the kid. After several meetings...several, and I'm feeling guilty because the father paid a lot of money for each visit, I found no conventional Axis I pathology. All of his labs I can think of that would display a medical/biological reason for lack of motivation to do anything is lacking. E.g. normal TSH, Vit B, folate levels, UDS is negative, etc. Psychological testing was all invalid because the kid put no effort into the testing. The kid (actually 21 years old) gives minimal answers. E.g. "What do you want out of life?" Kid: "I don't know. (stares at the ground for a few minutes). Um....I don't know."
I'm stumped. Some of the only theories I got is this kid is in the prodrome phase of schizophrenia, or perhaps has a cluster A personality disorder. I told the father what I could come up, and I felt very disappointed in myself for having seen this kid so many times and that was all I could do. Several antidepressants were tried, no effect. I did try a stimulant thinking this my be inattentive ADHD, and oddly it made the kid tired, bur it didn't improve anything.
just playing video games 12 hours a day
Very interesting case. Maybe negative symptoms of prodromal shcizophrenia? Was the kid always like that? Teenage years? Personality in the recent past?
I don't think this is a video game "addiction" (in qoutations because some definitions of the word addiction require the use of a substance.
Why? People with such a problem usually talk about it. The guy just stares at the ground during the entire interview. He seems to lack passion about anything.
That's what I was thinking. The problem being am I going to start him on an antipsychotic? My personal algorithm in these cases is this....
1) Do everything you can to rule everything else out. I think I exhuasted this step.
2) Present the possibility of prodrome to the patient. Tell them that there is no way to detect this in a clinical setting until after schizophrenia has already occurred. Yes there are ways to possibly detect earlier but PET scans are not the norm to be done on everyone annually. By the way, I currently have 4 patients where I highly suspect prodrome schizophrenia may be going on.
3) After telling the patient that prodrome is a possibilty, tell the them their options. I usually recommend fish oil, avoidance of marijuana among other illicit substances, recommend the patient read up on their own concerning the nature of psychosis and to keep a diary to see if they notice anything out of the ordinary such as hallucinations, paranoia, etc. Also to have close friends or family members they could trust to be an anchor and reference to see if those people notice the patient changing in a possibly pathologic way.
While I tell the patient an antipsychotic is an option, I never tell them I recommend it, but will provide it only if the patient wants it. I tell them if they got prodrome, the medication can help, if I knew for sure they had it, I'd recommend the med, but I don't ever know if someone is in prodrome for sure until the person actually develops diagnosable schizophrenia.
The kid did not want to take an antipsychotic. So be it. I can't do anything more along that theory. Surely if the kid showed dramatic improvement on one it would indicate with a stronger possibility this is a psychotic spectrum problem.
I told him and his dad if this was schizoid, there's no real treatment for it other than psychotherapy, and the use of meds may provide some benefit but it's not something studied well. I do have schizoid patients and they don't have a problem looking for work and just moping around doing nothing other than video games. He showed no motivation for psychotherapy when I offered it.
The ones I got that I treat, what's going on is they are forced to interact with people, and that causes them to be anxious or depressed, and the come to me for treatment for that, not due to their desire to be solitary.
Of course this just could be schizoid of another variety that I haven't seen before because this is a phenomenon I don't see mentioned much. All disorders present in varying ways and I haven't had dozens of cases like this--just a handful.
What's going on certainly is pathological. It's to the degree where if his father refused to take care of him, I realistically believe this kid would end up homeless because his detachment from reality in the sense that he seems ambivalent to everything is very strong. He's not even passionate about the video games.
Yes.If it was Asperger's he would always be like that right?
Yes.
That thought crossed my mind as well. I double checked the Asperger criteria, did some lit-reviews, etc...
But I came to this unfortunate conclusion. Even if it were that...in fact maybe it's both, Asperger's and schizoid, what can I do to help him? Seems like I can't do anything. This is one of the few cases where I ended up in a dead end where I felt I couldn't do anything to move the case along further and I was very bothered by it given how much money the father paid for my work.
The only option I could think of was trying more meds but it would literally be educated guesses in the hope that something would do something, while documenting each trial to see what happened. I would've tried an atypical on the possibility this could be schizophrenia prodrome.
And guess what? Everytime he took the meds, it was because his father strongly encouraged it. He just sat there, moped, and took it.
😡 Do atypicals improve negative symptoms? The question has crossed my mind and i wanted to start a thread about that. Almost every single patient i've seen always complained about how the "meds (almost always atypical antipsychotics, usually from risperidone but also sometimes from newer-even more "atypical" ones- like aripiprazole) made them slow, without energy/drive and careless about anything". Could it be that the atypicals actually worsen negative symptoms? I mean, if they work by inhibiting D2 receptors, wouldn't that mean that their drive/motivation/pleasure/working memory would also go down? Or is it because the patients can't really distinquish between the possible side-effects of the drugs from the symptoms of the disorder itself? Or is it because the scientists and doctors can't really distinquish between the two (!)?
Atypicals unfortunately don't improve negative sx's, despite the early hope that they would (via 5HT2A antagonism). The data has not shown such a benefit despite the theoretical benefit.
Antipsychotics could worsen the patient in a manner that could resemble negative symptoms of psychosis but for the most part (with rare exceptions) not actually worsen the psychosis itself.
E.g. You give Seroquel and it knocks someone out, sure that could look like negative psychosis, but in reality the person is just gorked.
I've seen several patients with negative signs of psychosis improve with antipsychotics, but you have to be mindful that the goal is to actually improve the patient. For example if a belligerent, irritable, and paranoid patient is knocked out on Thorazine, and the psychosis in reality is left untouched, some idiot doctors equate his lack of complaining with improvement because he's not bothering anyone.
A real test to see if the person improved is to see how they do once the sedation effect wears off, and with Thorazine good luck because that might not happen until the meds are stopped.
The rare exceptions? Too many antipsychotics could cause delirium due to the interactions with the cholinergic system. There's also tardive psychosis, a phenomenon that is not certainly to exist, but in theory is supposed to cause hypersensitivity of D2 receptors due to chronic blockade with antipsychotics. In which case the person becomes psychotic and then the use of strong D2 blockers may cause this problem to become worse.
Another problem is antipsychotics could reduce a comorbid manic component, and several patients like being manic.
I also hypothesize that it could be influencing, in a bad way, dopamine's general effects in the brain including wakefullness, alertness, euphoria, and the nucleus accumbens, and indirectly lower testosterone--thus lowering a person's quality of life in general.
I work in a forensic facility where I often times have several several weeks to months to get patients better because even when stabilized, they cannot be discharged until the court approves, and the court takes their time. In several cases, even if an antipsychotic works, I give the patient the option to try other ones to see which one gives them the best quality of life. In this clinical setting, my threshold for taking a patient off a med due to side effects is very low due to me having a lot of time to get it right.
Execellent post Whopper, very informative.
What i've seen (many times) is patient coming in floridly psychotic, paranoid, agitated etc. so patient is given some anti-psychotics. After a few days/weeks patient improves but while he/she was in a kinda hyper-aroused state before the treatment , now he/she lies silent, blank stares, flat-affect, kinda like exhausted and burnt-out. Some attending would say "ah its negative symptoms" but why do these "negative symptoms" occur after the aggressive drug-treatement? I could understand the "negative symptoms" argument if patient was presented with negative symptoms right from the start (like presenting with no emotions, no concentration and drive, abulic, with little speech, usually with thought disorder etc.-and in some cases they do), but in many cases patients present over-active, scared, confused, agitated etc.
Patients themseleves complain that the drugs make them "slow", without energy, emotions and without the ability to concentrate but many psychiatrists would not believe them and respond "well, its due to the disorder and not the drugs". But is it?
It seems very logical to me that if you block the "energy-motivation-reward-concentration" dopaminergic system you'll get something that very much resembles the so-called negative symptoms. Maybe there is no other way since the positive symptoms are an "over-activity" mental state (over-flow of perceptions and thoughts, hyper-associations between events, high emotionality etc.) and the only way to decrease it is by inducing the opposite (too little of all that stuff) and in doing so you might causing some-kind of a mild/subtle deficit. But i guess that there is always a cost-benefit analysis going-on.
Maybe a problem with current drugs is that they are not very selective. Maybe finding a drug that blocks only a hypothetical psychosis-specific brain area/circuit (if it exists, although my guess would be that it would overlap with a lot of "normal functions") would be much better for the quality of life of many patients, but maybe i'm talking science-fiction here. Lets hope that research would lead to some more "intelligent" and "specific" compounds.
Petran,
theoretically D2 blockers do very well getting rid of the positive sx's, and what is left once treated is the negative sx's. Of course the sedation from many meds can easily look like negative sx's as well. Whopper already mentioned anticholinergic effects (which can ultimately cause a delirium but at lower doses just a cognitive cloudiness). 5HT2A antagonism is what was theorized to help negative sx's, which was particular to most atypical/2nd gen antipsychotics. There is pretty good research that those with classical schizophrenia (schneiderian) have cognitive deficits, including (but not limited to) inhibition and acclimation to stimuli (such as measured with pre-pulse inhibition). In the area of PPI a lot of the research shows antipsychotics correct PPI, though, and since antipsychotics don't seem to help negative sx's this doesn't seem to be the sole explanation/component for negative sx's.
Selectivity is a huge problem. We're not bad at hitting receptors, but not the specific brain regions. We talk about the mesolimbic area being related to positive psychotic sx's (paranoia, hallucinations), and mesocortical being related to negative sx's. Conceptually why you would consider limbic encephalitis in the ddx of a new onset psychosis case.
Here's an article I found quickly (review) on neurocog deficits in schizophrenia.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21312407
This is being written about a lot more, as the real frontier being focused on is cognitive rehab for schizophrenics, with a lot of possible meds that Could help (as usual, all theoretical), including galantamine (and other cholineesterase inhibitors) and namenda. Glutamate antagonists are talked about as maybe the next big thing too, but it could all be hype.