A retrospective claims analysis of combination therapy in the treatment of adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Combination therapy in managing psychiatric disorders is not uncommon. While combination therapy has been documented for depression and schizophrenia, little is known about combination therapy practices in managing attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This study seeks to quantify the combination use of ADHD medications and to understand predictors of combination therapy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Prescription dispensing events were drawn from a U.S. national claims database including over 80 managed-care plans. Patients studied were age 18 or over with at least 1 medical claim with a diagnosis of ADHD (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] code 314.0), a pharmacy claim for ADHD medication during the study period July2003 to June2004, and continuous enrollment 6 months prior to and throughout the study period. Dispensing events were grouped into 6 categories: atomoxetine (ATX), long-acting stimulants (LAS), intermediate-acting stimulants (IAS), short-acting stimulants (SAS), bupropion (BUP), and Alpha-2 Adrenergic Agonists (A2A). Events were assigned to calendar months, and months with combined use from multiple categories within patient were identified. Predictors of combination therapy for LAS and for ATX were modeled for patients covered by commercial plans using logistic regression in a generalized estimating equations framework to adjust for within-patient correlation between months of observation. Factors included age, gender, presence of the hyperactive component of ADHD, prior diagnoses for psychiatric disorders, claims history of recent psychiatric visit, insurance plan type, and geographic region.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were 18,609 patients identified representing a total of 11,886 months of therapy with ATX; 40,949 months with LAS; 13,622 months with IAS; 38,141 months with SAS; 22,087 months with BUP; and 1,916 months with A2A. Combination therapy was present in 19.7% of continuing months (months after the first month of therapy) for ATX, 21.0% for LAS, 27.4% for IAS, 23.1% for SAS, 36.9% for BUP, and 53.0% for A2A.</p> <p>For patients receiving LAS, being age 25–44 or age 45 and older versus being 18–24 years old, seeing a psychiatrist, having comorbid depression, or having point-of-service coverage versus a Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) resulted in odds ratios significantly greater than 1, representing increased likelihood for combination therapy in managing adult ADHD.</p> <p>For patients receiving ATX, being age 25–44 or age 45 and older versus being 18–24 years old, seeing a psychiatrist, having a hyperactive component to ADHD, or having comorbid depression resulted in odds ratios significantly greater than 1, representing increased likelihood for combination therapy in managing adult ADHD.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>ATX and LAS are the most likely drugs to be used as monotherapy. Factors predicting combination use were similar for months in which ATX was used and for months in which LAS was used except that a hyperactive component to ADHD predicted increased combination use for ATX but not for LAS.</p

Clinical and Organizational Factors Related to the Reduction of Mechanical Restraint Application in an Acute Ward: An 8-Year Retrospective Analysis

Background: The purpose of this study was to describe the frequency of mechanical restraint use in an acute psychiatric ward and to analyze which variables may have significantly influenced the use of this procedure. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted in the Servizio Psichiatrico di Diagnosi e Cura (SPDC) of Modena Centro. The following variables of our sample, represented by all restrained patients admitted from 1-1-2005 to 31-12-2012, were analyzed: age, gender, nationality, psychiatric diagnoses, organic comorbidity, state and duration of admission, motivation and duration of restraints, nursing shift and hospitalization day of restraint, number of patients admitted at the time of restraint and institutional changes during the observation period. The above variables were statistically compared with those of all other non-restrained patients admitted to our ward in the same period. Results: Mechanical restraints were primarily used as a safety procedure to manage aggressive behavior of male patients, during the first days of hospitalization and night shifts. Neurocognitive disorders, organic comorbidity, compulsory state and long duration of admission were statistically significantly related to the increase of restraint use (p<.001, multivariate logistic regression). Institutional changes, especially more restricted guidelines concerning restraint application, were statistically significantly related to restraint use reduction (p<.001, chi2 test, multivariate logistic regression). Conclusion: The data obtained highlight that mechanical restraint use was influenced not only by clinical factors, but mainly by staff and policy factors, which have permitted a gradual but significant reduction in the use of this procedure through a multidimensional approach

Exploration of experiences in therapeutic groups for patients with severe mental illness: development of the Ferrara group experiences scale (FE-GES)

The study has been supported by the University of Ferrara (University Funds for Scientific Research 2008–2009

Off–label long acting injectable antipsychotics in real–world clinical practice: a cross-sectional analysis of prescriptive patterns from the STAR Network DEPOT study

Introduction: Information on the off–label use of Long–Acting Injectable (LAI) antipsychotics in the real world is lacking. In this study, we aimed to identify the sociodemographic and clinical features of patients treated with on– vs off–label LAIs and predictors of off–label First– or Second–Generation Antipsychotic (FGA vs. SGA) LAI choice in everyday clinical practice. Method: In a naturalistic national cohort of 449 patients who initiated LAI treatment in the STAR Network Depot Study, two groups were identified based on off– or on–label prescriptions. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to test several clinically relevant variables and identify those associated with the choice of FGA vs SGA prescription in the off–label group. Results: SGA LAIs were more commonly prescribed in everyday practice, without significant differences in their on– and off–label use. Approximately 1 in 4 patients received an off–label prescription. In the off–label group, the most frequent diagnoses were bipolar disorder (67.5%) or any personality disorder (23.7%). FGA vs SGA LAI choice was significantly associated with BPRS thought disorder (OR = 1.22, CI95% 1.04 to 1.43, p&nbsp;= 0.015) and hostility/suspiciousness (OR = 0.83, CI95% 0.71 to 0.97, p&nbsp;= 0.017) dimensions. The likelihood of receiving an SGA LAI grew steadily with the increase of the BPRS thought disturbance score. Conversely, a preference towards prescribing an FGA was observed with higher scores at the BPRS hostility/suspiciousness subscale. Conclusion: Our study is the first to identify predictors of FGA vs SGA choice in patients treated with off–label LAI antipsychotics. Demographic characteristics, i.e. age, sex, and substance/alcohol use co–morbidities did not appear to influence the choice towards FGAs or SGAs. Despite a lack of evidence, clinicians tend to favour FGA over SGA LAIs in bipolar or personality disorder patients with relevant hostility. Further research is needed to evaluate treatment adherence and clinical effectiveness of these prescriptive patterns

Comparing Long-Acting Antipsychotic Discontinuation Rates Under Ordinary Clinical Circumstances: A Survival Analysis from an Observational, Pragmatic Study

Background: Recent guidelines suggested a wider use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAI) than previously, but naturalistic data on the consequences of LAI use in terms of discontinuation rates and associated factors are still sparse, making it hard for clinicians to be informed on plausible treatment courses. Objective: Our objective was to assess, under real-world clinical circumstances, LAI discontinuation rates over a period of 12 months after a first prescription, reasons for discontinuation, and associated factors. Methods: The STAR Network ‘Depot Study’ was a naturalistic, multicentre, observational prospective study that enrolled subjects initiating a LAI without restrictions on diagnosis, clinical severity or setting. Participants from 32 Italian centres were assessed at baseline and at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. Psychopathology, drug attitude and treatment adherence were measured using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Drug Attitude Inventory and the Kemp scale, respectively. Results: The study followed 394 participants for 12 months. The overall discontinuation rate at 12 months was 39.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 34.4–44.3), with paliperidone LAI being the least discontinued LAI (33.9%; 95% CI 25.3–43.5) and olanzapine LAI the most discontinued (62.5%; 95% CI 35.4–84.8). The most frequent reason for discontinuation was onset of adverse events (32.9%; 95% CI 25.6–40.9) followed by participant refusal of the medication (20.6%; 95% CI 14.6–27.9). Medication adherence at baseline was negatively associated with discontinuation risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.853; 95% CI 0.742–0.981; p&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.026), whereas being prescribed olanzapine LAI was associated with increased discontinuation risk compared with being prescribed paliperidone LAI (HR 2.156; 95% CI 1.003–4.634; p&nbsp;=&nbsp;0.049). Conclusions: Clinicians should be aware that LAI discontinuation is a frequent occurrence. LAI choice should be carefully discussed with the patient, taking into account individual characteristics and possible obstacles related to the practicalities of each formulation

Reply: Atypical antipsychotics and neuroleptic malignant syndrome

The epidemiology of Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome (NMS) has been only recently examine das far as atypical antipsychotics are concerned. Further research is necessary regarding this clinical area, but preliminary data confim the risk of NMS by using atipycal antipsychotics, as well as conventional antipsychotics

The BPRS-E as predictor of length of stay in a residential facility

We evaluated the role of the BPRS-E in predicting inpatient length of stay in a sample of patients that was representative of the psychiatric population in the town of Ferrara, Northern Italy. The study participants were patients who were consecutively admitted to the only residential facility for short- to medium- term psychiatric care in the town during a 14-month period. Upon the patient’s admission, we documented sociodemographic and clinical data, ICD-10 psychiatric diagnosis, and duration of illness. The BPRS-E was administered by the first author. The BPRS-E items were subjected to a principal-components analysis with varimax rotation and Kaiser normalization. Factorial analysis produced six BPRSE factors. Factor 1 (positive symptoms) included grandiosity, suspiciousness, hallucinations, unusual thought content, bizarre behavior, mannerisms and posturing, and conceptual disorganization. Factor 2 (manic symptoms) included elevated mood, disorientation, tension, excitement, distractibility, and motor hyperactivity. Factor 3 (negative symptoms) included self-neglect, blunted affect, emotional withdrawal, and motor retardation. Factor 4 (depressive symptoms) included depression, suicidality, and guilt. Factor 5 (patients’ resistance to treatment) included hostility and uncooperativeness. Factor 6 (anxiety symptoms) included somatic concern and anxiety. The results of the bootstrap linear regression analysis showed that demographic and clinical variables were not associated with length of stay and that negative symptoms were positively associated with length of stay (coefficient=3.28, bias-corrected 95 percent CI=.96 to 5.93, p<.05; 22 percent of the variance explained). Age, sex, living conditions, duration of illness, diagnosis, and number of previous admissions were not associated with length of stay, thus giving further relevance to the possibility of predicting length of stay by administering the BPRS-E upon patient admission

Gli strumenti testali.

Un’area significativa dell’attività di Psichiatria di C-L è rappresentata dall’impiego di strumenti testistici, intesi come ausilio diagnostico a quanto, all’interno del colloquio psichiatrico. Il loro utilizzo, ferma restando la consapevolezza dell'irriducibilità dell'esperienza umana e della molteplicità dei fattori che influenzano le risposte soggettive agli eventi di vita mira fondamentalmente a cogliere e definire in parametri precisi alcuni fenomeni psichici e comportamentali, dalle caratteristiche di personalità, ai sintomi di sofferenza psicopatologica, dalle modalità di risposta emozionale alla malattia alle funzioni cognitive. In Psichiatria di C-L l’importanza della misurazione di diversi parametri psichici e comportamentali assume certamente un ruolo significativo. Nell’ambito degli strumenti a disposizione della clinica, è solitamente operata una distinzione tra strumenti a carattere proiettivo e strumenti a carattere obiettivo (rating scales e strumenti self-report). In questo capitolo, vengono presi in esame in particolare gli strumenti a carattere obiettivo, fornendo alcuni concetti generali relativamente alle caratteristiche e ai criteri psiconmetrici che costituiscono la base per la costruzione e l’impiego degli strumenti stessi. Verranno inoltre descritti alcuni tra gli strumenti più usati in ambito consulenziale, in particolare quelli impiegati per la valutazione della personalità, dei sintomi psicopatologici, degli stili di reazione e di comportamento verso la malattia e delle funzioni cognitive