A proposal for a psychopharmacology-pharmacotherapy catalogue of learning objectives and a curriculum in Europe.

Objectives Post-graduate training for specialisation in psychiatry and psychotherapy is part of a 4-6-year programme. This paper aims to inform on the general situation of teaching and training of psychopharmacology-psychopharmacotherapy in Europe. It presents the need for a psychopharmacotherapy education in psychiatric training programmes. Arguments as well as a proposal for a catalogue of learning objectives and an outline of a psychopharmacology curriculum are presented. Methods Based on their experience and on an analysis of the literature, the authors, experts in psychopharmacology-pharmacotherapy teaching, critically analyse the present situation and propose the development of a curriculum at the European level. Results Teaching programmes vary widely between European countries and, generally, teaching of psychopharmacology and pharmacotherapy does not exceed two-dozen hours. This is insufficient if one considers the central importance of psychopharmacology. A psychopharmacology-psychopharmacotherapy curriculum for the professional training of specialists in psychiatry and psychotherapy is proposed. Conclusions As the number of hours of theoretical teaching and practical training is insufficient, a catalogue of learning objectives should be established, which would then be part of a comprehensive curriculum at the European level. It could be inspired partly by those few previously proposed by other groups of authors and organisations

The intercontinental schizophrenia outpatient health outcomes (IC-SOHO) study: baseline clinical and functional characteristics and antipsychotic use patterns in the North Africa and Middle Eastern (AMEA) region: original article

Objective: To describe the baseline findings of the Intercontinental Schizophrenia Outpatient Health Outcomes (IC-SOHO) study in the North Africa and Middle Eastern sub-region (AMEA-SOHO) Method: The IC-SOHO study is an ongoing prospective, three-year, non-interventional observational study of schizophrenia treatment, clinical characteristics and mental health services utilization in two North African and two Middle Eastern countries. The study population consists of non-hospitalised patients who had initiated treatment with or changed to a new antipsychotic. Results: The baseline findings of the IC-SOHO study (AMEA Subset) appear to reflect clinical practice in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Algeria (N=1, 398). Overall, the patients were moderately to markedly ill and either overweight (46%) or obese (8%) when they entered the study. Functionally, the majority of patients were not involved in social activities, could not care for themselves and were unemployed. Substance and alcohol dependency/abuse was not a problem in this study population. At baseline the majority of patients were treated with typical antipsychotics (oral and depot); and anticholinergics were the most commonly prescribed concomitant medication. Sexual side effects were most frequently reported among the surveyed adverse events. Overall compliance/adherence to medication was good. Conclusion: The baseline IC-SOHO data highlighted various clinical and functional characteristics and antipsychotic use patterns in a group of outpatients with schizophrenia in a naturalistic setting. Once completed, the IC-SOHO study will add further to this knowledge base. SA Psychiatry Rev. Vol.7(3) 2004: 27-3

Intramuscular Olanzapine and Intramuscular Haloperidol in Acute Schizophrenia: Antipsychotic Efficacy and Extrapyramidal Safety During the First 24 Hours of Treatment

To determine the antipsychotic efficacy and extrapyramidal safety of intramuscular (IM) olanzapine and IM haloperidol during the first 24 hours of treatment of acute schizophrenia. Method: Patients (n = 311) with acute schizophrenia were randomly allocated (2:2: 1) to receive IM olanzapine (10.0 mg, n = 131), IM haloperidol (7.5 mg, n = 126), or IM placebo (n = 54). Results: After the first injection, IM olanzapine was comparable to IM haloperidol and superior to IM placebo for reducing mean change scores from baseline on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BRPS) Positive at 2 hours (-2.9 olanzapine, -2.7 haloperidol, and -1.5 placebo) and 24 hours (-2.8 olanzapine, -3.2 haloperidol, and -1.3 placebo); the BPRS Total at 2 hours (-14.2 olanzapine,-13.1 haloperidol, and -7.1 placebo) and 24 hours (-12.8 olanzapine, -12.9 haloperidol, and -6.2 placebo); and the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale at 24 hours (-0.5 olanzapine, -0.5 haloperidol, and -0.1 placebo). Patients treated with IM olanzapine had significantly fewer incidences of treatment-emergent parkinsonism (4.3% olanzapine vs 13.3% haloperidol, P = 0.036), but not akathisia (1.1% olanzapine vs 6.5% haloperidol, P = 0.065), than did patients treated with IM haloperidol; they also required significantly less anticholinergic treatment (4.6% olanzapine vs 20.6% haloperidol, P < 0.001). Mean extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) safety scores improved significantly from baseline during IM olanzapine treatment, compared with a general worsening during IM haloperidol treatment (Simpson-Angus Scale total score mean change: -0.61 olanzapine vs 0.70 haloperidol; P < 0.001; Barnes Akathisia Scale global score mean change: -0.27 olanzapine vs 0.01 haloperidol; P < 0.05). Conclusion: IM olanzapine was comparable to IM haloperidol for reducing the symptoms of acute schizophrenia during the first 24 hours of treatment, the efficacy of both being evident within 2 hours after the first injection. In general, more EPS were observed during treatment with IM haloperidol than with IM olanzapine

Replication Study and Meta-Analysis in European Samples Supports Association of the 3p21.1 Locus with Bipolar Disorder

n/

Insight and Hostility as Predictors and Correlates of Nonadherence in the European First Episode Schizophrenia Trial

International audienc

Efficacy of antipsychotic drugs against hostility in the European First-Episode Schizophrenia Trial (EUFEST)

To compare the effects of haloperidol, amisulpride, olanzapine, quetiapine, and ziprasidone on hostility in first-episode schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or schizophreniform disorder. We used the data acquired in the European First-Episode Schizophrenia Trial, an open, randomized trial (conducted in 14 countries) comparing 5 antipsychotic drugs in 498 patients aged 18-40 years with first-episode schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or schizophreniform disorder. DSM-IV diagnostic criteria were used. Patients were assessed between December 23, 2002 and January 14, 2006. Most subjects joined the study as inpatients and then continued with follow-ups in outpatient clinic visits. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) was administered at baseline and at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after randomization. We analyzed the scores on the PANSS hostility item in a subset of 302 patients showing at least minimal hostility (a score > 1) at baseline. We hypothesized (1) that the treatments would differ in their efficacy for hostility and (2) that olanzapine would be superior to haloperidol. Our primary statistical analysis tested the null hypothesis of no difference among the treatment groups in change in hostility over time. Secondary analysis addressed the question of whether the effects on hostility found in the primary analysis were specific to this item. All our analyses were post hoc. The primary analysis of hostility indicated an effect of differences between treatments (F(4,889) = 4.02, P = .0031). Post hoc treatment-group contrasts for hostility change showed that, at months 1 and 3, olanzapine was significantly superior (P <.05) to haloperidol, quetiapine, and amisulpride in reducing hostility. Secondary analyses demonstrated that these results were at least partly specific to hostility. Both hypotheses were supported. Olanzapine appears to be a superior treatment for hostility in early phases of therapy for first-episode schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, and schizophreniform disorder. This efficacy advantage of olanzapine must be weighed against its adverse metabolic effects and propensity to cause weight gain. ISRCTN Register Identifier: ISRCTN6873663

Tianeptine and paroxetine in major depressive disorder, with a special focus on the anxious component in depression: An international, 6-week double-blind study

Tianeptine (37.5 mg/day) and paroxetine (20 mg/day) were compared in a population of depressive patients without past or current history of co-morbid anxiety and/or important anxiolytic treatment. In a 6-week, double blind trial, the special focus was on anxious symptoms. Both drugs showed good efficacy on depressive symptomatology, assessed with MADRS and HDRS, but no difference was detected between tianeptine and paroxetine, for any assessment criterion. Despite the choice of selected depressive patients, without any co-morbid anxious disorder, anxiety scale scores at inclusion (HAMA and BAS) were appreciable but correlated poorly with depressive scores. Both tianeptine and paroxetine improved the apparent anxious component in depression. Tolerability of both drugs was good, although significantly better with tianeptine. Thus tianeptine and paroxetine are effective and safe treatments for major depression and may also act directly on the anxious component of the psychopathology

Persistent negative symptoms in first episode patients with schizophrenia: Results from the European First Episode Schizophrenia Trial

International audienc