Commentary on strategies for switching antipsychotics

Both the new generation of antipsychotics and the more traditional antipsychotic drugs produce an important and meaningful improvement in patients with schizophrenia, but most patients are neither cured nor free of symptoms. As a consequence, it is common to switch from one drug to another in the hope of obtaining a better response. All antipsychotic drugs produce some side effects, so switching can also be a tolerance issue. There are reports in the literature on the tactics of switching: abrupt discontinuation, cross tapering, starting a patient on a new drug while continuing with the old drug until the new drug has reached a steady state, or some variation on these tactics. In this issue, Ganguli et al. have carried out a randomized switching study, the data from which indicates the tactics that might be optimal. We put this paper into context, provide a critique and describe indications for switching

What Does It Take? California County Funding Requests for Recovery-Oriented Full Service Partnerships Under the Mental Health Services Act

The need to move mental health systems toward more recovery-oriented treatment modes is well established. Progress has been made to define needed changes but evidence is lacking about the resources required to implement them. The Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) in California was designed to implement more recovery-oriented treatment modes. We use data from county funding requests and annual updates to examine how counties budgeted for recovery-oriented programs targeted to different age groups under MHSA. Findings indicate that initial per-client budgeting for Full Services Partnerships under MHSA was maintained in future cycles and counties budgeted less per client for children. With this analysis, we begin to benchmark resource allocation for programs that are intended to be recovery-oriented, which should be evaluated against appropriate outcome measures in the future to determine the degree of recovery-orientation

Determinants of per diem Hospital Costs in Mental Health

INTRODUCTION:An understanding of differences in hospital costs between patient groups is relevant for the efficient organisation of inpatient care. The main aim of this study was to confirm the hypothesis that eight a priori identified cost drivers influence per diem hospital costs. A second aim was to explore further variables that might influence hospital costs. METHODS:The study included 667 inpatient episodes consecutively discharged in 2014 at the psychiatric hospital of the Medical Centre-University of Freiburg. Fifty-one patient characteristics were analysed. Per diem costs were calculated from the hospital perspective based on a detailed documentation of resource use. Mixed-effects maximum likelihood regression and an ensemble of conditional inference trees were used to analyse data. RESULTS:The study confirmed the a priori hypothesis that not being of middle age (33-64 years), danger to self, involuntary admission, problems in the activities of daily living, the presence of delusional symptoms, the presence of affective symptoms, short length of stay and the discharging ward affect per diem hospital costs. A patient classification system for prospective per diem payment was suggested with the highest per diem hospital costs in episodes having both delusional symptoms and involuntary admissions and the lowest hospital costs in episodes having neither delusional symptoms nor somatic comorbidities. CONCLUSION:Although reliable cost drivers were identified, idiosyncrasies of mental health care complicated the identification of clear and consistent differences in hospital costs between patient groups. Further research could greatly inform current discussions about inpatient mental health reimbursement, in particular with multicentre studies that might find algorithms to split patients in more resource-homogeneous groups

Clinical and economic ramifications of switching antipsychotics in the treatment of schizophrenia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Switching between antipsychotic medications is common in the treatment of schizophrenia. However, data on clinical and economic outcomes from antipsychotic switching, in particular acute care service use, is fairly limited. The goal of this research was to assess the clinical and economic ramifications of switching antipsychotics during outpatient management of schizophrenia.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data from a 1-year randomized, open-label cost-effectiveness study involving typical and atypical antipsychotics were assessed. The study protocol permitted switching of antipsychotics when clinically warranted. The risk of crisis-related events, use of acute-care services, and the time to the initial use of such services were determined in outpatients who switched antipsychotics compared with those who continued with their initial medications. Health care resource utilization data were abstracted from medical records and other sources (e.g., patient self-report), and direct costs were estimated using previously published benchmarks.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Almost one-third of patients (29.3%) underwent a switch from their initial antipsychotic agent, with an average duration of 100 days before such treatment alterations. Compared with their counterparts who remained on their initial therapies, individuals who switched antipsychotics experienced a significantly higher risk of acute-care services, including hospitalization (p = .013) and crisis services (p = .011). Patients undergoing medication switches also used acute-care services significantly sooner (p = .004) and accrued an additional $3,000 (a 25% increase) in annual total health care costs per patient, most of which was due to acute-care expenditures.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Switching antipsychotic medications was found to be associated with considerably poorer clinical and economic outcomes, as reflected by, more frequent and more rapid use of acute-care services compared with persons remaining on their initial treatments.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Trial ID 2325 in LillyTrials.com (also accessible via ClinicalStudyResults.org).</p

Assessing the efficacy of a modified assertive community-based treatment programme in a developing country

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A number of recently published randomized controlled trials conducted in developed countries have reported no advantage for assertive interventions over standard care models. One possible explanation could be that so-called "standard care" has become more comprehensive in recent years, incorporating some of the salient aspects of assertive models in its modus operandi. Our study represents the first randomised controlled trial assessing the effect of a modified assertive treatment service on readmission rates and other measures of outcome in a developing country.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>High frequency service users were randomized into an intervention (n = 34) and a control (n = 26) group. The control group received standard community care and the active group an assertive intervention based on a modified version of the international model of assertive community treatment. Study visits were conducted at baseline and 12 months with demographic and illness information collected at visit 1 and readmission rates documented at study end. Symptomatology and functioning were measured at both visits using the PANSS, CDSS, ESRS, WHO-QOL and SOFAS.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>At 12 month follow-up subjects receiving the assertive intervention had significantly lower total PANSS (p = 0.02) as well as positive (p < 0.01) and general psychopathology (p = 0.01) subscales' scores. The mean SOFAS score was also significantly higher (p = 0.02) and the mean number of psychiatric admissions significantly lower (p < 0.01) in the intervention group.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Our results indicate that assertive interventions in a developing setting where standard community mental services are often under resourced can produce significant outcomes. Furthermore, these interventions need not be as expensive and comprehensive as international, first-world models in order to reduce inpatient days, improve psychopathology and overall levels of functioning in patients with severe mental illness.</p

Evolutionary biology: a basic science for psychiatry?

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/65529/1/j.1600-0447.1992.tb03234.x.pd

Assertive community treatment for elderly people with severe mental illness

Background: Adults aged 65 and older with severe mental illnesses are a growing segment of the Dutch population. Some of them have a range of serious problems and are also difficult to engage. While assertive community treatment is a common model for treating difficult to engage severe mental illnesses patients, no special form of it is available for the elderly. A special assertive community treatment team for the elderly is developed in Rotterdam, the Netherlands and tested for its effectiveness.Methods: We will use a randomized controlled trial design to compare the effects of assertive community treatment for the elderly with those of care as usual. Primary outcome measures will be the number of dropouts, the number of patients engaged in care and patient's psychiatric symptoms, somatic symptoms, and social functioning. Secondary outcome measures are the number of unmet needs, the subjective quality of life and patients' satisfaction. Other secondary outcomes include the number of crisis contacts, rates of voluntary and involuntary admission, and length of stay. Inclusion criteria are aged 65 plus, the presence of a mental disorder, a lack of motivation for treatment and at least four suspected problems with functioning (addiction, somatic problems, daily living activities, housing etc.). If patients meet the inclusion criteria, they will be randomly allocated to either assertive community treatment for the elderly or care as usual. Trained assessors will use mainly observational instruments at the following time points: at baseline, after 9 and 18 months.Discussion: This study will help establish whether assertive community treatment for the elderly produces better results than care as usual in elderly people with severe mental illnesses who are difficult to engage. When assertive community treatment for the elderly proves valuable in these respects, it can be tested and implemented more widely, and mechanisms for its effects investigated

Innovations in mental health services implementation: a report on state-level data from the U.S. Evidence-Based Practices Project

BACKGROUND: The Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) Project has been investigating the implementation of evidence-based mental health practices (Assertive Community Treatment, Family Psychoeducation, Integrated Dual Diagnosis Treatment, Illness Management and Recovery, and Supported Employment) in state public mental health systems in the United States since 2001. To date, Project findings have yielded valuable insights into implementation strategy characteristics and effectiveness. This paper reports results of an effort to identify and classify state-level implementation activities and strategies employed across the eight states participating in the Project. METHODS: Content analysis and Greenhalgh et al's (2004) definition of innovation were used to identify and classify state-level activities employed during three phases of EBP implementation: Pre-Implementation, Initial Implementation and Sustainability Planning. Activities were coded from site visit reports created from documents and notes from key informant interviews conducted during two periods, Fall 2002 – Spring 2003, and Spring 2004. Frequency counts and rank-order analyses were used to examine patterns of implementation activities and strategies employed across the three phases of implementation. RESULTS: One hundred and six discreet implementation activities and strategies were identified as innovative and were classified into five categories: 1) state infrastructure building and commitment, 2) stakeholder relationship building and communications, 3) financing, 4) continuous quality management, and 5) service delivery practices and training. Implementation activities from different categories were employed at different phases of implementation. CONCLUSION: Insights into effective strategies for implementing EBPs in mental health and other health sectors require qualitative and quantitative research that seeks to: a) empirically test the effects of tools and methods used to implement EBPs, and b) establish a stronger evidence-base from which to plan, implement and sustain such efforts. This paper offers a classification scheme and list of innovative implementation activities and strategies. The classification scheme offers potential value for future studies that seek to assess the effects of various implementation processes, and helps establish widely accepted standards and criteria that can be used to assess the value of innovative activities and strategies