Crisis discharges and readmission risk in acute psychiatric male inpatients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Severe pressures on beds in psychiatric services have led to the implementation of an early ("crisis") discharge policy in the Western Cape, South Africa. The study examined the effect of this policy and length of hospital stay (LOS) on readmission rates in one psychiatric hospital in South Africa.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Discharge summaries of adult male patients (<it>n </it>= 438) admitted to Stikland Psychiatric Hospital during 2004 were retrospectively examined. Each patient's clinical course was then analysed for the period between January 1^st, 2004, and August 31^st, 2006.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Although shorter LOS was associated with decreased readmission rates, the effect of crisis discharges was far more powerful. Patients discharged as usual had a far lower risk of readmission than those discharged due to bed pressures (i.e. crisis discharge).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Increased risks associated with the early discharge policy necessitate the urgent review of the current management of bed shortages in this inpatient facility. The strengthening of community initiatives, particularly assertive outreach could be a way forward.</p

Pharmacotherapy of Schizophrenic Patients: Preponderance of Off-Label Drug Use

Multiple drug class combinations are often prescribed for the treatment of schizophrenia, although antipsychotic monotherapy reflects FDA labeling and scientific justification for combinations is highly variable. This study was performed to gain current data regarding drug treatment of schizophrenia as practiced in the community and to assess the frequencies of off-label drug class combinations. 200 DSM IV-diagnosed schizophrenic patients recruited from community treatment sources participated in this cross-sectional study of community based schizophrenic patients. Drug class categories include First and Second Generation Antipsychotic drugs (FGA and SGA, respectively), mood stabilizers, antidepressants and anti-anxiety drugs. 25.5% of patients received antipsychotic monotherapy; 70% of patients received an antipsychotic and another drug class. A total of 42.5% of patients received more than one antipsychotic drug. The most common drug class combination was antipsychotic and a mood stabilizer. Stepwise linear discriminant function analysis identified the diagnosis of schizoaffective schizophrenia, history of having physically hurt someone and high scores on the General Portion of the PANSS rating scale predicted the combined use of an antipsychotic drug and a mood stabilizer. “Real world” pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia has developed its own established practice that is predominantly off-label and may have outstripped current data support. The economic implications for public sector payers are substantial as well as for the revenue of the pharmaceutical industry, whose promotion of off-label drug use is an increasingly problematic. These data are consistent with the recognition of the therapeutic limitations of both first and second generation antipsychotic drugs

Onset of efficacy and tolerability following the initiation dosing of long-acting paliperidone palmitate: post-hoc analyses of a randomized, double-blind clinical trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Paliperidone palmitate is a long-acting injectable atypical antipsychotic for the acute and maintenance treatment of adults with schizophrenia. The recommended initiation dosing regimen is 234 mg on Day 1 and 156 mg on Day 8 via intramuscular (deltoid) injection; followed by 39 to 234 mg once-monthly thereafter (deltoid or gluteal). These post-hoc analyses addressed two commonly encountered clinical issues regarding the initiation dosing: the time to onset of efficacy and the associated tolerability.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In a 13-week double-blind trial, 652 subjects with schizophrenia were randomized to paliperidone palmitate 39, 156, or 234 mg (corresponding to 25, 100, or 150 mg equivalents of paliperidone, respectively) or placebo (NCT#00590577). Subjects randomized to paliperidone palmitate received 234 mg on Day 1, followed by their randomized fixed dose on Day 8, and monthly thereafter, with no oral antipsychotic supplementation. The onset of efficacy was defined as the first timepoint where the paliperidone palmitate group showed significant improvement in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score compared to placebo (Analysis of Covariance [ANCOVA] models and Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF] methodology without adjusting for multiplicity) using data from the Days 4, 8, 22, and 36 assessments. Adverse event (AE) rates and relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) versus placebo were determined.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Paliperidone palmitate 234 mg on Day 1 was associated with greater improvement than placebo on Least Squares (LS) mean PANSS total score at Day 8 (p = 0.037). After the Day 8 injection of 156 mg, there was continued PANSS improvement at Day 22 (p ≤ 0.007 vs. placebo) and Day 36 (p < 0.001). Taken together with results in the 39 mg and 234 mg Day 8 arms, these findings suggest a trend towards a dose-dependent response. During Days 1 to 7, AEs reported in ≥2% of paliperidone palmitate subjects (234 mg) and a greater proportion of paliperidone palmitate than placebo subjects were: agitation (3.2% vs. 1.3%; RR 2.52 [95% CI 0.583, 10.904]), headache (4.0% vs. 3.8%; RR 1.06 [95% CI 0.433, 2.619]), and injection site pain (6.7% vs. 3.8%; RR 1.79 [95% CI 0.764, 4.208]). Days 8 to 36 AEs meeting the same criteria in the 156 mg Day 8 arm were: anxiety (3.1% vs. 2.5%; RR 1.24 [95% CI 0.340, 4.542]), psychotic disorder (2.5% vs. 1.3%; RR 1.99 [95% CI 0.369, 10.699]), dizziness (2.5% vs. 1.3%; RR 1.99 [95% CI 0.369, 10.699]), and injection site pain (2.5% vs. 1.3%; RR 1.99 [95% CI 0.369, 10.699]). Corresponding Days 8 to 36 AEs in the 39 mg Day 8 group were: agitation (4.5% vs. 4.4%; RR 1.03 [95% CI 0.371, 2.874]), anxiety (3.9% vs. 2.5%; RR 1.55 [95% CI 0.446, 5.381]), and psychotic disorder (2.6% vs. 1.3%; RR 2.07 [95% CI 0.384, 11.110]) while in the 234 mg Day 8 group it was anxiety (3.1% vs. 2.5%, RR 1.25 [95% CI 0.342, 4.570]).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Significantly greater symptom improvement was observed by Day 8 with paliperidone palmitate (234 mg on Day 1) compared to placebo; this effect was maintained after the 156 mg Day 8 injection, with a trend towards a dose-dependent response. No unexpected tolerability findings were noted in the first week or month after the initiation dosing.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT#00590577">NCT#00590577</a></p

Does publication bias inflate the apparent efficacy of psychological treatment for major depressive disorder? A systematic review and meta-analysis of US national institutes of health-funded trials

Background The efficacy of antidepressant medication has been shown empirically to be overestimated due to publication bias, but this has only been inferred statistically with regard to psychological treatment for depression. We assessed directly the extent of study publication bias in trials examining the efficacy of psychological treatment for depression. Methods and Findings We identified US National Institutes of Health grants awarded to fund randomized clinical trials comparing psychological treatment to control conditions or other treatments in patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder for the period 1972–2008, and we determined whether those grants led to publications. For studies that were not published, data were requested from investigators and included in the meta-analyses. Thirteen (23.6%) of the 55 funded grants that began trials did not result in publications, and two others never started. Among comparisons to control conditions, adding unpublished studies (Hedges’ g = 0.20; CI95% -0.11~0.51; k = 6) to published studies (g = 0.52; 0.37~0.68; k = 20) reduced the psychotherapy effect size point estimate (g = 0.39; 0.08~0.70) by 25%. Moreover, these findings may overestimate the "true" effect of psychological treatment for depression as outcome reporting bias could not be examined quantitatively. Conclusion The efficacy of psychological interventions for depression has been overestimated in the published literature, just as it has been for pharmacotherapy. Both are efficacious but not to the extent that the published literature would suggest. Funding agencies and journals should archive both original protocols and raw data from treatment trials to allow the detection and correction of outcome reporting bias. Clinicians, guidelines developers, and decision makers should be aware that the published literature overestimates the effects of the predominant treatments for depression

Is the PANSS used correctly? a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The PANSS (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale) is one of the most important rating instruments for patients with schizophrenia. Nevertheless, there is a long and ongoing debate in the psychiatric community regarding its mathematical properties.</p> <p>All 30 items range from 1 to 7 leading to a minimum total score of 30, implying that the PANSS is an interval scale. For such interval scales straightforward calculation of relative changes is not appropriate. To calculate outcome criteria based on a percent change as, e.g., the widely accepted response criterion, the scale has to be transformed into a ratio scale beforehand. Recent publications have already pointed out the pitfall that ignoring the scale level (interval vs. ratio scale) leads to a set of mathematical problems, potentially resulting in erroneous results concerning the efficacy of the treatment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A Pubmed search based on the PRISMA statement of the highest-ranked psychiatric journals (search terms "PANSS" and "response") was carried out. All articles containing percent changes were included and methods of percent change calculation were analysed.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>This systematic literature research shows that the majority of authors (62%) actually appear to use incorrect calculations. In most instances the method of calculation was not described in the manuscript.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These alarming results underline the need for standardized procedures for PANSS calculations.</p

Selective Inhibitors of Protozoan Protein N-myristoyltransferases as Starting Points for Tropical Disease Medicinal Chemistry Programs

Inhibition of N-myristoyltransferase has been validated pre-clinically as a target for the treatment of fungal and trypanosome infections, using species-specific inhibitors. In order to identify inhibitors of protozoan NMTs, we chose to screen a diverse subset of the Pfizer corporate collection against Plasmodium falciparum and Leishmania donovani NMTs. Primary screening hits against either enzyme were tested for selectivity over both human NMT isoforms (Hs1 and Hs2) and for broad-spectrum anti-protozoan activity against the NMT from Trypanosoma brucei. Analysis of the screening results has shown that structure-activity relationships (SAR) for Leishmania NMT are divergent from all other NMTs tested, a finding not predicted by sequence similarity calculations, resulting in the identification of four novel series of Leishmania-selective NMT inhibitors. We found a strong overlap between the SARs for Plasmodium NMT and both human NMTs, suggesting that achieving an appropriate selectivity profile will be more challenging. However, we did discover two novel series with selectivity for Plasmodium NMT over the other NMT orthologues in this study, and an additional two structurally distinct series with selectivity over Leishmania NMT. We believe that release of results from this study into the public domain will accelerate the discovery of NMT inhibitors to treat malaria and leishmaniasis. Our screening initiative is another example of how a tripartite partnership involving pharmaceutical industries, academic institutions and governmental/non-governmental organisations such as Medical Research Council and Wellcome Trust can stimulate research for neglected diseases

Change in level of productivity in the treatment of schizophrenia with olanzapine or other antipsychotics

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>When treating schizophrenia, improving patients' productivity level is a major goal considering schizophrenia is a leading cause of functional disability. Productivity level has been identified as the most preferred treatment outcome by patients with schizophrenia. However, little has been done to systematically investigate productivity levels in schizophrenia. We set out to better understand the change in productivity level among chronically ill patients with schizophrenia treated with olanzapine compared with other antipsychotic medications. We also assessed the links between productivity level and other clinical outcomes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This post hoc analysis used data from 6 randomized, double-blind clinical trials of patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, with each trial being of approximately 6 months duration. Change in productivity level was compared between olanzapine-treated patients (HGBG, n = 172; HGHJ, n = 277; HGJB, n = 171; HGLB, n = 281; HGGN, n = 159; HGDH, n = 131) and patients treated with other antipsychotic medications (separately vs. haloperidol [HGGN, n = 97; HGDH, n = 132], risperidone [HGBG, n = 167; HGGN, n = 158], quetiapine [HGJB, n = 175], ziprasidone [HGHJ, n = 271] and aripiprazole [HGLB, n = 285]). Productivity was defined as functional activities/work including working for pay, studying, housekeeping and volunteer work. Productivity level in the prior 3 months was assessed on a 5-point scale ranging from no useful functioning to functional activity/work 75% to 100% of the time.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Chronically ill patients treated with olanzapine (OLZ) experienced significantly greater improvement in productivity when compared to patients treated with risperidone (RISP) (OLZ = 0.22 ± 1.19, RISP = -0.03 ± 1.17, p = 0.033) or ziprasidone (ZIP) (OLZ = 0.50 ± 1.38, ZIP = 0.25 ± 1.27, p = 0.026), but did not significantly differ from the quetiapine, aripiprazole or haloperidol treatment groups. Among first episode patients, OLZ therapy was associated with greater improvements in productivity levels compared to haloperidol (HAL), during the acute phase (OLZ = -0.31 ± 1.59, HAL = -0.69 ± 1.56, p = 0.011) and over the long-term (OLZ = 0.10 ± 1.50, HAL = -0.32 ± 1.91, p = 0.008). Significantly more chronically ill and first episode patients treated with olanzapine showed moderately high (>50%-75% of the time) and high levels of productivity (>75%-100% of the time) at endpoint, when compared to risperidone or haloperidol-treated patients (p < .05), respectively. Higher productivity level was associated with significantly higher study completion rates and better scores on the positive, negative, disorganized thoughts, hostility and depression subscales of the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Some antipsychotic medications significantly differed in beneficial impact on productivity level in the long-term treatment of patients with schizophrenia. Findings further highlight the link between clinical and functional outcomes, showing significant associations between higher productivity, lower symptom severity and better persistence on therapy.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>clinicaltrials.gov identifier <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00088049">NCT00088049</a>; <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00036088">NCT00036088</a></p

Current Data on and Clinical Insights into the Treatment of First Episode Nonaffective Psychosis: A Comprehensive Review

Implementing the most suitable treatment strategies and making appropriate clinical decisions about individuals with a first episode of psychosis (FEP) is a complex and crucial task, with relevant impact in illness outcome. Treatment approaches in the early stages should go beyond choosing the right antipsychotic drug and should also address tractable factors influencing the risk of relapse. Effectiveness and likely metabolic and endocrine disturbances differ among second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) and should guide the choice of the first-line treatment. Clinicians should be aware of the high risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in schizophrenia patients, and therefore monitoring weight and metabolic changes across time is mandatory. Behavioral and counseling interventions might be partly effective in reducing weight gain and metabolic disturbances. Ziprasidone and aripiprazole have been described to be least commonly associated with weight gain or metabolic changes. In addition, some of the SGAs (risperidone, amisulpride, and paliperidone) have been associated with a significant increase of plasma prolactin levels. Overall, in cases of FEP, there should be a clear recommendation of using lower doses of the antipsychotic medication. If no or minimal clinical improvement is found after 2 weeks of treatment, such patients may benefit from a change or augmentation of treatment. Clinicians should provide accurate information to patients and relatives about the high risk of relapse if antipsychotics are discontinued, even if patients have been symptom free and functionally recovered on antipsychotic treatment for a lengthy period of time.This review was carried out at the Hospital Marque´s de Valdecilla, University of Cantabria, Santander, Spain, with the following Grant support: Instituto de Salud Carlos III PI020499, PI050427, PI060507, Plan Nacional de Drugs Research Grant 2005-Orden sco/3246/2004, SENY Fundacio´ Research Grant CI 2005-0308007, Fundacio´n Marque´s de Valdecilla API07/011 and CIBERSAM