523 research outputs found

    Chlorpromazine for schizophrenia: a Cochrane systematic review of 50 years of randomised controlled trials

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Chlorpromazine (CPZ) remains one of the most common drugs used for people with schizophrenia worldwide, and a benchmark against which other treatments can be evaluated. Quantitative reviews are rare; this one evaluates the effects of chlorpromazine in the treatment of schizophrenia in comparison with placebo. METHODS: We sought all relevant randomised controlled trials (RCT) comparing chlorpromazine to placebo by electronic and reference searching, and by contacting trial authors and the pharmaceutical industry. Data were extracted from selected trials and, where possible, synthesised and random effects relative risk (RR), the number needed to treat (NNT) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) calculated. RESULTS: Fifty RCTs from 1955–2000 were included with 5276 people randomised to CPZ or placebo. They constitute 2008 person-years spent in trials. Meta-analysis of these trials showed that chlorpromazine promotes a global improvement (n = 1121, 13 RCTs, RR 0.76 CI 0.7 to 0.9, NNT 7 CI 5 to 10), although a considerable placebo response is also seen. People allocated to chlorpromazine tended not to leave trials early in both the short (n = 945, 16 RCTs, RR 0.74 CI 0.5 to 1.1) and medium term (n = 1861, 25 RCTs, RR 0.79 CI 0.6 to 1.1). There were, however, many adverse effects. Chlorpromazine is sedating (n = 1242, 18 RCTs, RR 2.3 CI 1.7 to 3.1, NNH 6 CI 5 to 8), increases a person's chances of experiencing acute movement disorders, Parkinsonism and causes low blood pressure with dizziness and dry mouth. CONCLUSION: It is understandable why the World Health Organization (WHO) have endorsed and included chlorpromazine in their list of essential drugs for use in schizophrenia. Low- and middle-income countries may have more complete evidence upon which to base their practice compared with richer nations using recent innovations

    Are lay people good at recognising the symptoms of schizophrenia?

    Get PDF
    ©2013 Erritty, Wydell. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.Aim: The aim of this study was to explore the general public’s perception of schizophrenia symptoms and the need to seekhelp for symptoms. The recognition (or ‘labelling’) of schizophrenia symptoms, help-seeking behaviours and public awareness of schizophrenia have been suggested as potentially important factors relating to untreated psychosis. Method: Participants were asked to rate to what extent they believe vignettes describing classic symptoms (positive and negative) of schizophrenia indicate mental illness. They were also asked if the individuals depicted in the vignettes required help or treatment and asked to suggest what kind of help or treatment. Results: Only three positive symptoms (i.e., Hallucinatory behaviour, Unusual thought content and Suspiciousness) of schizophrenia were reasonably well perceived (above 70%) as indicating mental illness more than the other positive or negative symptoms. Even when the participants recognised that the symptoms indicated mental illness, not everyone recommended professional help. Conclusion: There may be a need to improve public awareness of schizophrenia and psychosis symptoms, particularly regarding an awareness of the importance of early intervention for psychosis

    D2 receptor occupancy of olanzapine pamoate depot using positron emission tomography : an open-label study in patients with schizophrenia

    Get PDF
    A long-acting depot formulation of olanzapine that sustains plasma olanzapine concentrations for over a month after a single injection is currently under development. This multicenter, open-label study explored D2 receptor occupancy of a fixed dose of olanzapine pamoate (OP) depot given every 4 weeks. Patients (nine male, five female) with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder previously stabilized on oral olanzapine were switched to OP depot 300 mg by intramuscular injection every 4 weeks for 6 months. No visitwise within-group significant changes were found in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale Total or Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scores, although seven patients received oral olanzapine supplementation during the first four injection cycles. To minimize impact on D2 occupancy, positron emission tomography (PET) scans were not completed during injection cycles that required supplemental oral olanzapine. Two patients reported transient injection site adverse events, which did not result in discontinuation. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were insomnia, aggravated psychosis, and anxiety. Mean striatal D2 receptor occupancy, as measured by [11C]-raclopride PET, was 69% on oral olanzapine (5–20 mg/day) and 50% (trough) on OP depot at steady state. Following an initial decline, occupancy returned to 84% of baseline oral olanzapine occupancy after six injections. Over the study period, D2 receptor occupancy and plasma olanzapine concentrations were significantly correlated (r=0.76, Pless than or equal to0.001). OP depot resulted in mean D2 receptor occupancy of approximately 60% or higher at the end of the 6-month study period, a level consistent with antipsychotic efficacy and found during treatment with oral olanzapine. However, supplemental oral olanzapine or another dosing strategy may be necessary to maintain adequate therapeutic response during the first few injection cycles.peer-reviewe

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

    Get PDF
    <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

    Dose-associated changes in safety and efficacy parameters observed in a 24-week maintenance trial of olanzapine long-acting injection in patients with schizophrenia

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In a recently published 24-week maintenance study of olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI) in schizophrenia (Kane et al., 2010), apparent dose-associated changes were noted in both efficacy and safety parameters. To help clinicians balance safety and efficacy when choosing a dose of olanzapine LAI, we further studied these changes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Outpatients with schizophrenia who had maintained stability on open-label oral olanzapine for 4 to 8 weeks were randomly assigned to "low" (150 mg/2 weeks; N = 140), "medium" (405 mg/4 weeks; N = 318), or "high" (300 mg/2 weeks; N = 141) dosages of olanzapine LAI for 24 weeks. Potential relationships between dose and several safety or efficacy measures were examined via regression analysis, the Jonckheere-Terpstra test (continuous data), or the Cochran-Armitage test (categorical data).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Safety parameters statistically significantly related to dose were mean weight change (low: +0.67 [SD = 4.38], medium: +0.89 [SD = 3.87], high: +1.70 [SD = 4.14] kg, p = .024; effect size [ES] = 0.264 high vs. low dose), mean change in prolactin (low: -5.61 [SD = 12.49], medium: -2.76 [SD = 19.02]), high: +3.58 [SD = 33.78] ÎŒg/L, p = .001; ES = 0.410 high vs. low dose), fasting triglycerides change from normal at baseline to high (low: 3.2%, medium: 6.0%, high: 18.9%, p = .001; NNT = 7 high vs. low dose) and fasting high-density lipoprotein cholesterol change from normal at baseline to low (low: 13.8%, medium: 19.6%, high: 30.7%, p = .019; NNT = 6 high vs. low dose). Efficacy measures significantly related to dose included Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score mean change (low: +2.66 [SD = 14.95], medium: -0.09 [SD = 13.47], high: -2.19 [SD = 13.11], p <.01; ES = 0.356 high vs. low dose), relapse rate (low: 16%, medium: 10%, high: 5%, p = .003; NNT = 9 high vs. low dose), all-cause discontinuation rate (low: 36%, medium: 30%, high: 24%, p = .037; NNT = 9 high vs. low dose), and rate of discontinuation due to efficacy-related reasons (low: 20%, medium: 14%, high: 6%, p <.001). Time to all-cause discontinuation (p = .035) and time to relapse (p = .005) were also significantly related to dose.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Analyses of several safety and efficacy parameters revealed significant associations with dose of olanzapine LAI, with the highest dose generally showing greater efficacy as well as greater adverse changes in metabolic safety measures. When considering olanzapine LAI, as with all antipsychotics, it is important to carefully consider the potential benefits and risks for an individual patient.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00088491">NCT00088491</a></p

    Accumulated coercion and short-term outcome of inpatient psychiatric care

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The knowledge of the impact of coercion on psychiatric treatment outcome is limited. Multiple measures of coercion have been recommended. The aim of the study was to examine the impact of accumulated coercive incidents on short-term outcome of inpatient psychiatric care</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>233 involuntarily and voluntarily admitted patients were interviewed within five days of admission and at discharge or after maximum three weeks of care. Coercion was measured as number of coercive incidents, i.e. subjectively reported and in the medical files recorded coercive incidents, including legal status and perceived coercion at admission, and recorded and reported coercive measures during treatment. Outcome was measured both as subjective improvement of mental health and as improvement in professionally assessed functioning according to GAF. Logistic regression analyses were performed with patient characteristics and coercive incidents as independent and the two outcome measures as dependent variables</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Number of coercive incidents did not predict subjective or assessed improvement. Patients having other diagnoses than psychoses or mood disorders were less likely to be subjectively improved, while a low GAF at admission predicted an improvement in GAF scores</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The results indicate that subjectively and professionally assessed mental health short-term outcome of acute psychiatric hospitalisation are not predicted by the amount of subjectively and recorded coercive incidents. Further studies are needed to examine the short- and long-term effects of coercive interventions in psychiatric care.</p
    • 

    corecore