Antipsychotic Dose Mediates the Association between Polypharmacy and Corrected QT Interval

Antipsychotic (AP) drugs have the potential to cause prolongation of the QT interval corrected for heart rate (QTc). As this risk is dose-dependent, it may be associated with the number of AP drugs concurrently prescribed, which is known to be associated with increased cumulative equivalent AP dosage. This study analysed whether AP dose mediates the relationship between polypharmacy and QTc interval. We used data from a cross-sectional survey that investigated the prevalence of QTc lengthening among people with psychiatric illnesses in Italy. AP polypharmacy was tested for evidence of association with AP dose and QTc interval using the Baron and Kenny mediational model. A total of 725 patients were included in this analysis. Of these, 186 (26%) were treated with two or more AP drugs (AP polypharmacy). The mean cumulative AP dose was significantly higher in those receiving AP polypharmacy (prescribed daily dose/defined daily dose = 2.93, standard deviation 1.31) than monotherapy (prescribed daily dose/defined daily dose = 0.82, standard deviation 0.77) (z = -12.62, p < 0.001). Similarly, the mean QTc interval was significantly longer in those receiving AP polypharmacy (mean = 420.86 milliseconds, standard deviation 27.16) than monotherapy (mean = 413.42 milliseconds, standard deviation 31.54) (z = -2.70, p = 0.006). The Baron and Kenny mediational analysis showed that, after adjustment for confounding variables, AP dose mediates the association between polypharmacy and QTc interval. The present study found that AP polypharmacy is associated with QTc interval, and this effect is mediated by AP dose. Given the high prevalence of AP polypharmacy in real-world clinical practice, clinicians should consider not only the myriad risk factors for QTc prolongation in their patients, but also that adding a second AP drug may further increase risk as compared with monotherapy

Effectiveness of a stepped-care programme of WHO psychological interventions in migrant populations resettled in Italy: study protocol for the RESPOND randomized controlled trial

Introduction: Migrant populations, including workers, undocumented migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, internationally displaced persons, and other populations on the move, are exposed to a variety of stressors and potentially traumatic events before, during, and after the migration process. In recent years, the COVID-19 pandemic has represented an additional stressor, especially for migrants on the move. As a consequence, migration may increase vulnerability of individuals toward a worsening of subjective wellbeing, quality of life, and mental health, which, in turn, may increase the risk of developing mental health conditions. Against this background, we designed a stepped-care programme consisting of two scalable psychological interventions developed by the World Health Organization and locally adapted for migrant populations. The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this stepped-care programme will be assessed in terms of mental health outcomes, resilience, wellbeing, and costs to healthcare systems. Methods and analysis: We present the study protocol for a pragmatic randomized study with a parallel-group design that will enroll participants with a migrant background and elevated level of psychological distress. Participants will be randomized to care as usual only or to care a usual plus a guided self-help stress management guide (Doing What Matters in Times of Stress, DWM) and a five-session cognitive behavioral intervention (Problem Management Plus, PM+). Participants will self-report all measures at baseline before random allocation, 2 weeks after DWM delivery, 1 week after PM+ delivery and 2 months after PM+ delivery. All participants will receive a single-session of a support intervention, namely Psychological First Aid. We will include 212 participants. An intention-to-treat analysis using linear mixed models will be conducted to explore the programme's effect on anxiety and depression symptoms, as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire—Anxiety and Depression Scale summary score 2 months after PM+ delivery. Secondary outcomes include post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, resilience, quality of life, resource utilization, cost, and cost-effectiveness. Discussion: This study is the first randomized controlled trial that combines two World Health Organization psychological interventions tailored for migrant populations with an elevated level of psychological distress. The present study will make available DWM/PM+ packages adapted for remote delivery following a task-shifting approach, and will generate evidence to inform policy responses based on a more efficient use of resources for improving resilience, wellbeing and mental health

Cost-effectiveness of the Self-Help Plus Intervention for Adult Syrian Refugees Hosted in Turkey

Importance: The cost-effectiveness of the Self-Help Plus (SH+) program, a group-based, guided, self-help psychological intervention developed by the World Health Organization for people affected by adversity, is unclear.Objective: To investigate the cost-utility of providing the SH+ intervention combined with enhanced usual care vs enhanced usual care alone for Syrian refugees or asylum seekers hosted in Turkey.Design, setting, and participants: This economic evaluation was performed as a prespecified part of an assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial conducted between October 1, 2018, and November 30, 2019, with 6-month follow-up. A total of 627 adults with psychological distress but no diagnosed psychiatric disorder were randomly assigned to the intervention group or the enhanced usual care group.Interventions: The SH+ program was a 5-session (2 hours each), group-based, stress management course in which participants learned self-help skills for managing stress by listening to audio sessions. The SH+ sessions were facilitated by briefly trained, nonspecialist individuals, and an illustrated book was provided to group members. Th intervention group received the SH+ intervention plus enhanced usual care; the control group received only enhanced usual care from the local health care system. Enhanced usual care included access to free health care services provided by primary and secondary institutions plus details on nongovernmental organizations and freely available mental health services, social services, and community networks for people under temporary protection of Turkey and refugees.Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome measure was incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained from the perspective of the Turkish health care system. An intention-to-treat analysis was used including all participants who were randomized and for whom baseline data on costs and QALYs were available. Data were analyzed September 30, 2020, to July 30, 2021.Results: Of 627 participants (mean [SD] age, 31.3 [9.0] years; 393 [62.9%] women), 313 were included in the analysis for the SH+ group and 314 in the analysis for the enhanced usual care group. An incremental cost-utility ratio estimate of T£6068 ($1147) per QALY gained was found when the SH+ intervention was provided to groups of 10 Syrian refugees. At a willingness to pay per QALY gained of T£14 831 ($2802), the SH+ intervention had a 97.5% chance of being cost-effective compared with enhanced usual care alone.Conclusions and relevance: This economic evaluation suggests that implementation of the SH+ intervention compared with enhanced usual care alone for adult Syrian refugees or asylum seekers hosted in Turkey is cost-effective from the perspective of the Turkish health care system when both international and country-specific willingness-to-pay thresholds were applied.</p

Rationale and design of an independent randomised controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of aripiprazole or haloperidol in combination with clozapine for treatment-resistant schizophrenia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>One third to two thirds of people with schizophrenia have persistent psychotic symptoms despite clozapine treatment. Under real-world circumstances, the need to provide effective therapeutic interventions to patients who do not have an optimal response to clozapine has been cited as the most common reason for simultaneously prescribing a second antipsychotic drug in combination treatment strategies. In a clinical area where the pressing need of providing therapeutic answers has progressively increased the occurrence of antipsychotic polypharmacy, despite the lack of robust evidence of its efficacy, we sought to implement a pre-planned protocol where two alternative therapeutic answers are systematically provided and evaluated within the context of a pragmatic, multicentre, independent randomised study.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>The principal clinical question to be answered by the present project is the relative efficacy and tolerability of combination treatment with clozapine plus aripiprazole compared with combination treatment with clozapine plus haloperidol in patients with an incomplete response to treatment with clozapine over an appropriate period of time. This project is a prospective, multicentre, randomized, parallel-group, superiority trial that follow patients over a period of 12 months. Withdrawal from allocated treatment within 3 months is the primary outcome.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The implementation of the protocol presented here shows that it is possible to create a network of community psychiatric services that accept the idea of using their everyday clinical practice to produce randomised knowledge. The employed pragmatic attitude allowed to randomly allocate more than 100 individuals, which means that this study is the largest antipsychotic combination trial conducted so far in Western countries. We expect that the current project, by generating evidence on whether it is clinically useful to combine clozapine with aripiprazole rather than with haloperidol, provides physicians with a solid evidence base to be directly applied in the routine care of patients with schizophrenia.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p><b>Clincaltrials.gov Identifier</b>: NCT00395915</p

Psychosocial interventions for post-traumatic stress disorder in refugees and asylum seekers resettled in high-income countries: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Internal funding from the University of Veron

A practical framework for academics to implement public engagement interventions and measure their impact

Academic institutions have shown an increased interest in the so-called third mission to offer an impactful contribution to society. Indeed, public engagement programs ensure knowledge transfer and help to inspire positive public discourse. We aimed to propose a comprehensive framework for academic institutions planning to implement a public engagement intervention and to suggest potential indicators to measure its impact. To inform the framework development, we searched the literature on public engagement, the third mission, and design theory in electronic databases and additional sources (e.g., academic recommendations) and partnered with a communication agency offering non-academic advice. In line with this framework, we designed a public engagement intervention to foster scientific literacy in Italian youth, actively involving them in the development of the intervention. Our framework is composed of four phases (planning/design, implementation, immediate impact assessment, and medium- and long-term assessment). Impact indicators were subdivided into outcome variables that were immediately describable (e.g., changed understanding and awareness of the target population) and measurable only in the medium or long run (e.g., adoption of the intervention by other institutions). The framework is expected to maximize the impact of public engagement interventions and ultimately lead to better reciprocal listening and mutual understanding between academia and the public

Access to and use of psychiatric services by migrants resettled in Northern Italy

The present study was conducted to describe access to and use of psychiatric services by migrants resettled in a large and well-defined catchment area. The study was conducted in a catchment area of 459,536 inhabitants in Verona, a city located in the Northeast of Italy. Using a psychiatric case register, all native and migrant individuals with a first ever psychiatric contact from 2000 to 2015 were identified. Service use data during the 12 months following first contact were collected. During the study period a total of 2610 migrants and 28,860 natives had at least one psychiatric contact. A progressive rise in the proportion of migrants seeking psychiatric care was observed, from 2.5% in 2000 to more than 14% in 2015. During the 12 months following first contact, the proportion of patients with a single consultation did not differ between resettled migrants and natives. However, migrants were more often marked users or heavy users of psychiatric services. Multivariate linear regression analyses showed that younger male individuals with psychotic disorders experienced higher psychiatric services use regardless their native or migrant condition. In a large catchment area with a well-developed community-based system of mental health care a progressive rise in the number of migrants seeking psychiatric care was observed. The pattern of service use during the 12 months after first contact was not related to nationality, suggesting the capacity of community psychiatric services to retain people in care. These findings call for the development of culturally and linguistically appropriate community psychiatric services