Maintenance treatment with antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia

Haloperidol (oral) versus olanzapine (oral) for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is often a severe and disabling psychiatric disorder. Antipsychotics remain the mainstay of psychotropic treatment for people with psychosis. In limited resource and humanitarian contexts, it is key to have several options for beneficial, low-cost antipsychotics, which require minimal monitoring. We wanted to compare oral haloperidol, as one of the most available antipsychotics in these settings, with a second-generation antipsychotic, olanzapine.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical benefits and harms of haloperidol compared to olanzapine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia study-based register of trials, which is based on monthly searches of CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, Embase, ISRCTN, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed and WHO ICTRP. We screened the references of all included studies. We contacted relevant authors of trials for additional information where clarification was required or where data were incomplete. The register was last searched on 14 January 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing haloperidol with olanzapine for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. Our main outcomes of interest were clinically important change in global state, relapse, clinically important change in mental state, extrapyramidal side effects, weight increase, clinically important change in quality of life and leaving the study early due to adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently evaluated and extracted data. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) and the number needed to treat for an additional beneficial or harmful outcome (NNTB or NNTH) with 95% CI. For continuous data, we estimated mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) with 95% CIs. For all included studies, we assessed risk of bias (RoB 1) and we used the GRADE approach to create a summary of findings table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 68 studies randomising 9132 participants. We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in clinically important change in global state (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.02; 6 studies, 3078 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in relapse (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.02; 7 studies, 1499 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Haloperidol may reduce the incidence of clinically important change in overall mental state compared to olanzapine (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.81; 13 studies, 1210 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every eight people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience this improvement. The evidence suggests that haloperidol may result in a large increase in extrapyramidal side effects compared to olanzapine (RR 3.38, 95% CI 2.28 to 5.02; 14 studies, 3290 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every three people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one additional person would experience extrapyramidal side effects. For weight gain, the evidence suggests that there may be a large reduction in the risk with haloperidol compared to olanzapine (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.61; 18 studies, 4302 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every 10 people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience weight increase. A single study suggests that haloperidol may reduce the incidence of clinically important change in quality of life compared to olanzapine (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.91; 828 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every nine people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience clinically important improvement in quality of life. Haloperidol may result in an increase in the incidence of leaving the study early due to adverse effects compared to olanzapine (RR 1.99, 95% CI 1.60 to 2.47; 21 studies, 5047 participants; low-certainty evidence). For every 22 people treated with haloperidol instead of olanzapine, one fewer person would experience this outcome. Thirty otherwise relevant studies and several endpoints from 14 included studies could not be evaluated due to inconsistencies and poor transparency of several parameters. Furthermore, even within studies that were included, it was often not possible to use data for the same reasons. Risk of bias differed substantially for different outcomes and the certainty of the evidence ranged from very low to low. The most common risks of bias leading to downgrading of the evidence were blinding (performance bias) and selective reporting (reporting bias).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the certainty of the evidence was low to very low for the main outcomes in this review, making it difficult to draw reliable conclusions. We are very uncertain whether there is a difference between haloperidol and olanzapine in terms of clinically important global state and relapse. Olanzapine may result in a slightly greater overall clinically important change in mental state and in a clinically important change in quality of life. Different side effect profiles were noted: haloperidol may result in a large increase in extrapyramidal side effects and olanzapine in a large increase in weight gain. The drug of choice needs to take into account side effect profiles and the preferences of the individual. These findings and the recent inclusion of olanzapine alongside haloperidol in the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines should increase the likelihood of it becoming more easily available in low- and middle- income countries, thereby improving choice and providing a greater ability to respond to side effects for people with lived experience of schizophrenia. There is a need for additional research using appropriate and equivalent dosages of these drugs. Some of this research needs to be done in low- and middle-income settings and should actively seek to account for factors relevant to these. Research on antipsychotics needs to be person-centred and prioritise factors that are of interest to people with lived experience of schizophrenia.

Antipsychotic dose reduction compared to dose continuation for people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic drugs are the mainstay treatment for schizophrenia, yet they are associated with diverse and potentially dose-related side effects which can reduce quality of life. For this reason, the lowest possible doses of antipsychotics are generally recommended, but higher doses are often used in clinical practice. It is still unclear if and how antipsychotic doses could be reduced safely in order to minimise the adverse-effect burden without increasing the risk of relapse.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of reducing antipsychotic dose compared to continuing the current dose for people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We conducted a systematic search on 10 February 2021 at the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials, which is based on CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, and WHO ICTRP. We also inspected the reference lists of included studies and previous reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any dose reduction against continuation in people with schizophrenia or related disorders who were stabilised on their current antipsychotic treatment.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently screened relevant records for inclusion, extracted data from eligible studies, and assessed the risk of bias using RoB 2. We contacted study authors for missing data and additional information. Our primary outcomes were clinically important change in quality of life,  rehospitalisations and dropouts due to adverse effects; key secondary outcomes were clinically important change in functioning, relapse, dropouts for any reason, and at least one adverse effect. We also examined scales measuring symptoms, quality of life, and functioning as well as a comprehensive list of specific adverse effects. We pooled outcomes at the endpoint preferably closest to one year. We evaluated the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 25 RCTs, of which 22 studies provided data with 2635 participants (average age 38.4 years old). The median study sample size was 60 participants (ranging from 18 to 466 participants) and length was 37 weeks (ranging from 12 weeks to 2 years). There were variations in the dose reduction strategies in terms of speed of reduction (i.e. gradual in about half of the studies (within 2 to 16 weeks) and abrupt in the other half), and in terms of degree of reduction (i.e. median planned reduction of 66% of the dose up to complete withdrawal in three studies). We assessed risk of bias across outcomes predominantly as some concerns or high risk.  No study reported data on the number of participants with a clinically important change in quality of life or functioning, and only eight studies reported continuous data on scales measuring quality of life or functioning. There was no difference between dose reduction and continuation on scales measuring quality of life (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.17 to 0.15, 6 RCTs, n = 719, I2 = 0%, moderate certainty evidence) and scales measuring functioning (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.17, 6 RCTs, n = 966, I2 = 0%, high certainty evidence). Dose reduction in comparison to continuation may increase the risk of rehospitalisation based on data from eight studies with estimable effect sizes; however, the 95% CI does not exclude the possibility of no difference (risk ratio (RR) 1.53, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.81, 8 RCTs, n = 1413, I2 = 59% (moderate heterogeneity), very low certainty evidence). Similarly, dose reduction increased the risk of relapse based on data from 20 studies (RR 2.16, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.06, 20 RCTs, n = 2481, I2 = 70% (substantial heterogeneity), low certainty evidence).   More participants in the dose reduction group in comparison to the continuation group left the study early due to adverse effects (RR 2.20, 95% CI 1.39 to 3.49, 6 RCTs with estimable effect sizes, n = 1079, I2 = 0%, moderate certainty evidence) and for any reason (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.81, 12 RCTs, n = 1551, I2 = 48% (moderate heterogeneity), moderate certainty evidence). Lastly, there was no difference between the dose reduction and continuation groups in the number of participants with at least one adverse effect based on data from four studies with estimable effect sizes (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.12, 5 RCTs, n = 998 (4 RCTs, n = 980 with estimable effect sizes), I2 = 0%, moderate certainty evidence).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review synthesised the latest evidence on the reduction of antipsychotic doses for stable individuals with schizophrenia. There was no difference between dose reduction and continuation groups in quality of life, functioning, and number of participants with at least one adverse effect. However, there was a higher risk for relapse and dropouts, and potentially for rehospitalisations, with dose reduction. Of note, the majority of the trials focused on relapse prevention rather potential beneficial outcomes on quality of life, functioning, and adverse effects, and in some studies there was rapid and substantial reduction of doses. Further well-designed RCTs are therefore needed to provide more definitive answers.

Twenty-year effects of antipsychotics in schizophrenia and affective psychotic disorders

BACKGROUND

Studies that examine course and outcome in psychosis have reported considerable heterogeneity in terms of recovery, remission, employment, symptom presentation, social outcomes, and antipsychotic medication effects. Even with demonstrated heterogeneity in course and outcome, prophylactic antipsychotic maintenance therapy remains the prominent practice, particularly in participants with schizophrenia. Lack of efficacy in maintenance antipsychotic treatment and concerns over health detriments gives cause to re-examine guidelines.

METHODS

This study was conducted as part of the Chicago follow-up study designed as a naturalistic prospective longitudinal research study to investigate the course, outcome, symptomatology, and effects of antipsychotic medication on recovery and rehospitalization in participants with serious mental illness disorders. A total of 139 participants with 734 observations were included in the analysis. GEE logistic models were applied to adjust for confounding factors measured at index hospitalization and follow-ups.

RESULTS

Our data show that the majority of participants with schizophrenia or affective psychosis experience future episodes of psychosis at some point during the 20-year follow-up. There was a significant diagnostic difference between groups showing an increase in the number of future episodes of psychosis in participants with schizophrenia. Participants with schizophrenia not on antipsychotics after the first 2 years have better outcomes than participants prescribed antipsychotics. The adjusted odds ratio of not on antipsychotic medication was 5.989 (95% CI 3.588-9.993) for recovery and 0.134 (95% CI 0.070-0.259) for rehospitalization. That is, regardless of diagnosis, after the second year, the absence of antipsychotics predicted a higher probability of recovery and lower probability of rehospitalization at subsequent follow-ups after adjusting for confounders.

CONCLUSION

This study reports multiple findings that bring into question the use of continuous antipsychotic medications, regardless of diagnosis. Even when the confound by indication for prescribing antipsychotic medication is controlled for, participants with schizophrenia and affective psychosis do better than their medicated cohorts, strongly confirming the importance of exposing the role of aiDSP and antipsychotic drug resistance.

Antipsychotic polypharmacy reduction versus polypharmacy continuation for people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

In clinical practice, different antipsychotics can be combined in the treatment of people with schizophrenia (polypharmacy). This strategy can aim at increasing efficacy, but might also increase the adverse effects due to drug-drug interactions. Reducing polypharmacy by withdrawing one or more antipsychotics may reduce this problem, but must be done carefully, in order to maintain efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the effects and safety of reducing antipsychotic polypharmacy compared to maintaining people with schizophrenia on the same number of antipsychotics.

SEARCH METHODS

On 10 February 2021, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials, which is based on CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.Gov, Embase, ISRCTN, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed and WHO ICTRP.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared reduction in the number of antipsychotics to continuation of the current number of antipsychotics. We included adults with schizophrenia or related disorders who were receiving more than one antipsychotic and were stabilised on their current treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all the identified references for inclusion, and all the full papers. We contacted study authors if we needed any further information. Two review authors independently extracted the data, assessed the risk of bias using RoB 2 and the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. The primary outcomes were: quality of life assessed as number of participants with clinically important change in quality of life; service use assessed as number of participants readmitted to hospital and adverse effects assessed with number of participants leaving the study early due to adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five RCTs with 319 participants. Study duration ranged from three months to one year. All studies compared polypharmacy continuation with two antipsychotics to polypharmacy reduction to one antipsychotic.  We assessed the risk of bias of results as being of some concern or at high risk of bias. A lower number of participants left the study early due to any reason in the polypharmacy continuation group (risk ratio (RR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.68; I2 = 0%; 5 RCTs, n = 319; low-certainty evidence), and a lower number of participants left the study early due to inefficacy (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.65; I2 = 0%; 3 RCTs, n = 201).  Polypharmacy continuation resulted in more severe negative symptoms (MD 3.30, 95% CI 1.51 to 5.09; 1 RCT, n = 35). There was no clear difference between polypharmacy reduction and polypharmacy continuation on readmission to hospital, leaving the study early due to adverse effects, functioning, global state, general mental state and positive symptoms, number of participants with at least one adverse effect, weight gain and other specific adverse effects, mortality and cognition. We assessed the certainty of the evidence as very low or low across measured outcomes. No studies reported quality of life, days in hospital, relapse, depressive symptoms, behaviour and satisfaction with care. Due to lack of data, it was not possible to perform some planned sensitivity analyses, including one controlling for increasing the dose of the remaining antipsychotic. As a result, we do not know if the observed results might be influenced by adjustment of dose of remaining antipsychotic compound.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review summarises the latest evidence on polypharmacy continuation compared with polypharmacy reduction. Our results show that polypharmacy continuation might be associated with a lower number of participants leaving the study early, especially due to  inefficacy. However, the evidence is of low and very low certainty and the data analyses based on few study only, so that it is not possible to draw strong conclusions based on the results of the present review. Further high-quality RCTs are needed to investigate this important topic.

Later is not necessarily better: limitations of survival analysis in studies of long-term drug treatment of psychiatric conditions

Survival analysis is routinely used to assess differences between groups in relapse prevention and treatment discontinuation studies involving people with long-term psychiatric conditions. The actual outcome in survival analysis is 'time to event', yet, in the mental health field, there has been little consideration of whether a temporary delay to relapse is clinically relevant in a condition that can last for decades. Moreover, in psychiatric drug trials, a pattern of elevated early relapses following randomisation to placebo or no treatment is common. This may be the result of the withdrawal of previous treatment leading to physiological withdrawal effects, which may be mistaken for relapse, or genuine relapse precipitated by the process of withdrawal. Such withdrawal effects typically produce converging survival curves eventually. They inevitably lead to differences in time to relapse, even when there is little or no difference in the cumulative risk of relapse at final follow-up. Therefore, statistical tests based on survival analyses can be misleading because they obscure these withdrawal effects. We illustrate these difficulties in a trial of antipsychotic reduction versus maintenance, and a trial of prophylactic esketamine in people with treatment-resistant depression. Both illustrate withdrawal-related effects that underline the importance of long-term follow-up and question the use of tests based on time to event. Further discussion of the most relevant outcome and appropriate approach to analysis, and research on patient and carer preferences is important to inform the design of future trials and interpretation of existing ones.

Health resource utilization and cost before versus after initiation of second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics among adults with schizophrenia in Alberta, Canada: a retrospective, observational single-arm study

BACKGROUND

Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics, along with community treatment orders (CTOs), are used to improve treatment effectiveness through adherence among individuals with schizophrenia. Understanding real-world medication adherence, and healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and costs in individuals with schizophrenia overall and by CTO status before and after second generation antipsychotic (SGA)-LAI initiation may guide strategies to optimize treatment among those with schizophrenia.

METHODS

This retrospective observational single-arm study utilized administrative health data from Alberta, Canada. Adults (≥ 18 years) with schizophrenia who initiated a SGA-LAI (no use in the previous 2-years) between April 1, 2014 and March 31, 2016, and had ≥ 1 additional dispensation of a SGA-LAI were included; index date was the date of SGA-LAI initiation. Medication possession ratio (MPR) was determined, and paired t-tests were used to examine mean differences in all-cause and mental health-related HRU and costs (Canadian dollars), comprised of hospitalizations, physician visits, emergency department visits, and total visits, over the 2-year post-index and 2-year pre-index periods. Analyses were stratified by presence or absence of an active CTO during the pre-index and/or post-index periods.

RESULTS

Among 1,211 adults with schizophrenia who initiated SGA-LAIs, 64% were males with a mean age of 38 (standard deviation [SD] 14) years. The mean overall antipsychotic MPR was 0.39 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36, 0.41) greater during the 2-year post-index period (0.84 [SD 0.26]) compared with the 2-year pre-index period (0.45 [SD 0.40]). All-cause and mental health-related HRU and costs were lower post-index versus pre-index (p < 0.001) for hospitalizations, physician visits, emergency department visits, and total visits; mean total all-cause HRU costs were $33,788 (95% CI -$38,993, -$28,583) lower post- versus pre-index ($40,343 [SD $68,887] versus $74,131 [SD $75,941]), and total mental health-related HRU costs were $34,198 (95%CI -$39,098, -$29,297) lower post- versus pre-index ($34,205 [SD $63,428] versus $68,403 [SD $72,088]) per-patient. Forty-three percent had ≥ 1 active CTO during the study period; HRU and costs varied according to CTO status.

CONCLUSIONS

SGA-LAIs are associated with greater medication adherence, and lower HRU and costs however the latter vary according to CTO status.

MDMA for the Treatment of Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia

The profound economic burden of schizophrenia is due, in part, to the negative symptoms of the disease, which can severely limit daily functioning. There is much debate in the field regarding their measurement and classification and there are no FDA-approved treatments for negative symptoms despite an abundance of research. 3,4-Methylenedioxy methamphetamine (MDMA) is a schedule I substance that has emerged as a novel therapeutic given its ability to enhance social interactions, generate empathy, and induce a state of metaplasticity in the brain. This review provides a rationale for the use of MDMA in the treatment of negative symptoms by reviewing the literature on negative symptoms, their treatment, MDMA, and MDMA-assisted therapy. It reviews recent evidence that supports the safe and potentially effective use of MDMA to treat negative symptoms and concludes with considerations regarding safety and possible mechanisms of action.

Schizophrenia: a disorder of broken brain bioenergetics

A substantial and diverse body of literature suggests that the pathophysiology of schizophrenia is related to deficits of bioenergetic function. While antipsychotics are an effective therapy for the management of positive psychotic symptoms, they are not efficacious for the complete schizophrenia symptom profile, such as the negative and cognitive symptoms. In this review, we discuss the relationship between dysfunction of various metabolic pathways across different brain regions in relation to schizophrenia. We contend that several bioenergetic subprocesses are affected across the brain and such deficits are a core feature of the illness. We provide an overview of central perturbations of insulin signaling, glycolysis, pentose-phosphate pathway, tricarboxylic acid cycle, and oxidative phosphorylation in schizophrenia. Importantly, we discuss pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions that target these pathways and how such interventions may be exploited to improve the symptoms of schizophrenia.

An analysis of views about supported reduction or discontinuation of antipsychotic treatment among people with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medication can reduce psychotic symptoms and risk of relapse in people with schizophrenia and related disorders, but it is not always effective and adverse effects can be significant. We know little of patients' views about continuing or discontinuing antipsychotic treatment.

AIMS

To explore the views of people with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders about continuing their antipsychotic medication or attempting to reduce or discontinue this medication with clinical support.

METHODS

We collected quantitative and qualitative data by conducting semi-structured interviews in London, UK. Factors predicting a desire to discontinue medication were explored. Content analysis of qualitative data was undertaken.

RESULTS

We interviewed 269 participants. 33% (95% CI, 27 to 39%) were content with taking long-term antipsychotic medication. Others reported they took it reluctantly (19%), accepted it on a temporary basis (24%) or actively disliked it (18%). 31% (95% CI, 25 to 37%) said they would like to try to stop medication with professional support, and 45% (95% CI, 39 to 51%) wanted the opportunity to reduce medication. People who wanted to discontinue had more negative attitudes towards the medication but were otherwise similar to other participants. Wanting to stop or reduce medication was motivated mainly by adverse effects and health concerns. Professional support was identified as potentially helpful to achieve reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

This large study reveals that patients are commonly unhappy about the idea of taking antipsychotics on a continuing or life-long basis. Professional support for people who want to try to reduce or stop medication is valued.

Examining Side Effect Variability of Antipsychotic Treatment in Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: A Meta-analysis of Variance

Side effects of antipsychotic drugs play a key role in nonadherence of treatment in schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD). While clinical observations suggest that side effect variability between patients may be considerable, statistical evidence is required to confirm this. Here, we hypothesized to find larger side effect variability under treatment compared with control. We included double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adults with a diagnosis of SSD treated with 1 out of 14 antipsychotics. Standard deviations of the pre-post treatment differences of weight gain, prolactin levels, and corrected QT (QTc) times were extracted. The outcome measure was the variability ratio of treatment to control for individual antipsychotic drugs and the overall variability ratio of treatment to control across RCTs. Individual variability ratios were weighted by the inverse-variance method and entered into a random-effects model. We included N = 16 578 patients for weight gain, N = 16 633 patients for prolactin levels, and N = 10 384 patients for QTc time. Variability ratios (VR) were significantly increased for weight gain (VR = 1.08; 95% CI: 1.02-1.14; P = .004) and prolactin levels (VR = 1.38; 95% CI: 1.17-1.62; P < .001) but did not reach significance for QTc time (VR = 1.05; 95% CI: 0.98-1.12; P = 0.135). We found marked differences between individual antipsychotics and increased variability in side effects in patients under treatment with antipsychotics suggesting that subgroups of patients or individual patients may benefit from treatment allocation through stratified or personalized medicine.

Pharmacotherapy of Schizophrenia in Acute and Maintenance Phase

Schizophrenia is one of the leading disorders causing impairment in society. Therefore, it is crucial to review evidence-based treatment approaches which are both effective and causing minimum side effects. In this paper, treatment recommendations for first episode schizophrenia, patients in acute phase with a history of multiple episodes, and patients in the maintenance phase will be discussed in light of the Psychiatric Association of Turkey Guideline for Treatment of Schizophrenia, other recent national and international guidelines as well as expert consensus reports in the literature. Finally, practical considerations will be suggested.

Antipsychotics for negative and positive symptoms of schizophrenia: dose-response meta-analysis of randomized controlled acute phase trials

Determining the optimal antipsychotic target dose in acute phase treatment is of high clinical relevance. The effect of antipsychotics on negative symptoms should be taken into account because patients will often continue on the treatment received in the acute phase. Therefore, we conducted a formal dose-response meta-analysis of negative symptoms and positive symptoms based on a systematic review of fixed-dose randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the effectiveness of antipsychotics for the acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Forty RCTs included a total of 15,689 patients. The 95% effective doses per day for the 13 antipsychotics included and 3 long acting were mostly different for negative and positive symptoms: amisulpride (481 mg, 690.6 mg); aripiprazole (11.9 mg, 11 mg); asenapine (7.61 mg, 5.66 mg); brexpiprazole (2.1 mg, 4 mg); cariprazine (4 mg, 6.51 mg); haloperidol (6.34 mg, 7.36 mg); lurasidone (58.2 mg, 86.3 mg); olanzapine (15.5 mg, 9.52 mg); olanzapine long-acting injection (15.7 mg, 13.5 mg); paliperidone (7.2 mg, 7 mg); paliperidone long-acting injection (7.5 mg, 5.9 mg); quetiapine instant-release (264.2 mg, 316.5 mg); quetiapine extended-release (774 mg, 707.2 mg); risperidone (7.5 mg, 7.7 mg); risperidone long-acting injection (5.13 mg, 6.7 mg); sertindole (13.5 mg, 16.3 mg); and ziprasidone (71.6 mg, 152.6 mg). The shape of the dose-response curves varied across different drugs with most drugs showing a plateau at higher doses. Most dose-response curves suggested that the near-maximum effective doses could be in the lower-to-medium range of the licensed dose. Additional RCTs are necessary to establish the optimal dose.

Reversibility of Antipsychotic-Induced Weight Gain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Weight gain is a major adverse effect of antipsychotic medication, negatively affecting physical and mental well-being. The objective of this study was to explore if dose reduction, discontinuation, switch to a partial agonist, or switch from polypharmacy to monotherapy will lead to weight loss.

METHODS

Controlled and uncontrolled studies reporting the effects of discontinuation, dose reduction, switch to a partial agonist, or switch from polypharmacy to monotherapy on weight were included. Primary outcome was difference in weight compared to maintenance groups based on controlled studies. Secondary outcome was change in weight from initiation of one of the included interventions until follow-up in a pre-post analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 40 randomized controlled trials and 15 uncontrolled studies including 12,279 individuals. The effect of the interventions, i.e. dose reduction, drug discontinuation, or switch to a partial agonis, reduced the weight with 1.5 kg (95% CI -2.03 to -0.98; P < 0.001) compared to maintenance treatment. The weight change from pre to post was a reduction of 1.13 kg (95% CI -1.36 to -0.90; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

We found a significant but small reduction in weight, suggesting that antipsychotic-induced weight gain can be reversed to some degree. Only a few studies were designed to address the question as primary outcome, which limits the generalizability of our findings.

Medical Comorbidities in 181 Patients With Bipolar Disorder vs. Schizophrenia and Related Psychotic Disorders: Findings From a Single-Center, Retrospective Study From an Acute Inpatients Psychiatric Unit

Introduction: Medical comorbidities (MCs) represent a significant burden in terms of more frequent hospitalizations and overall lower life expectancy among people with severe mental disorders, such as schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders (SZ) and bipolar disorder (BD). The present article aims to compare the prevalence of MCs and to examine the associated characteristics as marital status, job occupation, level of education, and living arrangements, between BD and SZ patients. Methods: One-hundred-eight-one patients with MCs (85/47% had BD and 96/53% had SZ) were recruited retrospectively from the Acute Inpatients Psychiatry Unit of Policlinico Tor Vergata, Rome, between January-2017 and December-2020. MCs were: cardiovascular diseases (CVD), bacterial infections, mycoses, viral diseases, neoplasms, musculoskeletal, respiratory tract, urological and male genital, gynecological, neurological, gastrointestinal, metabolic syndrome, nutritional, and metabolic diseases. Results: BD had more MC than SZ (36.2 vs. 28.2%, respectively, p = 0.04). CVD and metabolic MC were more common among BD (51.8 vs.34.4%; 51.8 vs.35.3%; p = 0.018; p = 0.039; respectively), while viral diseases were more frequent in SZ (13.5 vs.3.5%, p = 0.035). Hypertension was common in both psychiatric illnesses (81.8% BD vs. 65.6% SZ, p = 0.18). Obesity was the most frequent metabolic disease in both BD and SZ (75% BD vs. 73.5% SZ, p = 0.91), followed by diabetes mellitus (52.3% BD vs. 55.9% SZ, p = 0.93), metabolic syndrome (54.5% BD vs. 47.1% SZ, p = 0.67) and dysthyroidism (47.7% BD vs. 25.7% SZ, p = 0.093). After performing a binary logistic regression analysis, only two MCs showed a statistically significant association: patients with SZ had an OR of 2.01 [CI 95% (1.00-4.01)] for CVD compared to BD; on the other hand, patients with BD had an OR of 16.57 [CI 95% (3.58-76.77)] for gynecological diseases compared to SZ patients. Conclusions: MCs are common among people with severe mental illness, especially CVD and metabolic diseases, highlighting the need for a more collaborative relationship between general medical providers and psychiatrists.

Sensitivity and specificity of a facial emotion recognition test in classifying patients with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a debilitating mental illness that causes significant disability. However, the lack of evidence for functional decline yields difficulty in distinguishing patients with schizophrenia from healthy adults. Since patients with schizophrenia demonstrate severe facial emotion recognition deficit (FERD), FERD measurement appears to be a promising solution for the aforementioned challenge.We aimed to develop a FERD-based screening tool to differentiates patients with schizophrenia from healthy adults.

METHODS

Patients' responses were extracted from a previous study. The most discriminative index was determined by comparing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of patients' FER scores in 7 domains individually and collectively. The best cut-off score was selected only for the most discriminative index to provide both high sensitivity and specificity (≥ 0.90).

RESULTS

The "number of domains failed" showed the highest discriminative value (AUC = 0.92). Since high sensitivity and specificity could not be achieved simultaneously, two sub-optimal cut-off scores were recommended for prospective users. For users prioritizing sensitivity, the "≥ 2 domains failed" index yields high sensitivity (0.96) with modest specificity (0.66). For users targeting specificity, the "≥ 4 domains failed" indexachieves high specificity (0.92) with acceptable sensitivity (0.72).

LIMITATIONS

Convenience sampling with mild clinical severity and younger healthy adults (< 20 years old) may limit the generalizability.

CONCLUSION

The FERD screener seems to be a discriminative tool with changeable cut-off scores achieving high sensitivity or specificity. Therefore, it may be useful in detecting patients and ruling out adults erroneously suspected of having schizophrenia.

One-year Outcome of First vs. Later Episode Schizophrenia: A Real-world Naturalistic Study

Objective

The aim the study was to calculate remission, recovery and relapse rates in first episode patients with schizophrenia (FES) vs. patients at a later phase (non-FES).

Methods

Thirty-two FES and 101 non-FES patients took part in the study. The assessment included testing at baseline and at 1 year with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Calgary Depression scale, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Udvalg for Kliniske Undersøgelser (UKU) scale, Simpson Angus, and General Assessment of Functioning (GAF) subscale. The statistical analysis included chi-square test and analysis of covariance.

Results

At baseline 15.62% FES vs. 10.89% non-FES patients were in remission; none of FES vs. 2.97% non-FES patients were in recovery. At endpoint, the respective figures were 12.50% vs. 25.00% and 3.12% vs. 3.96%. None of the differences in rates was significant between the two groups except from the percentage of patients being under medication (higher in the non-FES group). Baseline PANSS negative subscale (PANSS-N) was the only predictor of the outcome at endpoint.

Conclusion

The current study reported very low rates of remission and recovery of patients with schizophrenia without any differences between FES and non-FES patients. One possibility is that the increased antipsychotic treatment compensates for the worsening of the illness with time. An accumulating beneficial effect of antipsychotic treatment suggested that early lack of remission is not prognostic of a poor outcome.

Examining healthcare professionals' beliefs and actions regarding the physical health of people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

People with schizophrenia have a higher premature mortality risk compared with the general population mainly due to cardiovascular disease (CVD). Despite this, people with schizophrenia are less likely to access physical health services or have their physical health investigated and monitored.

AIMS

To examine the beliefs and actions of mental health professionals regarding the physical health of people with schizophrenia.

METHOD

Two hundred and fifty-five healthcare professionals who support people with schizophrenia within Greater Manchester Mental Health NHS Foundation Trust (GMMH), United Kingdom and Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust (PCFT), United Kingdom took part. Beliefs and actions were assessed using a self-administered questionnaire, which was constructed around two primary domains (1) CVD risk factors; and (2) physical health interventions. Descriptive statistics were reported and responses between different healthcare professional groups were compared.

RESULTS

The overwhelming majority of participants were aware of established CVD risk factors with 98% identifying family history of CVD, 98% for smoking and 96% for high blood pressure. Most participants believed nearly all healthcare professionals were responsible for monitoring the physical health of people with schizophrenia, regardless of job speciality. There were 67% of participants who reported delivering an intervention to improve sedentary behaviour for people with schizophrenia. However, awareness of government and NHS recommended lifestyle interventions were low.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found good knowledge regarding many established CVD risk factors but little clarity regarding who is responsible for monitoring the physical health of people with schizophrenia and how often brief lifestyle interventions are being implemented.

Maintenance treatment with antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

The symptoms and signs of schizophrenia have been linked to high levels of dopamine in specific areas of the brain (limbic system). Antipsychotic drugs block the transmission of dopamine in the brain and reduce the acute symptoms of the disorder. An original version of the current review, published in 2012, examined whether antipsychotic drugs are also effective for relapse prevention. This is the updated version of the aforesaid review.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of maintaining antipsychotic drugs for people with schizophrenia compared to withdrawing these agents.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials including the registries of clinical trials (12 November 2008, 10 October 2017, 3 July 2018, 11 September 2019).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised trials comparing maintenance treatment with antipsychotic drugs and placebo for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD), again based on a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

The review currently includes 75 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving 9145 participants comparing antipsychotic medication with placebo. The trials were published from 1959 to 2017 and their size ranged between 14 and 420 participants. In many studies the methods of randomisation, allocation and blinding were poorly reported. However, restricting the analysis to studies at low risk of bias gave similar results. Although this and other potential sources of bias limited the overall quality, the efficacy of antipsychotic drugs for maintenance treatment in schizophrenia was clear. Antipsychotic drugs were more effective than placebo in preventing relapse at seven to 12 months (primary outcome; drug 24% versus placebo 61%, 30 RCTs, n = 4249, RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.45, number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 3, 95% CI 2 to 3; high-certainty evidence). Hospitalisation was also reduced, however, the baseline risk was lower (drug 7% versus placebo 18%, 21 RCTs, n = 3558, RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.57, NNTB 8, 95% CI 6 to 14; high-certainty evidence). More participants in the placebo group than in the antipsychotic drug group left the studies early due to any reason (at seven to 12 months: drug 36% versus placebo 62%, 24 RCTs, n = 3951, RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.65, NNTB 4, 95% CI 3 to 5; high-certainty evidence) and due to inefficacy of treatment (at seven to 12 months: drug 18% versus placebo 46%, 24 RCTs, n = 3951, RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.44, NNTB 3, 95% CI 3 to 4). Quality of life might be better in drug-treated participants (7 RCTs, n = 1573 SMD -0.32, 95% CI to -0.57 to -0.07; low-certainty evidence); probably the same for social functioning (15 RCTs, n = 3588, SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.53 to -0.34; moderate-certainty evidence). Underpowered data revealed no evidence of a difference between groups for the outcome 'Death due to suicide' (drug 0.04% versus placebo 0.1%, 19 RCTs, n = 4634, RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.97,low-certainty evidence) and for the number of participants in employment (at 9 to 15 months, drug 39% versus placebo 34%, 3 RCTs, n = 593, RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.41, low certainty evidence). Antipsychotic drugs (as a group and irrespective of duration) were associated with more participants experiencing movement disorders (e.g. at least one movement disorder: drug 14% versus placebo 8%, 29 RCTs, n = 5276, RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.85, number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 20, 95% CI 14 to 50), sedation (drug 8% versus placebo 5%, 18 RCTs, n = 4078, RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.86, NNTH 50, 95% CI not significant), and weight gain (drug 9% versus placebo 6%, 19 RCTs, n = 4767, RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.35, NNTH 25, 95% CI 20 to 50).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

For people with schizophrenia, the evidence suggests that maintenance on antipsychotic drugs prevents relapse to a much greater extent than placebo for approximately up to two years of follow-up. This effect must be weighed against the adverse effects of antipsychotic drugs. Future studies should better clarify the long-term morbidity and mortality associated with these drugs.

Improving the "real life" management of schizophrenia spectrum disorders by LAI antipsychotics: A one-year mirror-image retrospective study in community mental health services

Schizophrenia poses a significant economic burden on the healthcare system as well as it has a significant impact on society at large. Reasons for such a high economic burden of schizophrenia include the frequent relapses and hospitalizations occurring in this disorder. We analyze the effectiveness of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) compared to oral medications, in terms of “clinical process management” in a sample of patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorder treated in community mental health centers. An observational, retrospective, mirror-image study was carried out to evaluate the effectiveness of LAIs compared to oral medications in terms of number of hospitalizations, emergency visits and planned visits on a 10-year period (from July 2007 to June 2017). Differences between first and second generation LAIs were also explored. Our findings show that hospitalization and emergency visits are significantly decreased with the use of LAIs, while planned visits are increased in patients treated with LAIs. Our results suggest that LAIs, in particular, second generation ones, reduce hospitalization rates and emergency visits, improving the economic burden of schizophrenia. Therefore, LAIs should be considered a cost-effective treatment in the management of schizophrenia under routine conditions.

Acceptance of the Deltoid Muscle Injection of Aripiprazole Long-acting Injectable in the Patients with Schizophrenia

Objective

To improve poor medication adherence in schizophrenic patients, long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics are used. However, it has not yet become common in Japan. Recently, aripiprazole LAI was approved for alternative injection into the deltoid muscle in addition to the gluteal muscle. The acceptance for the proposal to switch from gluteal to deltoid injections of aripiprazole LAI was investigated.

Methods

The subjects were 32 outpatients with schizophrenia who had continuously received aripiprazole LAI administration into the gluteal muscle for ≥ 6 months. In the patients who had continued deltoid injection for 3 months after switching, the changes in the pain and shame in comparison with gluteal injections were evaluated.

Results

Switching to the deltoid injection was chosen by 17 out of 32 patients. Three months later, 9 patients were still receiving deltoid injections with highly rated satisfaction. The main reasons for switching to deltoid injections included the pain and shame associated with gluteal injections. The main reason for returning to the gluteal injection was the pain experienced from the injection in the deltoid.

Conclusion

The option to select the injected area was based on the amount of pain in the deltoid and gluteal sites, leading to the widespread use of aripiprazole LAI.

To continue or not to continue? Antipsychotic medication maintenance versus dose-reduction/discontinuation in first episode psychosis: HAMLETT, a pragmatic multicenter single-blind randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medication is effective for symptomatic treatment in schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. After symptom remission, continuation of antipsychotic treatment is associated with lower relapse rates and lower symptom severity compared to dose reduction/discontinuation. Therefore, most guidelines recommend continuation of treatment with antipsychotic medication for at least 1 year. Recently, however, these guidelines have been questioned as one study has shown that more patients achieved long-term functional remission in an early discontinuation condition-a finding that was not replicated in another recently published long-term study.

METHODS/DESIGN

The HAMLETT (Handling Antipsychotic Medication Long-term Evaluation of Targeted Treatment) study is a multicenter pragmatic single-blind randomized controlled trial in two parallel conditions (1:1) investigating the effects of continuation versus dose-reduction/discontinuation of antipsychotic medication after remission of a first episode of psychosis (FEP) on personal and social functioning, psychotic symptom severity, and health-related quality of life. In total 512 participants will be included, aged between 16 and 60 years, in symptomatic remission from a FEP for 3-6 months, and for whom psychosis was not associated with severe or life-threatening self-harm or violence. Recruitment will take place at 24 Dutch sites. Patients are randomized (1:1) to: continuation of antipsychotic medication until at least 1 year after remission (original dose allowing a maximum reduction of 25%, or another antipsychotic drug in similar dose range); or gradual dose reduction till eventual discontinuation of antipsychotics according to a tapering schedule. If signs of relapse occur in this arm, medication dose can be increased again. Measurements are conducted at baseline, at 3, and 6 months post-baseline, and yearly during a follow-up period of 4 years.

DISCUSSION

The HAMLETT study will offer evidence to guide patients and clinicians regarding questions concerning optimal treatment duration and when to taper off medication after remission of a FEP. Moreover, it may provide patient characteristics associated with safe dose reduction with a minimal risk of relapse.

TRIAL STATUS

Protocol version 1.3, October 2018. The study is active and currently recruiting patients (since September 2017), with the first 200 participants by the end of 2019. We anticipate completing recruitment in 2022 and final assessments (including follow-up 3.5 years after phase one) in 2026.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

European Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT number 2017-002406-12. Registered 7 June 2017.

How Can Poetry Support the Understanding of Psychotic Experiences? - A Conceptual Review

OBJECTIVE

The therapeutic application of poetry for those who have experienced psychosis remains under researched and potentially undervalued. This paper presents a conceptual review exploring the relationship between poetry and psychosis, based on a synthesis of existing literature.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The review identified papers from a range of sources and disciplines. Initial searches were undertaken using databases CINAHL, PsycINFO and ASSIA; this search was then followed up with a library search for key texts and a further search for associated grey literature involving exploring blogs and conference presentations. The data was then synthesized based on methods from both narrative review and thematic analysis to generate a conceptual framework.

RESULTS

The results reveal a conceptual framework comprised of three domains: i) psychotic language as meaningful poetics, ii) poetry as an expression of psychosis and iii) poetic exchange as therapeutic practice. The conceptual framework proposes that not only can psychosis be understood as meaningful poetics, but also that poetry may offer meaningful linguistic opportunities to aid the expression and narration of self and experiences. The potential for extending our understanding of the poetry in this way is analogous to forms of talking therapy, and this may be a base for extending understanding and communicative practice for a range of mental health professions.

CONCLUSION

The conceptual framework suggests a novel understanding of psychosis in relation to poetry, moving away from traditional biomedical paradigms and placing importance upon individual narratives.

Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia: A Review and Clinical Guide for Recognition, Assessment, and Treatment

Schizophrenia is frequently a chronic and disabling disorder, characterized by heterogeneous positive and negative symptom constellations. The objective of this review was to provide information that may be useful for clinicians treating patients with negative symptoms of schizophrenia. Negative symptoms are a core component of schizophrenia that account for a large part of the long-term disability and poor functional outcomes in patients with the disorder. The term negative symptoms describes a lessening or absence of normal behaviors and functions related to motivation and interest, or verbal/emotional expression. The negative symptom domain consists of five key constructs: blunted affect, alogia (reduction in quantity of words spoken), avolition (reduced goal-directed activity due to decreased motivation), asociality, and anhedonia (reduced experience of pleasure). Negative symptoms are common in schizophrenia; up to 60% of patients may have prominent clinically relevant negative symptoms that require treatment. Negative symptoms can occur at any point in the course of illness, although they are reported as the most common first symptom of schizophrenia. Negative symptoms can be primary symptoms, which are intrinsic to the underlying pathophysiology of schizophrenia, or secondary symptoms that are related to psychiatric or medical comorbidities, adverse effects of treatment, or environmental factors. While secondary negative symptoms can improve as a consequence of treatment to improve symptoms in other domains (ie, positive symptoms, depressive symptoms or extrapyramidal symptoms), primary negative symptoms generally do not respond well to currently available antipsychotic treatment with dopamine D₂ antagonists or partial D₂ agonists. Since some patients may lack insight about the presence of negative symptoms, these are generally not the reason that patients seek clinical care, and clinicians should be especially vigilant for their presence. Negative symptoms clearly constitute an unmet medical need in schizophrenia, and new and effective treatments are urgently needed.

Randomised controlled trial of gradual antipsychotic reduction and discontinuation in people with schizophrenia and related disorders: the RADAR trial (Research into Antipsychotic Discontinuation and Reduction)

INTRODUCTION

Antipsychotic medication is effective in reducing acute symptoms of psychosis, but it has a range of potentially serious and debilitating adverse effects and is often disliked by patients. It is therefore essential it is only used when benefits outweigh harms. Although multiple trials conducted with people with schizophrenia indicate an increased risk of relapse in the short-term following abrupt antipsychotic discontinuation, there is little evidence about the long-term outcome of a gradual process of reduction and discontinuation on social functioning, relapse and other outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentre, randomised controlled trial involving people with schizophrenia and related disorders who have had more than one episode. Participants are randomised to have a clinically-supervised, gradual reduction of antipsychotic medication, leading to discontinuation when possible, or to continue with maintenance treatment. Blinded follow-up assessments are conducted at 6, 12 and 24 months and the primary outcome is social functioning, measured by the Social Functioning Scale at 24 months. A minimum of 134 evaluable participants provides 90% power to detect a five-point difference, and 206 to detect a four-point difference. Secondary outcomes include severe relapse (admission to hospital) and the study is also intended to detect a minimum 10% difference in severe relapse, which requires 402 participants, assuming a 15% loss to follow-up. Other secondary outcomes include all relapses, as identified by an independent and blinded endpoint committee, symptoms measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, quality of life, adverse effects, self-rated recovery and neuropsychological measures. Enrolment started in 2016. The trial is scheduled to finish in June 2022.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was initially obtained on 27 October 2016 (UK Research Ethics Committee reference 16/LO/1507). Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated to the public.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN90298520. EudraCT: 2016-000709-36. Pre-results.

Mental health outcomes associated with of the use of amphetamines: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of amphetamines is a global public health concern. We summarise global data on use of amphetamines and mental health outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD 42017081893). We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo for methamphetamine or amphetamine combined with psychosis, violence, suicidality, depression or anxiety. Included studies were human empirical cross-sectional surveys, case-control studies, cohort studies and randomised controlled trials that assessed the association between methamphetamine and one of the mental health outcomes. Random effects meta-analysis was used to pool results for any use of amphetamines and amphetamine use disorders.

FINDINGS

149 studies were eligible and 59 were included in meta-analyses. There was significant heterogeneity in effects. Evidence came mostly from cross-sectional studies. Any use of amphetamines was associated with higher odds of psychosis (odds ratio [OR] = 2.0, 95%CI 1.3-3.3), violence (OR = 2.2, 95%CI 1.2-4.1; adjusted OR [AOR] = 1.4, 95%CI 0.8-2.4), suicidality OR = 4.4, 95%CI 2.4-8.2; AOR = 1.7, 95%CI 1.0-2.9) and depression (OR = 1.6, 95%CI 1.1-2.2; AOR = 1.3, 95%CI 1.2-1.4). Having an amphetamine use disorder was associated with higher odds of psychosis (OR = 3.0, 95%CI 1.9-4.8; AOR = 2.4, 95%CI 1.6-3.5), violence (OR = 6.2, 95%CI 3.1-12.3), and suicidality (OR = 2.3, 95%CI 1.8-2.9; AOR = 1.5, 95%CI 1.3-1.8).

INTERPRETATION

Methamphetamine use is an important risk factor for poor mental health. High quality population-level studies are needed to more accurately quantify this risk. Clinical responses to methamphetamine use need to address mental health harms.

Impaired insulin signaling in unaffected siblings and patients with first-episode psychosis

Patients with psychotic disorders are at high risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus, and there is increasing evidence that patients display glucose metabolism abnormalities before significant antipsychotic medication exposure. In the present study, we examined insulin action by quantifying insulin sensitivity in first-episode psychosis (FEP) patients and unaffected siblings, compared to healthy individuals, using a physiological-based model and comprehensive assessment battery. Twenty-two unaffected siblings, 18 FEP patients, and 15 healthy unrelated controls were evaluated using a 2-h oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), with 7 samples of plasma glucose and serum insulin concentration measurements. Insulin sensitivity was quantified using the oral minimal model method. Lipid, leptin, free fatty acids, and inflammatory marker levels were also measured. Anthropometric, nutrient, and activity assessments were conducted; total body composition and fat distribution were determined using whole-body dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Insulin sensitivity significantly differed among groups (F = 6.01 and 0.004), with patients and siblings showing lower insulin sensitivity, compared to controls (P = 0.006 and 0.002, respectively). Body mass index, visceral adipose tissue area (cm²), lipids, leptin, free fatty acids, inflammatory markers, and activity ratings were not significantly different among groups. There was a significant difference in nutrient intake with lower total kilocalories/kilogram body weight in patients, compared to siblings and controls. Overall, the findings suggest that familial abnormal glucose metabolism or a primary insulin signaling pathway abnormality is related to risk for psychosis, independent of disease expression and treatment effects. Future studies should examine underlying biological mechanisms of insulin signaling abnormalities in psychotic disorders.

Effect of adding individualized occupational therapy to standard care on rehospitalization of patients with schizophrenia: A 2-year prospective cohort study

AIM

We examined the effect of individualized occupational therapy (IOT) compared to the usual group occupational therapy (GOT) on the rehospitalization of patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study included patients with schizophrenia who were discharged within 1 year from a psychiatric hospital. Time to rehospitalization by treatment group (GOT + IOT or GOT-alone) was evaluated with Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. The impact of demographics and clinical factors associated with rehospitalization was investigated using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Of the 111 patients who met the criteria, 54 were in the GOT + IOT group and 57 in the GOT-alone group. Over the 2 years from discharge, the overall rehospitalization rate was 51.376% (56 patients); the GOT + IOT group demonstrated a significantly lower rehospitalization rate with 16 patients rehospitalized compared to 40 patients from the GOT-alone group. Time to rehospitalization was significantly longer for the GOT + IOT group compared to those in the GOT-alone group (P < 0.001). The multivariate Cox proportional hazards models showed that type of occupational therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.543), medication adherence (HR = 0.343), access to resident support persons (HR = 0.450), and executive function at discharge (HR = 0.740) were all significantly associated with rehospitalization.

CONCLUSION

Our results provide support for the prolonging effects of IOT in relation to rehospitalization and the reduction of rehospitalization risk compared to patients with schizophrenia who receive GOT alone, in addition to supporting good cognition at discharge and favorable medication adherence.

Mental health professionals' views and experiences of antipsychotic reduction and discontinuation

Background

The widely established treatment for psychosis is long-term antipsychotic medication. However, many people stop taking this treatment, and request other options. There are also growing concerns about adverse effects, but currently no professional guidelines to support reducing or stopping these drugs. The views and experiences of individual mental health professionals around reducing and stopping antipsychotics are therefore crucial in treatment decisions.

Methods

We conducted 7 focus groups with prescribing psychiatrists and other members of community-based statutory mental health services in London. Participants discussed their views about, experiences, and processes of antipsychotic reduction and discontinuation. Data were analysed using thematic analysis.

Results

Participants acknowledged that antipsychotics can have severe adverse effects. They were generally supportive of trying to reduce these drugs to the lowest effective dose, although stopping antipsychotics was less acceptable. Prior experiences of adverse events after reduction or discontinuation meant that both were approached with caution. Reduction was also reported to be hampered by organisational and knowledge barriers. Lack of resources, pressure to discharge, and poor continuity of care were seen as organisational barriers. Knowledge barriers included inadequate evidence about who might be best suited to reduction, and lack of guidance about how this could be done safely. This meant that reduction was often prompted by patients, and sometimes actively discouraged, and stability with maintenance treatment was often favoured.

Conclusions

Concerns about risk and other barriers means that clinicians are often reluctant to implement reduction or discontinuation of antipsychotic medication. In order to increase the treatment options available to service users, more research and guidance on how to minimise the risks of antipsychotic reduction and discontinuation is required to enable clinicians to engage more constructively with service users requests, offering people more choice and control in managing their mental health condition.

Haloperidol discontinuation for people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a disabling serious mental illness that can be chronic. Haloperidol, one of the first generation of antipsychotic drugs, is effective in the treatment of schizophrenia but can have adverse side effects. The effects of stopping haloperidol in people with schizophrenia who are stable on their prescription are not well researched in the context of systematic reviews.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of haloperidol discontinuation in people with schizophrenia who are stable on haloperidol.

SEARCH METHODS

On 20 February 2015, 24 May 2017, and 12 January 2019, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials including trial registers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included clinical trials randomising adults with schizophrenia or related disorders who were receiving haloperidol, and were stable. We included trials that randomised such participants to either continue their current treatment with haloperidol or discontinue their haloperidol treatment. We included trials that met our selection criteria and reported usable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently checked all records retrieved from the search and obtained full reports of relevant records for closer inspection. We extracted data from included studies independently. All usable data were dichotomous, and we calculated relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) using a fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias within the included studies and used GRADE to create a 'Summary of findings' table.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 232 participants comparing haloperidol discontinuation with haloperidol continuation. Discontinuation was achieved in all five studies by replacing haloperidol with placebo. The trials' size ranged between 23 and 87 participants. The methods of randomisation, allocation concealment and blinding were poorly reported.Participants allocated to discontinuing haloperidol treatment were more likely to show no improvement in global state compared with those in the haloperidol continuation group (n = 49; 1 RCT; RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.33 to 3.20; very low quality evidence: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited due to relevant methodological shortcomings of included trials). Those who continued haloperidol treatment were less likely to experience a relapse compared to people who discontinued taking haloperidol (n = 165; 4 RCTs; RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.74; very low quality evidence). Satisfaction with treatment (measured as numbers leaving the study early) was similar between groups (n = 43; 1 RCT; RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.28; very low quality evidence).No usable mental state, general functioning, general behaviour or adverse effect data were reported by any of the trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review provides limited evidence derived from small, short-term studies. The longest study was for one year, making it difficult to generalise the results to a life-long disorder. Very low quality evidence shows that discontinuation of haloperidol is associated with an increased risk of relapse and a reduction in the risk of 'global state improvement'. However, participant satisfaction with haloperidol treatment was not different from participant satisfaction with haloperidol discontinuation as measured by leaving the studies early. Due to the very low quality of these results, firm conclusions cannot be made. In addition, the available studies did not report usable data regarding the adverse effects of haloperidol treatment.Considering that haloperidol is one of the most widely used antipsychotic drugs, it was surprising that only a small number of studies into the benefit and harm of haloperidol discontinuation were available. Moreover, the available studies did not report on outcomes that are important to clinicians and to people with schizophrenia, particularly adverse effects and social outcomes. Better designed trials are warranted.

Effectiveness of 1-year treatment with long-acting formulation of aripiprazole, haloperidol, or paliperidone in patients with schizophrenia: retrospective study in a real-world clinical setting

BACKGROUND

Schizophrenia is a chronic mental illness that requires lifelong antipsychotic treatment. Therapy discontinuation, often due to poor adherence, increases the risk of relapses after both first and subsequent psychotic episodes. Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic drugs (APDs) have been introduced to increase therapeutic adherence, reducing blood-level variability compared to corresponding oral preparations.

PURPOSE

To compare the effectiveness of three LAI-APDs: aripiprazole (Apr) prolonged release once monthly (OM) haloperidol decanoate (Hal-D) and paliperidone palmitate (PP-OM).

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data for all patients with schizophrenia or other psychoses (n=217) treated with the three LAI-APDs for the first time from January 1, 2012 to October 31, 2016: n=48 with Apr-OM, n=55 with Hal-D, and n=114 with PP-OM. After 6 and 12 months of LAI treatments, we assessed clinical and functioning improvement, urgent consultations, psychiatric hospitalizations, adverse effects, and dropout. We compared urgent consultations and psychiatric hospitalizations required by the same patient 6 and 12 months before and after LAI implementation. Data were statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

The three LAI groups differed significantly only for "need for economic support from social service" (more frequent in the Hal-D group) and "schizoaffective disorder" (prevalent in the Apr-OM group). Apr-OM was prescribed at the maximum dose required by the official guidelines, whereas the other two LAIs were prescribed at lower doses. After 6 and 12 months' treatment with the three LAI-APDs, we registered similar and significant reductions in both urgent consultations and psychiatric hospitalizations (P<0.001) and overlapping clinical and functioning improvement-scale scores (P<0.001), and 14.28% of patients dropped out, with no difference among the three LAI-APDs. Different kinds of adverse effects, though similar for number and severity, were reported in the three LAI groups.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that both first- and second-generation LAI-APDs represent important therapeutic options, useful for improving schizophrenia's clinical course and its economic burden. Our study, which offers a wide and comprehensive observation of real-world clinical settings, combined an effectiveness evaluation through mirror analysis performed for each individual patient to a subsequent comparison among the three LAI-APDs, allowing us a more complete evaluation of clinical efficacy.

Aripiprazole Long-Acting Injection During First Episode Schizophrenia-An Exploratory Analysis

Background: Long-acting injectable (LAI) aripiprazole was found to be efficacious in schizophrenia. In common clinical practice, the use of LAIs is often restricted to chronic patients with frequent relapses and poor adherence. Recently, some investigators advanced the idea of early LAI use also in young people with schizophrenia at their first psychotic episode (FEP). Objective: Our study aimed to assess the effect of LAI aripiprazole once monthly (AOM) in the treatment of FEP in patients aged 18-26 years. Methods: We included 50 patients with DSM-5 schizophrenia as assessed with SCID, and used the Clinical Global Impressions Scale-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) to assess symptom severity and the World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL), the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and the Personal and Social Performance Scale (PSP) to assess quality of life (QoL) and global health perception at baseline and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after the first AOM injection. Results: AOM was associated with a progressive improvement, compared to baseline, of both positive (p < 0.001) and negative (p < 0.001) symptoms and in general psychopathology (p < 0.001) and decrease in global severity (p < 0.001). We also observed progressive improvement in QoL and social and personal functioning. Treatment adherence was 78% at study endpoint. Our results support that AOM may improve psychotic symptoms, QoL and social functioning in young FEP patients. Further studies should compare AOM to its oral formulation in the treatment of young patients with schizophrenia at the outset of their illness.

Antipsychotics and risk of natural death in patients with schizophrenia

Background: Research on antipsychotics and early mortality in schizophrenia has arisen from Western countries and results show that mortality from natural causes is obviously increased in schizophrenia. China, differs largely from Western countries in health and social welfare systems, and Asian patients are more susceptible to side-effects and might require less antipsychotics than their Western counterparts. We, therefore, investigated the association between antipsychotic use and increased mortality from natural causes among patients with schizophrenia in China. Methods: We conducted a population-based nested case-control study using patients' hardcopy archives obtained from the Severe Mental Health Disorder Systems of Chengdu between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2013. We identified all schizophrenic patients aged 18-65 years who died of natural causes in 2013 (N=157), and their age- and gender-matched controls (N=444). Results: Antipsychotic use was more frequent in controls than in cases (59.9% vs 32.5%). Risk of death decreased significantly in those receiving antipsychotic monotherapy (adjusted odds ratio=0.27, 95% CI=0.16-0.46) and antipsychotic polypharmacy (adjusted odds ratio=0.29, 95% CI=0.12-0.70) than antipsychotic-free patients. Compared with monotherapy, antipsychotic-free treatment was associated with prominently increased mortality (adjusted odds ratio=3.64, 95% CI=2.18-6.08). When stratified by age and gender, the results remained unchanged. Conclusion: Antipsychotic monotherapy significantly decreased mortality from natural causes in schizophrenic patients while antipsychotic polypharmacy did not contribute to the excess mortality and deserves further clarification. We need to improve the physical health of schizophrenic patients and promote health education among community mental health staff and primary caregivers.

Are structural brain changes in schizophrenia related to antipsychotic medication? A narrative review of the evidence from a clinical perspective

Some observational studies and literature reviews suggest that antipsychotic drug use is associated with loss of grey or white matter in patients with schizophrenia, whereas others have contradicted this finding. Here, I summarize and critique the available evidence and put it in the context of clinical practice. This narrative review pools evidence from observational and experimental studies in humans and animals on the relationship between antipsychotic medication use and brain structure and function in patients with schizophrenia. To summarize, the observational evidence in patients with schizophrenia and the experimental evidence in animals suggest that antipsychotic drugs can cause reductions in brain volume, but differ as to where those effects are manifest. The experimental evidence in patients is inconclusive. There is stronger and more consistent evidence that other factors, such as alcohol and cannabis use, are likely causes of progressive brain changes in schizophrenia. Overall, I argue the case against antipsychotics is not proven and the jury is out on any significance of putative antipsychotic-induced brain changes. Taken in the context of strong evidence from clinical trials that antipsychotic drugs have beneficial effects on symptoms, function, relapse and cognition, and observational evidence that treatment normalizes other imaging indices and reduces mortality, the balance of probabilities is that antipsychotic drugs do not cause adverse structural brain changes in schizophrenia.

Measuring adherence to antipsychotic medications for schizophrenia: Concordance and validity among a community sample in rural China

BACKGROUND

Despite the abundance of measures to assess medication adherence by persons suffering schizophrenia, few studies have evaluated their concordance and validity against a reference standard in resource-poor community settings. We explored the concordance and validity of several measures to assess antipsychotic medication adherence in a resource-poor community.

METHOD

Based on a random sample of 278 villagers diagnosed with schizophrenia from Liuyang, Hunan Province, China, we used a concordance correlation coefficient (rc) and Kappa statistic to assess agreement among pill counts, refill records, clinician rating, Drug Attitude Inventory (DAI), and the Brief Adherence Rating Scale (BARS). The validity of various measures was evaluated by their concordance and sensitivity/specificity to home-based unannounced pill count (UPC) as the reference standard.

RESULTS

The estimated proportion of adherent patients according to all measures (41% ~ 88%) was substantially higher than identified by UPC (35%). Concordance between any two measures was poor (rc/Kappa mostly <0.30). Validity of various measures also was poor against the UPC (rc < 0.20; Kappa <0.16), although refill records and the structured instruments (BARS) performed better than office-based pill counts and clinician impression. BARS, DAI and clinician rating were not sensitive to changes in adherence and would likely underestimate any program effect.

CONCLUSION

In resource-poor community settings, most measures assessed in this study should not be used alone as they overestimated adherence, underestimated program effect, and had poor validity. A combination of UPC and several other measures may provide more insight into clinical trials and programmatic management.

Maintenance antipsychotic treatment versus discontinuation strategies following remission from first episode psychosis: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Understanding the relative risks of maintenance treatment versus discontinuation of antipsychotics following remission in first episode psychosis (FEP) is an important area of practice.

METHOD

A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prospective experimental studies including a parallel control group were identified to compare maintenance antipsychotic treatment with total discontinuation or medication discontinuation strategies following remission in FEP.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included. Relapse rates were higher in the discontinuation group (53%; 95% CIs: 39%, 68%; N = 290) compared with maintenance treatment group (19%; 95% CIs: 0.05%, 37%; N = 230). In subgroup analyses, risk difference of relapse was lower in studies with a longer follow-up period, a targeted discontinuation strategy, a higher relapse threshold, a larger sample size, and samples with patients excluded for drug or alcohol dependency. Insufficient studies included psychosocial functioning outcomes for a meta-analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a higher risk of relapse for those who undergo total or targeted discontinuation strategies compared with maintenance antipsychotics in FEP samples. The effect size is moderate and the risk difference is lower in trials of targeted discontinuation strategies.

DECLARATION OF INTEREST

A.T. has received honoraria and support from Janssen-Cilag and Otsuka Pharmaceuticals for meetings and has been has been an investigator on unrestricted investigator-initiated trials funded by AstraZeneca and Janssen-Cilag. He has also previously held a Pfizer Neurosciences Research Grant. S.M. has received sponsorship from Otsuka and Lundbeck to attend an academic congress and owns shares in GlaxoSmithKline and AstraZeneca. J.H. has attended meetings supported by Sunovion Pharmaceuticals.

A multicenter, randomized controlled trial of individualized occupational therapy for patients with schizophrenia in Japan

The individualized occupational therapy (IOT) program is a psychosocial program that we developed to facilitate proactive participation in treatment and improve cognitive functioning and other outcomes for inpatients with acute schizophrenia. The program consists of motivational interviewing, self-monitoring, individualized visits, handicraft activities, individualized psychoeducation, and discharge planning. This multicenter, open-labeled, blinded-endpoint, randomized controlled trial evaluated the impact of adding IOT to a group OT (GOT) program as usual for outcomes in recently hospitalized patients with schizophrenia in Japanese psychiatric hospitals setting compared with GOT alone. Patients with schizophrenia were randomly assigned to the GOT+IOT group or the GOT alone group. Among 136 randomized patients, 129 were included in the intent-to-treat population: 66 in the GOT+IOT and 63 in the GOT alone groups. Outcomes were administered at baseline and discharge or 3 months following hospitalization including the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia Japanese version (BACS-J), the Schizophrenia Cognition Rating Scale Japanese version, the Social Functioning Scale Japanese version, the Global Assessment of Functioning scale, the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory Japanese version (IMI-J), the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale-8 (MMAS-8), the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), and the Japanese version of Client Satisfaction Questionnaire-8 (CSQ-8J). Results of linear mixed effects models indicated that the IOT+GOT showed significant improvements in verbal memory (p <0.01), working memory (p = 0.02), verbal fluency (p < 0.01), attention (p < 0.01), and composite score (p < 0.01) on the BACS-J; interest/enjoyment (p < 0.01), value/usefulness (p < 0.01), perceived choice (p < 0.01), and IMI-J total (p < 0.01) on the IMI-J; MMAS-8 score (p < 0.01) compared with the GOT alone. Patients in the GOT+IOT demonstrated significant improvements on the CSQ-8J compared with the GOT alone (p < 0.01). The present findings provide support for the feasibility in implementing an IOT program and its effectiveness for improving cognitive impairment and other outcomes in patients with schizophrenia.

Community-based psychosocial interventions for people with schizophrenia in low and middle-income countries: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is consensus that the treatment of schizophrenia should combine anti-psychotic medication and psychosocial interventions in order to address complex social, economic and health needs. It is recommended that family therapy or support; community-based rehabilitation; and/or self-help and support groups should be provided for people with schizophrenia in low and middle-income countries. The effectiveness of community-based psychosocial interventions in these settings is unclear.

METHODS

Studies evaluating community-based psychosocial interventions for people with schizophrenia were identified through database searching up to April 2016. Randomised controlled trials were included if they compared the intervention group with a control group receiving treatment as usual including medication. Only studies set in low and middle-income countries were included. Random effects meta-analyses were performed separately for each intervention type.

RESULTS

Eleven randomised controlled trials in five middle-income countries were identified, with a total of 1580 participants. The content of included interventions varied from single-faceted psychoeducational interventions, to multi-component rehabilitation-focused interventions, to case management interventions. A third of the included studies did not incorporate any community involvement in the intervention. The quality of evidence was often low. Amongst the seven studies that reported on symptom severity up to 18 months post intervention, the pooled standardised mean difference (SMD) across all intervention types was 0.95 (95% CI 0.28, 1.61; P 0.005; I 2 = 95%; n = 862), representing a strong effect. A strong effect on symptom severity remained after excluding two studies with a high risk of bias (SMD 0.80; 95% CI 0.07, 1.53; P 0.03; I 2 = 94%; n = 676). Community-based psychosocial interventions may also have beneficial impacts on functioning (SMD 1.12; 95% CI 0.25, 2.00; P 0.01; I 2 = 94%; n = 511) and reducing hospital readmissions (SMD 0.68; 95% CI 0.27, 1.09; P 0.001; I2 = 33%; n = 167).

CONCLUSION

The limited evidence from low and middle-income countries supports the feasibility and effectiveness of community-based psychosocial interventions for schizophrenia, even in the absence of community mobilisation. Community-based psychosocial interventions should therefore be provided in these settings as an adjuvant service in addition to facility-based care for people with schizophrenia.

A 20-Year multi-followup longitudinal study assessing whether antipsychotic medications contribute to work functioning in schizophrenia

To assess the long-term effectiveness of antipsychotic medications in facilitating work functioning in patients with schizophrenia we conducted longitudinal multifollowup research on 139 initially psychotic patients. The 70 patients with schizophrenia and 69 initially psychotic mood disordered control patients were followed up 6 times over 20 years. We compared the influence on work functioning of patients with schizophrenia continuously prescribed antipsychotics with patients with schizophrenia not prescribed antipsychotics, using statistical controls for inter-subject differences. While antipsychotics reduce or eliminate flagrant psychosis for most patients with schizophrenia at acute hospitalizations, four years later and continually until the 20 year followups, patients with schizophrenia not prescribed antipsychotics had significantly better work functioning. The work performance of the patients who were continuously prescribed antipsychotics was at a low rate and did not improve over time. Multiple other factors also interfere with work functioning. The data suggest that some patients with schizophrenia not prescribed antipsychotics for prolonged periods can function relatively well. Multiple other factors are associated with poor post-hospital work performance. The longitudinal data raise questions about prolonged treatment of schizophrenia with antipsychotic medications.

Guidelines for the Pharmacotherapy of Schizophrenia in Adults

OBJECTIVE

The present guidelines address the pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia in adults across different stages, phases, and symptom domains.

METHOD

Guidelines were developed using the ADAPTE process, which takes advantage of existing guidelines. Six guidelines were identified for adaptation, with recommendations extracted from each. For those specific to the pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia in adults, a working group selected between guidelines and recommendations to create an adapted guideline.

RESULTS

Recommendations can be categorized into 6 areas that include 1) first-episode schizophrenia, 2) acute exacerbation, 3) relapse prevention and maintenance treatment, 4) treatment-resistant schizophrenia, 5) clozapine-resistant schizophrenia, and 6) specific symptom domains. For each category, recommendations are made based on the available evidence, which is discussed and linked to other established guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

In most cases, evidence-based recommendations are made that can be used to guide current clinical treatment and decision making. Notably, however, there is a paucity of established evidence to guide treatment decision making in the case of clozapine-resistant schizophrenia, a subsample that represents a sizable proportion of those with schizophrenia.

Canadian Schizophrenia Guidelines: Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders with Coexisting Substance Use Disorders

OBJECTIVE

Persons with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders frequently have coexisting substance use disorders that require modifications to treatment approaches for best outcomes. The objectives of this review were to identify evidence-based practices best practices that improve outcomes for individuals with schizophrenia and substance used disorders.

METHOD

We reviewed guidelines that were published in the last 5 years and that included systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Most of our recommendations came from 2 publications from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE): the 2011 guidance titled Coexisting Severe Mental Illness (Psychosis) and Substance Misuse: Assessment and Management in Healthcare Settings and the 2014 guidance titled Psychosis and Schizophrenia in Adults: Prevention and Management. We placed these recommendations into the Canadian context to create this guideline.

RESULTS

Evidence supports the inclusion of individuals with coexisting substance use disorders in first-episode psychosis programs. The programs should integrate psychosis and substance use treatments, emphasizing ongoing monitoring of both substance use and patterns and symptoms. The best outcomes are achieved with combined use of antipsychotic medications and addiction-based psychosocial interventions. However, limited evidence is available to recommend using one antipsychotic medication over another or one psychosocial intervention over another for persons with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders with coexisting substance use disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Treating persons who have schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders with coexisting substance use disorders can present clinical challenges, but modifications in practice can help engage and retain people in treatment, where significant improvements over time can be expected.

Short Text Messages to Encourage Adherence to Medication and Follow-up for People With Psychosis (Mobile.Net): Randomized Controlled Trial in Finland

Background

A text messaging service (short message service [SMS]) has the potential to target large groups of people with long-term illnesses such as serious mental disorders, who may have difficulty with treatment adherence. Robust research on the impact of mobile technology interventions for these patients remains scarce.

Objective

The main objective of our study was to investigate the impact of individually tailored short text messages on the rate of psychiatric hospital readmissions, health care service use, and clinical outcomes. In addition, we analyzed treatment costs.

Methods

Between September 2011 and November 2012, we randomly assigned 1139 people to a tailored text message intervention (n=569) or usual care (n=570). Participants received semiautomated text messages for up to 12 months or usual care. The primary outcome, based on routinely collected health register data, was patient readmission into a psychiatric hospital during a 12-month follow-up period. Secondary outcomes were related to other service use, coercion, medication, adverse events, satisfaction, social functioning, quality of life, and economic factors (cost analysis).

Results

There was 98.24% (1119/1139) follow-up at 12 months. Tailored mobile telephone text messages did not reduce the rate of hospital admissions (242/563, 43.0% of the SMS group vs 216/556, 38.8% of the control group; relative risk 1.11; 95% CI 0.92-1.33; P=.28), time between hospitalizations (mean difference 7.0 days 95% CI –8.0 to 24.0; P=.37), time spent in a psychiatric hospital during the year (mean difference 2.0 days 95% CI –2.0 to 7.0; P=.35), or other service outcomes. People who received text messages were less disabled, based on Global Assessment Scale scores at the time of their readmission, than those who did not receive text messages (odds ratio 0.68; 95% CI 0.47-0.97; P=.04). The costs of treatment were higher for people in the SMS group than in the control group (mean €10,103 vs €9210, respectively, P<.001).

Conclusions

High-grade routinely collected data can provide clear outcomes for pragmatic randomized trials. SMS messaging tailored with the input of each individual patient did not decrease the rate of psychiatric hospital visits after the 12 months of follow-up. Although there may have been other, more subtle effects, the results of these were not evident in outcomes of agreed importance to clinicians, policymakers, and patients and their families.

Trial Registration

International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN): 27704027; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN27704027 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6rVzZrbuz).

Maintenance efficacy designs in psychiatry: Randomized discontinuation trials - enriched but not better

Introduction

Although classical randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for proof of drug efficacy, randomized discontinuation trials (RDTs), sometimes called “enriched” trials, are used increasingly, especially in psychiatric maintenance studies.

Methods

A narrative review of two decades of experience with RDTs.

Results

RDTs in psychiatric maintenance trials tend to use a dependent variable as a predictor: treatment response. Treatment responders are assessed for treatment response. This tautology in the logic of RDTs renders them invalid, since the predictor and the outcome are the same variable. Although RDTs can be designed to avoid this tautologous state of affairs, like using independent predictors of outcomes, such is not the case with psychiatric maintenance studies

Further, purported benefits of RDTs regarding feasibility were found to be questionable. Specifically, RDTs do not enhance statistical power in many settings, and, because of high dropout rates, produce results of questionable validity. Any claimed benefits come with notably reduced generalizability.

Conclusions

RDTs appear to be scientifically invalid as used in psychiatric maintenance designs. Their purported feasibility benefits are not seen in actual trials for psychotropic drugs. There is warrant for changes in federal policy regarding marketing indications for maintenance efficacy using the RDT design.