Antipsychotic polytherapy on an inpatient psychiatric unit: how does clinical practice coincide with Joint Commission guidelines?

Off-label use of antipsychotic medications in psychiatric inpatients in China: a national real-world survey

BACKGROUND

The off-label use of antipsychotic medications is common in many countries, and the extent of such use in psychiatric inpatients in China has not been sufficiently studied. The purpose of this study was to survey the incidence and examine the correlates of off-label antipsychotic use in a large, nationally-representative sample in China.

METHODS

This study included discharged psychiatric patients between March 19 and 31, 2019 from 41 tertiary psychiatric hospitals across 29 provinces in China. Their socio-demographic and clinical data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

After excluding patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder or bipolar disorder, 981 patients were included in the analysis. Overall, antipsychotics were prescribed to 63.2% (95%CI 60.2-66.2%) of the sample. Antipsychotics were used in a wide spectrum of psychiatric disorders, with the rate being the highest among patients with dissociative (conversion) disorders (89.9, 95%CI 83.0-94.8%), organic mental disorders (81.7, 95%CI 73.1-88.7%), dementia (79.0,95%CI 67.8-87.9%), obsessive-compulsive disorder (77.8, 95%CI 55.7-92.5%), mental disorders due to psychoactive substances (75.3,95%CI 64.7-84.2%), behavioural and emotional disorders with onset usually occurring in childhood and adolescence (71.4, 95%CI 45.5-90.1%), somatoform disorders (63.2, 95%CI 40.8%-82..2%), major depression disorder (53.7,95%CI 48.8-58.6%), anxiety disorder (38.8,95%CI 30.5-47.7%), and insomnia (25.0, 95%CI 8.5-28.9%). The top three most commonly used antipsychotics were olanzapine (29.1%), quetiapine (20.3%) and risperidone (6.8%), and their corresponding average doses were 9.04 ± 5.80 mg/day, 185.13 ± 174.72 mg/day, and 2.98 ± 1.71 mg/day, respectively. A binary logistic regression showed that younger age, having the Employee Health Insurance or Residents Health Insurance, having psychotic symptoms and requiring restraint during hospitalization were significantly associated with off-label use of antipsychotics.

CONCLUSION

Off-label use of antipsychotics is very common in psychiatric inpatients in China, mainly with moderate-dose use of single agents. However, the efficacy and safety of this practice is uncertain for many diagnoses and for the elderly. Clinicians should be cautious about this practice while waiting for more research data.

Application of a Pharmacogenetics-Based Precision Medicine Model (5SPM) to Psychotic Patients That Presented Poor Response to Neuroleptic Therapy

Antipsychotics are the keystone of the treatment of severe and prolonged mental disorders. However, there are many risks associated with these drugs and not all patients undergo full therapeutic profit from them. The application of the 5 Step Precision Medicine model(5SPM), based on the analysis of the pharmacogenetic profile of each patient, could be a helpful tool to solve many of the problematics traditionally associated with the neuroleptic treatment. In order to solve this question, a cohort of psychotic patients that showed poor clinical evolution was analyzed. After evaluating the relationship between the prescribed treatment and pharmacogenetic profile of each patient, a great number of pharmacological interactions and pharmacogenetical conflicts were found. After reconsidering the treatment of the conflictive cases, patients showed a substantial reduction on mean daily doses and polytherapy cases, which may cause less risk of adverse effects, greater adherence, and a reduction on economic costs.

Prevalence and clinical features associated with bipolar disorder polypharmacy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty exists regarding the prevalence and clinical features associated with the practice of polypharmacy in bipolar disorder (BD), warranting a systematic review on the matter.

METHODS

Three authors independently searched major electronic databases from inception till September 2015. Articles were included that reported either qualitative or quantitative data about the prevalence and clinical features associated with polypharmacy in adult cases of BD.

RESULTS

The operative definitions of polypharmacy adopted across varying studies varied, with concomitant use of two or more psychotropic medications or use of four or more psychotropic medications at once being the most common and the most reliable, respectively. Regardless of type or current mood episode polarity of BD, prevalence rates up to 85% and 36% were found using the most permissive (two or more medications at once) and the most conservative (four or more) operative definitions for polypharmacy, respectively. Point prevalence prescription rates of one or more antidepressant or antipsychotic as part of a polypharmacy regimen occurred in up to 45% or 80% of the cases, respectively, according to the most permissive definition of polypharmacy. In contrast, lithium prescription rates ranged from 13% to 33% in BD patients receiving polypharmacy according to conservative and permissive definitions, possibly suggesting a reduced need for augmentation of combination strategies for those cases of BD with a favorable lifetime lithium response and/or long-lasting treatment as well as less likelihood of lithium response over the time most severe cases possibly exposed to a more complex polypharmacy overall.

LIMITATIONS

"Apples and oranges" bias; publication bias for most recently introduced compounds.

CONCLUSION

Polypharmacy is common among people with BD across varying type and mood episode phases of illness. Special population, including BD patients at high risk of familial load for suicidal behavior, solicit further research as well as the plausible "protective" role of lithium toward polypharmacy in BD. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42014015084.

The impact of antipsychotic polytherapy costs in the public health care in Sao Paulo, Brazil

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines for the treatment of psychoses recommend antipsychotic monotherapy. However, the rate of antipsychotic polytherapy has increased over the last decade, reaching up to 60% in some settings. Studies evaluating the costs and impact of antipsychotic polytherapy in the health system are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the costs of antipsychotic polytherapy and its impact on public health costs in a sample of subjects with psychotic disorders living in residential facilities in the city of Sao Paulo, Brazil.

METHOD

A cross-sectional study that used a bottom-up approach for collecting costs data in a public health provider's perspective. Subjects with psychosis living in 20 fully-staffed residential facilities in the city of Sao Paulo were assessed for clinical and psychosocial profile, severity of symptoms, quality of life, use of health services and pharmacological treatment. The impact of polytherapy on total direct costs was evaluated.

RESULTS

147 subjects were included, 134 used antipsychotics regularly and 38% were in use of antipsychotic polytherapy. There were no significant differences in clinical and psychosocial characteristics between polytherapy and monotherapy groups. Four variables explained 30% of direct costs: the number of antipsychotics, location of the residential facility, time living in the facility and use of olanzapine. The costs of antipsychotics corresponded to 94.4% of the total psychotropic costs and to 49.5% of all health services use when excluding accommodation costs. Olanzapine costs corresponded to 51% of all psychotropic costs.

CONCLUSION

Antipsychotic polytherapy is a huge economic burden to public health service, despite the lack of evidence supporting this practice. Great variations on antipsychotic costs explicit the need of establishing protocols for rational antipsychotic prescriptions and consequently optimising resource allocation. Cost-effectiveness studies are necessary to estimate the best value for money among antipsychotics, especially in low and middle income countries.

Efficacy and clinical determinants of antipsychotic polypharmacy in psychotic patients experiencing an acute relapse and admitted to hospital stay: results from a cross-sectional and a subsequent longitudinal pilot study

Background. Antipsychotic polypharmacy is used in several psychiatric disorders, despite poor evidence existing to support this practice. Aim. We evaluated whether psychotic patients in acute relapse exposed to antipsychotic polypharmacy (AP + AP) showed different demographic, clinical, or psychopathological features compared to those exposed to one antipsychotic (AP) and whether AP + AP patients showed significantly higher improvement compared to AP patients after a 4-week treatment. Methods. Inpatients were subdivided into AP + AP and AP ones. In the cross-sectional step, patients were compared according to demographics, clinical variables, and scores on rating scales. In the longitudinal step, patients remained for 4 weeks under admission medications and were compared for clinical improvement. Results. AP + AP patients were more frequently diagnosed with schizophrenia and mental retardation as a comorbid illness. AP + AP patients were more frequently under first-generation antipsychotics and had worse clinical presentation. After 4 weeks of treatment, both AP + AP and AP patients improved compared to the baseline. However, AP patients scored significantly less than AP + AP patients at the Clinical Global Impression Scale at the 4-week time point but not at the baseline, indicating a treatment-specific improvement. Conclusions. Antipsychotic polypharmacy may be offered to specific types of psychotic patients. However, efficacy of this strategy is limited at best.