Subjectively-assessed cognitive impairment and neurocognition associations in schizophrenia inpatients

Cognitive Outcomes in Nonacute Patients With Schizophrenia Treated With Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics Versus Oral Antipsychotics

BACKGROUND

Patients with schizophrenia often face challenges related to cognitive function, affecting their daily functioning and overall quality of life. The choice of antipsychotic treatment may play a crucial role in determining cognitive outcomes.

STUDY QUESTION

Our study aimed to investigate whether there was a difference in cognitive ability between the patients with schizophrenia receiving oral antipsychotics (OAP) versus long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAI-APs).

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a cross-sectional study using analytical methods between January 1, 2020, and January 1, 2022. Participants were divided into 2 groups: patients undergoing treatment with OAP and patients undergoing treatment with LAI-AP. All participants underwent version A of Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS).

MEASURES AND OUTCOMES

The primary objective was to compare cognitive function in patients with schizophrenia treated with LAI antipsychotics versus OAP using BACS. Primary outcome measures include overall BACS score, with secondary measures focusing on specific cognitive domains. This study contributes to the understanding of the cognitive effects of different antipsychotic formulations in schizophrenia treatment.

RESULTS

Although there was a slightly higher intelligence quotient in the LAI-AP group (102.2 vs. 101.32, P = 0.5401), it was not statistically significant. Olanzapine was the most commonly prescribed antipsychotic, with 48% of patients in the LAI-AP group and 40% in the OAP group. The LAI-AP group outperformed in all BACS evaluations. The most notable difference was in the token motor task (57.78 ± 17.03 vs. 50.04 ± 18.82, P = 0.0335), while the Tower of London test showed the smallest difference (17.26 ± 2.61 vs. 15.48 ± 3.47, P = 0.0046). Regression analysis revealed no significant variance in intelligence quotient scores; however, a significant discrepancy in BACS scores was evident, favoring the LAI treatment for better cognitive outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of long-acting antipsychotic treatment in individuals with schizophrenia offers promising advantages in preserving cognitive function.

Development and Evaluation of a Cognitive Battery for People With Schizophrenia in Ethiopia

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

Cognitive difficulties significantly burdened people with schizophrenia (PWS). However, cognitive assessment is often unavailable in low- and middle-income counties (LMICs) due to a lack of validated and culturally adapted cognitive assessment tools. In this study, we developed and evaluated a culturally sensitive cognitive battery for PWS in Ethiopia.

STUDY DESIGN

This study was conducted in three phases. First, we selected appropriate tests through an instrument selection procedure and created a new battery. Then, we rigorously adapted the tests using culturally competent procedures, including cognitive interviewing and expert meetings. Finally, we tested the new battery in 208 PWS and 208 controls. We evaluated its psychometric properties using advanced statistical techniques, including Item Response Theory (IRT).

STUDY RESULTS

The Ethiopian Cognitive Assessment battery for Schizophrenia (ECAS) was developed from three different batteries. Participants reported tests were easy to complete, and the raters found them easy to administer. All tests had good inter-rater reliability, and the composite score had very high test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.91). One-factor structure better represented the data with excellent internal consistency (α = .81). ECAS significantly differentiated PWS from controls with 77% sensitivity and 62% specificity at a Z-score ≤0.12 cut-off value. IRT analysis suggested that the battery functions best among moderately impaired participants (difficulty between -0.06 and 0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

ECAS is a practical, tolerable, reliable, and valid assessment of cognition. ECAS can supplement current assessment tools in LAMICs for PWS and can be used to measure cognitive intervention outcomes.

What factors should we modify to promote high functioning and prevent functional decline in people with schizophrenia?

Background

Since research in schizophrenia mainly focuses on deficits and risk factors, we need studies searching for high-functioning protective factors. Thus, our objective was to identify protective (PFs) and risk factors (RFs) separately associated with high (HF) and low functioning (LF) in patients with schizophrenia.

Methods

We collected information (sociodemographic, clinical, psychopathological, cognitive, and functional) from 212 outpatients with schizophrenia. Patients were classified according to their functional level (PSP) as HF (PSP > 70, n = 30) and LF (PSP ≤ 50, n = 95). Statistical analysis consisted of Chi-square test, Student's t-test, and logistic regression.

Results

HF model: variance explained: 38.4-68.8%; PF: years of education (OR = 1.227). RFs: receiving a mental disability benefit (OR = 0.062) and scores on positive (OR = 0.719), negative-expression (OR = 0.711), and negative-experiential symptoms (OR = 0.822), and verbal learning (OR = 0.866). LF model: variance explained: 42.0-56.2%; PF: none; RFs: not working (OR = 6.900), number of antipsychotics (OR = 1.910), and scores on depressive (OR = 1.212) and negative-experiential symptoms (OR = 1.167).

Conclusion

We identified specific protective and risk factors for high and low functioning in patients with schizophrenia and confirmed that high functioning factors are not necessarily the opposite of those associated with low functioning. Only negative experiential symptoms are a shared and inverse factor for high and low functioning. Mental health teams must be aware of protective and risk factors and try to enhance or reduce them, respectively, to help their patients improve or maintain their level of functioning.