Effect of risperidone on hostility in schizophrenia

The specific anti-hostility effect of lurasidone in patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia: results of pooled post hoc analyses in adolescents and adults

Symptoms of hostility in patients during acute exacerbations of schizophrenia have been associated with aggressive behavior. Data suggest that some second-generation antipsychotics have specific anti-hostility effects, independent of sedation and positive symptom improvement. Two post hoc analyses were performed to examine the efficacy of lurasidone for reducing hostility in patients with schizophrenia. One analysis pooled adults (N = 1168) from 5 placebo-controlled, 6-week trials of lurasidone (40-160 mg). Another analysis pooled younger patients (up to age 25 years, N = 427) from the adult studies and a similarly designed trial of lurasidone (40 or 80 mg) in adolescent patients (13-17 years old). The outcome measure was mean change in the hostility item (P7) of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). To address pseudospecificity, results were adjusted for positive symptom change and sedation. In adults with a baseline PANSS hostility score ≥2, significant improvement in hostility was observed for all doses with a dose-related increase in effect size (Cohen's d): lurasidone 40 mg = 0.18, 80 mg = 0.24, 120 mg = 0.36, and 160 mg = 0.53. The same dose-response pattern was observed for the more severe hostility subgroups (P7: ≥3, ≥4), and in the early-onset population. Results suggest that lurasidone has specific, dose-related anti-hostility effects.

The Importance of Conduct Disorder in the Treatment of Violence in Schizophrenia: Efficacy of Clozapine Compared With Olanzapine and Haloperidol

OBJECTIVE

Treatment of violence in schizophrenia remains a challenging problem, especially in patients with conduct disorder. Previous clinical studies did not select patients on the basis of violence and did not focus on conduct disorder. This study is a head-to-head comparison of clozapine, olanzapine, and haloperidol in the treatment of violent schizophrenia patients with and without conduct disorder.

METHODS

Physically assaultive schizophrenia patients (N=99) were randomly assigned to receive clozapine, olanzapine, or haloperidol in a 12-week double-blind trial. They were characterized on the basis of the presence or absence of conduct disorder before age 15. Assaults were recorded; their frequency and severity were scored on the Modified Overt Aggression Scale. Psychiatric symptoms were evaluated through the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale.

RESULTS

Patients with a history of conduct disorder had more frequent and severe assaults than those without conduct disorder during the 12-week trial. Clozapine was superior to haloperidol and olanzapine in reducing assaults; olanzapine was superior to haloperidol. Clozapine's greater antiaggressive efficacy over haloperidol was substantially more pronounced in patients with conduct disorder than in patients without conduct disorder. In patients with conduct disorder, clozapine was four times more likely than haloperidol to result in lower violence; in patients without conduct disorder, it was three times more likely to do so. Olanzapine's superiority over haloperidol was also more pronounced in patients with conduct disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first to examine the effect of clozapine in violent schizophrenia patients with conduct disorder. When conduct disorder is present, clozapine is the optimal treatment.

Pharmacological interventions to reduce violence in patients with schizophrenia in forensic psychiatry

BACKGROUND

The purpose was to systematically investigate which pharmacological strategies are effective to reduce the risk of violence among patients with Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders (SSD) in forensic settings.

METHODS

For this systematic review six electronic data bases were searched. Two researchers independently screened the 6,003 abstracts resulting in 143 potential papers. These were then analyzed in detail by two independent researchers. Of these, 133 were excluded for various reasons leaving 10 articles in the present review.

RESULTS

Of the 10 articles included, five were merely observational, and three were pre-post studies without controls. One study applied a matched case-control design and one was a non-randomized controlled trial. Clozapine was investigated most frequently, followed by olanzapine and risperidone. Often, outcome measures were specific to the study and sample sizes were small. Frequently, relevant methodological information was missing. Due to heterogeneous study designs and outcomes meta-analytic methods could not be applied.

CONCLUSION

Due to substantial methodological limitations it is difficult to draw any firm conclusions about the most effective pharmacological strategies to reduce the risk of violence in patents with SSD in forensic psychiatry settings. Studies applying more rigorous methods regarding case-definition, outcome measures, sample sizes, and study designs are urgently needed.

Specific Anti-hostility Effects of Atypical Antipsychotics in Persons with Schizophrenia: From Clozapine to Cariprazine

LEARNING OBJECTIVE

After participating in this activity, learners should be better able to:• Evaluate the anti-hostility effects of available atypical antipsychotic agents.

ABSTRACT

In addition to hallucinations and delusions, persons with schizophrenia may exhibit hostility. In clinical trials of antipsychotics, hostility is routinely measured as part of rating scales such as the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale or Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. The availability of the atypical antipsychotic clozapine in 1989 led to the observation that it is possible to have a treatment effect on hostility that is independent of the treatment effect on hallucinations or delusions, and independent of general sedative effects. The data supporting this notion of a specific anti-hostility effect are the most robust for clozapine as the data include specifically designed randomized, controlled clinical trials. A specific anti-hostility effect is also observable to various degrees with most of the other atypical antipsychotics, as evidenced in post hoc analyses of clinical trials originally conducted for regulatory purposes, supplemented by post hoc analyses of large effectiveness trials. The generalizability of these studies, however, may be limited. Participants in these trials were not selected for aggressive and hostile behavior. Some of the studies also excluded patients with substance use disorders. The latter is particularly important because alcohol and substance use are well known to increase risk for hostility and aggression. Nevertheless, the repeated demonstrations of the specificity of an anti-hostility effect (in terms of statistical independence of effects on other positive symptoms and of sedation) are of potential clinical importance.

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.

Effect of Brexpiprazole on Agitation and Hostility in Patients With Schizophrenia: Post Hoc Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Studies

BACKGROUND

Managing agitation and hostility represents a significant treatment challenge in schizophrenia. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the short- and long-term efficacy of brexpiprazole for reducing agitation and hostility in schizophrenia.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of data from two 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT01396421 and NCT01393613) and a 52-week, open-label, extension study (NCT01397786). In the short-term studies, 1094 patients received placebo, 2 mg/d of brexpiprazole, or 4 mg/d of brexpiprazole; 346 brexpiprazole-treated patients rolled over into the long-term study and received 1 to 4 mg/d of brexpiprazole. Agitation was assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Excited Component (EC), and hostility was assessed using the PANSS hostility item (P7).

RESULTS

Brexpiprazole improved PANSS-EC score over 6 weeks, with least squares mean differences versus placebo of -0.69 (95% confidence limits, -1.28, -0.11) for 2 mg/d (P = 0.020) and -1.11 (-1.70, -0.53) for 4 mg/d (P = 0.0002). In the subgroup with hostility at baseline (P7 score ≥3; 50.8% of the randomized sample), least squares mean differences versus placebo at week 6 on the PANSS-EC were -0.63 (-1.54, 0.28) for 2 mg/d (P = 0.18) and -1.03 (-1.92, -0.14) for 4 mg/d (P = 0.024), and on P7 (adjusted for positive symptoms) were -0.27 (-0.53, -0.01) for 2 mg/d (P = 0.038) and -0.34 (-0.59, -0.09) for 4 mg/d (P = 0.0080). The improvements were maintained over 58 weeks. Adverse events were generally comparable between treatment groups over 6 weeks; the incidence of akathisia among patients with hostility was 5.9% with placebo, 5.2% with 2 mg/d, and 8.6% with 4 mg/d.

CONCLUSIONS

Brexpiprazole has the potential to be an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment for agitation and hostility among patients with schizophrenia.

Risperidone in the management of agitation and aggression associated with psychiatric disorders

Objective

This review provides an overview of the prevalence and treatment of agitation and aggression, and focuses on the use of risperidone to treat these symptoms in patients from different age groups.

Methods

MEDLINE® and EMBASE® databases were used to identify controlled studies of risperidone in the treatment of disruptive behavior disorders and pervasive developmental disorders in pediatric patients, acute agitation or aggression in adults, and psychological and behavioral symptoms of dementia in the elderly. Additionally, key open-label, long-term trials assessing the efficacy and safety of risperidone were considered.

Results

The results of the 19 double-blind studies identified showed that risperidone is effective in treating agitation and aggression in the different populations, regardless of age. The safety and tolerability of risperidone appear to be good overall but certain safety issues, such as a higher risk of cerebrovascular adverse events in the elderly with dementia, were highlighted.

Conclusions

Risperidone is useful for treating aggression and agitation associated with various psychiatric disorders in patients from different age groups.

Efficacy of cariprazine across symptom domains in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia: Pooled analyses from 3 phase II/III studies

Schizophrenia affects various symptom domains, including positive and negative symptoms, mood, and cognition. Cariprazine, a dopamine D₃/D₂ receptor partial agonist and serotonin 5-HT_1A receptor partial agonist, with preferential binding to D₃ receptors, is approved for the treatment of adult patients with schizophrenia (US, Europe) and mania associated with bipolar I disorder (US). For these investigations, data were pooled from 3 positive, 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II/III trials of cariprazine in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia (NCT00694707, NCT01104766, NCT01104779); 2 trials were fixed-dose and 1 trial was flexible-dose. Post hoc analyses evaluated mean change from baseline to week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) -derived symptom factors (positive symptoms, negative symptoms, disorganized thought, uncontrolled hostility/excitement, anxiety/depression) and PANSS single items for cariprazine (1.5-9.0 mg/d) versus placebo. P values were not adjusted for multiple comparisons. At week 6, statistically significant differences versus placebo were seen for cariprazine on all 5 PANSS factors (P < 0.01 all). Effects sizes ranged from 0.21 (anxiety/depression) to 0.47 (disorganized thought). Dose-response analysis from the fixed-dose studies found significant differences for all cariprazine doses (1.5, 3.0, 4.5, and 6.0 mg/d) versus placebo in PANSS total score, and in negative symptom and disorganized thought factor scores (P < 0.001). Differences between cariprazine and placebo were also statistically significant on 26 of 30 PANSS single items (P < 0.05). In these post hoc analyses, cariprazine was effective versus placebo in improving all 5 PANSS factor domains, suggesting that it may have broad-spectrum efficacy in patients with acute schizophrenia.

Efficacy of typical and atypical antipsychotic medication on hostility in patients with psychosis-spectrum disorders: a review and meta-analysis

As violence against self and others is an important outcome in the treatment of patients with psychosis-spectrum disorders and hostility is an important indicator for violence, we set out to evaluate the effects of different types of antipsychotic agents in reducing hostility. We performed a systematic literature search, which provided 18 suitable randomized studies comparing typical to atypical antipsychotics for at least 4 weeks in patients with psychotic disorders. Results showed a small (0.26) but significant effect for atypical as compared to typical antipsychotics, with high heterogeneity, even though the mean dose of typical antipsychotics was higher. This effect size remained similar when separately analyzing sponsored and non-sponsored studies. When differentiating between high and low-dose studies, the high-dose group showed a significant difference between typical and atypical antipsychotics whereas the low-dose group did not. An analysis comparing clozapine to typical antipsychotics showed a moderate effect size (0.415), with low heterogeneity. These results are important for clinicians to help their shared decision making with patients when choosing maintenance treatment, as next to efficacy for psychosis and tolerability, safety for the patient and their environment is an important outcome.

Risperidone for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation (rapid tranquillisation)

BACKGROUND

Aggressive, agitated or violent behaviour due to psychosis constitutes an emergency psychiatric treatment where fast-acting interventions are required. Risperidone is a widely accessible antipsychotic that can be used to manage psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

OBJECTIVES

To examine whether oral risperidone alone is an effective treatment for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (up to April 2017); this register is compiled by systematic searches of major resources (including AMED, BIOSIS CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, and registries of clinical trials) and their monthly updates, handsearches, grey literature, and conference proceedings. There are no language, date, document type, or publication status limitations for inclusion of records into the register.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing rapid use of risperidone and other drugs, combinations of drugs or placebo for people exhibiting aggression or agitation (or both) thought to be due to psychosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected all citations from searches, identified relevant abstracts, and independently extracted data from all included studies. For binary data we calculated risk ratio (RR) and for continuous data we calculated mean difference (MD), all with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and used a fixed-effect model. We assessed risk of bias for the included studies and used the GRADE approach to produce a 'Summary of findings' tables.

MAIN RESULTS

The review now contains data from nine trials (total n = 582) reporting on five comparisons. Due to risk of bias, small size of trials, indirectness of outcome measures and a paucity of investigated and reported 'pragmatic' outcomes, evidence was graded as very-low quality. None of the included studies provided useable data on our primary outcome 'tranquillisation or asleep' by 30 minutes, repeated need for tranquillisation or any economic outcomes. Data were available for our other main outcomes of agitation or aggression, needing restraint, and incidence of adverse effects.Risperidone versus haloperidol (up to 24 hours follow-up)For the outcome, specific behaviour - agitation, no clear difference was found between risperidone and haloperidol in terms of efficacy, measured as at least 50% reduction in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Psychotic Agitation Sub-score (PANSS-PAS) (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.26; participants = 124; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) and no effect was observed for need to use restraints (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.43 to 9.21; participants = 28; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence). Incidence of adverse effects was similar between treatment groups (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.66; participants = 124; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence).Risperidone versus olanzapineOne small trial (n = 29) reported useable data for the comparison risperidone versus olanzapine. No effect was observed for agitation measured as PANSS-PAS endpoint score at two hours (MD 2.50, 95% CI -2.46 to 7.46; very low-quality evidence); need to use restraints at four days (RR 1.43, 95% CI 0.39 to 5.28; very-low quality evidence); specific movement disorders measured as Behavioural Activity Rating Scale (BARS) endpoint score at four days (MD 0.20, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.83; very low-quality evidence).Risperidone versus quetiapineOne trial reported (n = 40) useable data for the comparison risperidone versus quetiapine. Aggression was measured using the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS) endpoint score at two weeks. A clear difference, favouring quetiapine was observed (MD 1.80, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.40; very-low quality evidence). No evidence of a difference between treatment groups could be observed for incidence of akathisia after 24 hours (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 6.06; very low-quality evidence). Two participants allocated to risperidone and one allocated to quetiapine experienced myocardial ischaemia during the trial.Risperidone versus risperidone + oxcarbazepineOne trial (n = 68) measured agitation using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Excited Component.(PANSS-EC) endpoint score and found a clear difference, favouring the combination treatment at one week (MD 2.70, 95% CI 0.42 to 4.98; very low-quality evidence), but no effect was observed for global state using Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) endpoint score at one week (MD -0.20, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.21; very-low quality evidence). Incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms after 24 hours was similar between treatment groups (RR 1.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 5.14; very-low quality evidence).Risperidone versus risperidone + valproic acidTwo trials compared risperidone with a combination of risperidone plus valproic acid. No clear differences between the treatment groups were observed for aggression (MOAS endpoint score at three days: MD 1.07, 95% CI -0.20 to 2.34; participants = 54; studies = 1; very low-quality evidence) or incidence of akathisia after 24 hours: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.28 to 2.03; participants = 122; studies = 2; very low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, results for the main outcomes show no real effect for risperidone. The only data available for use in this review are from nine under-sampled trials and the evidence available is of very low quality. This casts uncertainty on the role of risperidone in rapid tranquillisation for people with psychosis-induced aggression. High-quality pragmatic RCTs are feasible and are needed before clear recommendations can be drawn on the use of risperidone for psychosis-induced aggression or agitation.

Antipsychotics for aggression in adults: A meta-analysis

Aggressive behavior complicates the presentation of many psychiatric illnesses, and is associated with significant morbidity. Antipsychotic medications are used to treat this symptom dimension across multiple diagnoses. In this meta-analysis we sought to identify the effect size of antipsychotic medications for the treatment of reactive-impulsive aggression in adults, and identify differences across underlying diagnosis and specific agent. A search was conducted of four databases, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Embase and the Cochrane Library to end date of August 10, 2016. The search terms included "aggression", "irritable mood", "anger", "hostility" and "antipsychotic agents" or "dopamine antagonists". 505 results were found, of which 47 were reviewed in detail and 21 ultimately included in the analysis. Antipsychotics were broadly effective for the treatment of aggression, but with effect sizes similar to those for non-pharmacologic interventions (standard mean difference=0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.22-0.36, z=8.5, p<0.001). There was no evidence for differences according to choice of agent (χ²=2.7, df=6, p=0.85), or conclusive evidence as to the importance of the underlying diagnosis (χ²=3.2, df=3, p=0.36). A small but significant dose effect was identified (β=0.0002, 95% CI 0.0001-0.0004, p=0.038). Although antipsychotics appear to be effective for treatment of aggression, their small effect sizes in the context of their significant side-effects should be taken into account when making clinical decisions about their use.

The Pharmacotherapy of Human Aggression: A Review

Aggression is a common treatment problem that may be associated with several disorders including schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, acute mania/bipolar disorder, personality disorders, substance abuse disorders, medical disorders, neurological disorders, and medication misadventures. Aggression is not a linear entity, it is a multidimensional problem influenced by a patient's environment and biological, psychological, and/or neurological status. It follows that if one has a multidimensional treatment problem, then a compre hensive treatment plan must be used to achieve optimal management. The comprehensive treatment of aggression should include a thorough baseline evaluation, regular objective measurement of aggression severity using a rating scale (eg, Overt Aggression Scale), psychological interventions, behavioral interventions, pharmacotherapy and, if necessary, seclusion and/or restraint. The pharmacotherapy of aggres sion includes the traditional antipsychotics and benzodiazepines, which are most commonly used; other pharmacotherapies frequently selected include the β-blockers, carbamazepine, and lithium. Despite these pharmacotherapeutic options and despite a pharmacological rationale for each one, the medications used for the treatment of aggression are at least in part nonspecific for aggression. The nonspecificity of these pharmacotherapies is best exemplified by the common use of multiple drug regimens. This may then lead to drug misadventures either in the form of drug-drug interactions, adverse effects, or toxicity. The serenics are a class of phenylpiperazine compounds that have exhibited some promise as being more selective anti- aggression drugs. Eltoprazine, the first member of this new class, is in early phases of human investigation. Copyright © 1996 by W.B. Saunders Company

Supportive therapy for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Supportive therapy is often used in everyday clinical care and in evaluative studies of other treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To review the effects of supportive therapy compared with standard care, or other treatments in addition to standard care for people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register of trials (November 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials involving people with schizophrenia and comparing supportive therapy with any other treatment or standard care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reliably selected studies, quality rated these and extracted data. For dichotomous data, we estimated the risk ratio (RR) using a fixed-effect model with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Where possible, we undertook intention-to-treat analyses. For continuous data, we estimated the mean difference (MD) fixed-effect with 95% CIs. We estimated heterogeneity (I(2) technique) and publication bias. We used GRADE to rate quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Four new trials were added after the 2012 search. The review now includes 24 relevant studies, with 2126 participants. Overall, the evidence was very low quality.We found no significant differences in the primary outcomes of relapse, hospitalisation and general functioning between supportive therapy and standard care.There were, however, significant differences favouring other psychological or psychosocial treatments over supportive therapy. These included hospitalisation rates (4 RCTs, n = 306, RR 1.82 CI 1.11 to 2.99, very low quality of evidence), clinical improvement in mental state (3 RCTs, n = 194, RR 1.27 CI 1.04 to 1.54, very low quality of evidence) and satisfaction of treatment for the recipient of care (1 RCT, n = 45, RR 3.19 CI 1.01 to 10.7, very low quality of evidence). For this comparison, we found no evidence of significant differences for rate of relapse, leaving the study early and quality of life.When we compared supportive therapy to cognitive behavioural therapy CBT), we again found no significant differences in primary outcomes. There were very limited data to compare supportive therapy with family therapy and psychoeducation, and no studies provided data regarding clinically important change in general functioning, one of our primary outcomes of interest.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient data to identify a difference in outcome between supportive therapy and standard care. There are several outcomes, including hospitalisation and general mental state, indicating advantages for other psychological therapies over supportive therapy but these findings are based on a few small studies where we graded the evidence as very low quality. Future research would benefit from larger trials that use supportive therapy as the main treatment arm rather than the comparator.

Effectiveness and safety of clozapine in elderly patients with chronic resistant schizophrenia

ABSTRACT Background: Recommendations for the treatment of elderly schizophrenia patients are largely based on data extrapolated from studies of antipsychotic medications in younger patient populations. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of clozapine monotherapy in a diagnostically homogeneous group of elderly patients suffering from schizophrenia (DSM-IV-TR criteria).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of computerized medical charts of elderly inpatients suffering from schizophrenia treated at our center during the period January 2007-December 2012 was undertaken. Inclusion criteria were: (1) 60 years and older, (2) unsuccessful treatment with at least three different antipsychotic compounds during the last five years prior to the study period. Mortality and re-hospitalization over a five-year period were the pre-defined outcome measures.

RESULTS

Of 527 elderly patients suffering from schizophrenia 43 patients, mean age 69.4 ± 8.7 years, were treated with clozapine. There were 19 women and 24 men, mean disease duration was 38.8 years. All had been exposed to at least three first- and second-generation antipsychotics prior to clozapine treatment. Clozapine was very well tolerated by the patients and mortality rate (8/43 (18.6% vs. 87/484 (18%)) was equal to that of other first- and second-generation antipsychotics (p < 0.18). Re-hospitalization rates with clozapine were significantly lower than rates for the five-year period prior to exposure to clozapine (0.41 vs. 3.8; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The present study demonstrates that clozapine is efficacious and safe for the treatment of elderly schizophrenia patients. Prospective studies are needed to support these findings.

Amisulpride for older patients with long-standing schizophrenia

A large and growing number of older people across the world experience schizophrenia. Recommendations for their treatment are largely based on data extrapolated from studies of the use of antipsychotic medications in younger populations. The present study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of amisulpride monotherapy in a diagnostically homogeneous group of elderly patients without cognitive impairment experiencing schizophrenia (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria for schizophrenia). Mortality and rehospitalization for a 5-year period were the predefined outcome measures. We conducted a retrospective chart review of all elderly (60 years and older) schizophrenia patients treated in a large tertiary care center. Of the 527 elderly schizophrenia patients for a 5-year period (2007-2013), 30 patients, mean (SD) age of 67.5 (5.8) years, were treated with amisulpride monotherapy. There were 19 women and 11 men in the analyzed group. Mean duration of disease was 34.4 years. All had been exposed to at least 3 first- and second-generation antipsychotics before amisulpride treatment. Amisulpride was very well tolerated by the patients, and mortality rate (10% vs 19%) was significantly lower than that of other first- and second-generation antipsychotics (P < 0.02). Rehospitalization rates with amisulpride were significantly lower than those with other second-generation antipsychotics (P < 0.001). We tentatively conclude that our preliminary results demonstrate that amisulpride is an efficacious and safe atypical antipsychotic for the treatment for elderly schizophrenia patients.

Effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs against hostility in patients with schizophrenia in the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) study

INTRODUCTION

Aggressive behavior can be a dangerous complication of schizophrenia. Hostility is related to aggression. This study aimed to compare the effects of olanzapine, perphenazine, risperidone, quetiapine, and ziprasidone on hostility in schizophrenia.

METHODS

We used the data that were acquired in the 18-month Phase 1 of the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) study. We analyzed the scores of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) hostility item in a subset of 614 patients who showed at least minimal hostility (a score ≥ 2) at baseline.

RESULTS

The primary analysis of hostility indicated an effect of difference between treatments (F(4,1487) = 7.78, P < 0.0001). Olanzapine was significantly superior to perphenazine and quetiapine at months 1, 3, 6, and 9. It was also significantly superior to ziprasidone at months 1, 3, and 6, and to risperidone at months 3 and 6.

DISCUSSION

Our results are consistent with those of a similar post-hoc analysis of hostility in first-episode subjects with schizophrenia enrolled in the European First-Episode Schizophrenia Trial (EUFEST) trial, where olanzapine demonstrated advantages compared with haloperidol, quetiapine, and amisulpride.

CONCLUSION

Olanzapine demonstrated advantages in terms of a specific antihostility effect over the other antipsychotics tested in Phase 1 of the CATIE trial.

Aggression in Psychoses

Most individuals diagnosed with a mental illness are not violent, but some mentally ill patients commit violent acts. PubMed database was searched for articles published between 1980 and November 2013 using the combination of key words “schizophrenia” or “bipolar disorder” with “aggression” or “violence.” In comparison with the general population, there is approximately a twofold increase of risk of violence in schizophrenia without substance abuse comorbidity and ninefold with such comorbidity. The risk in bipolar disorder is at least as high as in schizophrenia. Most of the violence in bipolar disorder occurs during the manic phase. Violence among adults with schizophrenia may follow two distinct pathways: one associated with antisocial conduct and another associated with the acute psychopathology, particularly anger and delusions. Clozapine is the most effective treatment of aggressive behavior in schizophrenia. Emerging evidence suggests that olanzapine may be the second most effective treatment. Treatment nonadherence greatly increases the risk of violent behavior, and poor insight as well as hostility is associated with nonadherence. Nonpharmacological methods of treatment of aggression in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder are increasingly important. Cognitive behavioral approaches appear to be effective in cases where pharmacotherapy alone is not sufficient.

The psychopharmacology of aggressive behavior: a translational approach: part 2: clinical studies using atypical antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, and lithium

Patients experiencing mental disorders are at an elevated risk for developing aggressive behavior. In the past 10 years, the psychopharmacological treatment of aggression has changed dramatically owing to the introduction of atypical antipsychotics on the market and the increased use of anticonvulsants and lithium in the treatment of aggressive patients.This review (second of 2 parts) uses a translational medicine approach to examine the neurobiology of aggression, discussing the major neurotransmitter systems implicated in its pathogenesis (serotonin, glutamate, norepinephrine, dopamine, and γ-aminobutyric acid) and the neuropharmacological rationale for using atypical antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, and lithium in the therapeutics of aggressive behavior. A critical review of all clinical trials using atypical antipsychotics (aripiprazole, clozapine, loxapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone, and amisulpride), anticonvulsants (topiramate, valproate, lamotrigine, and gabapentin), and lithium are presented. Given the complex, multifaceted nature of aggression, a multifunctional combined therapy, targeting different receptors, seems to be the best strategy for treating aggressive behavior. This therapeutic strategy is supported by translational studies and a few human studies, even if additional randomized, double-blind, clinical trials are needed to confirm the clinical efficacy of this framework.

Pharmacological management of acute and persistent aggression in forensic psychiatry settings

Aggressive behaviour is common in forensic psychiatric settings. The aetiology of aggressive behaviour is multifactorial and can be driven by psychosis, impulsivity, psychopathy, intoxication, cognitive impairment, or a combination of all of these. Recognition of the different factors behind the aggression can inform medication selection and the relative need for specific environmental and behavioural interventions in a forensic psychiatric setting. Acute agitation needs to be managed quickly and effectively before further escalation of the behavioural dyscontrol occurs. Benzodiazepines and/or antipsychotic medications are often used and can be given intramuscularly to achieve a rapid onset of action. Available are intramuscular preparations of second-generation antipsychotics that have similar efficacy to lorazepam and haloperidol in reducing agitation, but are well tolerated and not associated with the extrapyramidal adverse effects, including akathisia, that can plague the older first-generation antipsychotics. The longer-term management of persistent aggressive behaviour can be quite complex. A major obstacle is that the causality of aggressive events can differ from patient to patient, and also from event to event in the same patient. For patients with schizophrenia and persistent aggressive behaviour, clozapine is recommended both for its superior antipsychotic effect and its specific anti-hostility effect. Mood stabilizers such as valproate may be helpful in instances of poor impulsivity and personality disorders. Other agents that have been successfully used include β-adrenoceptor antagonists (β-blockers) and antidepressants.

Representation of people with intellectual disabilities in randomised controlled trials on antipsychotic treatment for behavioural problems

BACKGROUND

Behavioural problems are common in people with intellectual disability (ID) and are often treated with antipsychotics.

AIM

To establish the frequency and characteristics of people with ID included in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on antipsychotic treatment for behavioural problems, and to investigate the quality of these RCTs.

METHODS

A literature search in EMBASE, PubMed and Cochrane was performed and reviewed.

RESULTS

People with ID participated in 27 of the 100 included RCTs. The RCTs were of good quality but smaller compared with trials in patients with dementia or schizophrenia (average sample sizes = 55, 124 and 374). In 13/27 trials no clear definition of ID was given. Over 25 different outcome measures were used to assess behavioural problems.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies in which people with ID are included are of a sufficient quality, but of a small size. The heterogeneity in the characteristics of the ID population included as well as in the applied assessment instruments makes performing meta-analyses unfeasible.

Antipsychotic medication for early episode schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Long-term treatment with antipsychotic medications in early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders is common, but both short and long-term effects on the illness are unclear. There have been numerous suggestions that people with early episodes of schizophrenia appear to respond differently than those with multiple prior episodes. The number of episodes may moderate response to drug treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antipsychotic medication treatment on people with early episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group register (July 2007) as well as references of included studies. We contacted authors of studies for further data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies with a majority of first and second episode schizophrenia spectrum disorders comparing initial antipsychotic medication treatment with placebo, milieu, or psychosocial treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Working independently, we critically appraised records from 681studies, of which five studies met inclusion criteria. John Rathbone from the Schizophrenia Group supported us with the data extraction. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) where possible. For continuous data, we calculated mean difference (MD). We calculated numbers needed to treat/harm (NNT/NNH) where appropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

Five studies with a combined N = 998 met inclusion criteria. Four studies (N = 724) provided leaving the study early data and results suggested that individuals treated with a typical antipsychotic medication are less likely to leave the study early than those treated with placebo (Chlorpromazine: 3 RCTs N = 353, RR 0.4 CI 0.3 to 0.5, NNT 3.2, Fluphenaxine: 1 RCT N = 240, RR 0.5 CI 0.3 to 0.8, NNT 5; Thioridazine: 1 RCT N = 236, RR 0.44 CI 0.3 to 0.7, NNT 4.3, Trifulperazine: 1 RCT N = 94, RR 0.96 CI 0.3 to 3.6). Two studies (Cole 1964; May 1976) contributed data to assessment of side effects and present a general pattern of more frequent side effects among individuals treated with typical antipsychotic medications compared to placebo. Rappaport 1978 suggested a higher rehospitalisation rate for those receiving chlorpromazine compared to placebo (N = 80, RR 2.29 CI 1.3 to 4.0, NNH 2.9). However, a higher attrition in the placebo group is likely to have introduced a survivor bias into this comparison, as this difference becomes non-significant in a sensitivity analysis on intent-to-treat participants (N = 127, RR 1.69 CI 0.9 to 3.0). One study (May 1976) contributes data to a comparison of trifluoperazine to psychotherapy on long-term health in favour of the trifluoperazine group (N = 92, MD 5.8 CI 1.6 to 0.0); however, data from this study are also likely to contain biases due to selection and attrition. One study (Mosher 1995) contributes data to a comparison of typical antipsychotic medication to psychosocial treatment on six-week outcome measures of global psychopathology (N = 89, MD 0.01 CI -0.6 to 0.6) and global improvement (N = 89, MD -0.03 CI -0.5 to 0.4), indicating no between-group differences. On the whole, there is very little useable data in the few studies meeting inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

With only a few studies meeting inclusion criteria, and with limited useable data in these studies, it is not possible to arrive at definitive conclusions. The preliminary pattern of evidence suggests that people with early episode schizophrenia treated with typical antipsychotic medications are less likely to leave the study early, but more likely to experience medication-related side effects. Data are too sparse to assess the effects of antipsychotic medication on outcomes in early episode schizophrenia.

Brain serotonin receptors and transporters: initiation vs. termination of escalated aggression

RATIONALE

Recent findings have shown a complexly regulated 5-HT system as it is linked to different kinds of aggression.

OBJECTIVE

We focus on (1) phasic and tonic changes of 5-HT and (2) state and trait of aggression, and emphasize the different receptor subtypes, their role in specific brain regions, feed-back regulation and modulation by other amines, acids and peptides.

RESULTS

New pharmacological tools differentiate the first three 5-HT receptor families and their modulation by GABA, glutamate and CRF. Activation of 5-HT(1A), 5-HT(1B) and 5-HT(2A/2C) receptors in mesocorticolimbic areas, reduce species-typical and other aggressive behaviors. In contrast, agonists at 5-HT(1A) and 5-HT(1B) receptors in the medial prefrontal cortex or septal area can increase aggressive behavior under specific conditions. Activation of serotonin transporters reduce mainly pathological aggression. Genetic analyses of aggressive individuals have identified several molecules that affect the 5-HT system directly (e.g., Tph2, 5-HT(1B), 5-HT transporter, Pet1, MAOA) or indirectly (e.g., Neuropeptide Y, αCaMKII, NOS, BDNF). Dysfunction in genes for MAOA escalates pathological aggression in rodents and humans, particularly in interaction with specific experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

Feedback to autoreceptors of the 5-HT(1) family and modulation via heteroreceptors are important in the expression of aggressive behavior. Tonic increase of the 5-HT(2) family expression may cause escalated aggression, whereas the phasic increase of 5-HT(2) receptors inhibits aggressive behaviors. Polymorphisms in the genes of 5-HT transporters or rate-limiting synthetic and metabolic enzymes of 5-HT modulate aggression, often requiring interaction with the rearing environment.

Behavioral and pharmacogenetics of aggressive behavior

Serotonin (5-HT) has long been considered as a key transmitter in the neurocircuitry controlling aggression. Impaired regulation of each subtype of 5-HT receptor, 5-HT transporter, synthetic and metabolic enzymes has been linked particularly to impulsive aggression. The current summary focuses mostly on recent findings from pharmacological and genetic studies. The pharmacological treatments and genetic manipulations or polymorphisms of aspecific target (e.g., 5-HT1A receptor) can often result in inconsistent results on aggression, due to "phasic" effects of pharmacological agents versus "trait"-like effects of genetic manipulations. Also, the local administration of a drug using the intracranial microinjection technique has shown that activation of specific subtypes of 5-HT receptors (5-HT1A and 5-HT1B) in mesocorticolimbic areas can reduce species-typical and other aggressive behaviors, but the same receptors in the medial prefrontal cortex or septal area promote escalated forms of aggression. Thus, there are receptor populations in specific brain regions that preferentially modulate specific types of aggression. Genetic studies have shown important gene-environment interactions; it is likely that the polymorphisms in the genes of 5-HT transporters or rate-limiting synthetic and metabolic enzymes of 5-HT (e.g., MAOA) determine the vulnerability to adverse environmental factors that escalate aggression. We also discuss the interaction between the 5-HT system and other systems. Modulation of 5-HT neurons in the dorsalraphe nucleus by GABA, glutamate and CRF profoundly regulate aggressive behaviors. Also, interactions of the 5-HT system with other neuropeptides(arginine vasopressin, oxytocin, neuropeptide Y, opioid) have emerged as important neurobiological determinants of aggression. Studies of aggression in genetically modified mice identified several molecules that affect the 5-HT system directly (e.g., Tph2, 5-HT1B, 5-HT transporter, Pet1, MAOA) or indirectly[e.g., BDNF, neuronal nitric oxide (nNOS), aCaMKII, Neuropeptide Y].The future agenda delineates specific receptor subpopulations for GABA, glutamate and neuropeptides as they modulate the canonical aminergic neurotransmitters in brainstem, limbic and cortical regions with the ultimate outcome of attenuating or escalating aggressive behavior.

Prescribing patterns and the use of therapeutic drug monitoring of psychotropic medication in a psychiatric high-security unit

The aim of this study was to investigate the use of psychotropic medication and therapeutic drug monitoring in a high-security psychiatric unit and to compare the doses and serum concentrations both with the recommended intervals and with the doses and serum concentrations in a control group. One hundred thirty-two patients were admitted in the period from January 2000 to December 2005. All available samples were used when comparing serum concentrations and doses with the recommended ranges. For the comparison of doses and serum concentration-to-dose (C:D) ratios with the control group only 1 sample from each patient was used. A total of 459 analyses of 27 different drugs in samples from 8 women and 73 men were included. The median number of therapeutic drug monitoring analyses per patient was 4 (range 1-29). Thirty-seven of the 81 patients (46%) used 2 or more antipsychotics at the same time. Clozapine, lamotrigine, olanzapine, quetiapine, ziprasidone, and zuclopenthixol were often given in doses above the recommended. The serum levels were frequently above those recommended for clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone, and zuclopenthixol. The serum levels were significantly higher in the study group than in the control group for clozapine, lamotrigine, quetiapine, and zuclopenthixol. The given dose was significantly higher in the study group than in the control group for clozapine, lamotrigine and zuclopenthixol. The C:D ratio was significantly lower in the study group than in the control group for olanzapine but higher for quetiapine. The non-evidence based practice of high-dose polypharmacy with several antipsychotics is widely used in this unit. The use of higher doses in the study group than in the control group was not due to differences in metabolism or adherence to treatment between the 2 groups. The frequent use of therapeutic drug monitoring did not seem to have a great impact on the prescribed doses.

Changes in positive and negative syndrome scale-derived hostility factor in adolescents with schizophrenia treated with aripiprazole: post hoc analysis of randomized clinical trial data

INTRODUCTION

This post hoc analysis evaluated the effects of aripiprazole on Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Hostility factor scores in adolescents with schizophrenia.

METHODS

In total, 302 adolescents (13-17 years) with schizophrenia were enrolled in a 6-week, multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comparing aripiprazole (10 or 30 mg/day) with placebo. The PANSS was the primary outcome measure. To determine the effect of aripiprazole on hostility, a post hoc analysis of the PANSS Hostility factor and individual items was performed.

RESULTS

Aripiprazole was superior to placebo in reducing PANSS Hostility factor scores in adolescents with schizophrenia. After 6 weeks, aripiprazole 10 mg/day and aripiprazole 30 mg/day showed a statistically significant improvement versus placebo (-3.0, -3.7, versus -2.1; p < 0.05; last observation carried forward [LOCF]) in the PANSS Hostility factor. For aripiprazole 30 mg/day, statistically significant separation from placebo was evident from week 3 through week 6 and at week 6 for aripiprazole 10 mg/day. Individual PANSS Hostility, Uncooperativeness, and Poor Impulse Control Items showed statistically significant improvement with aripiprazole 30 mg/day over placebo at end point.

CONCLUSIONS

This post hoc analysis shows that aripiprazole (10 and 30 mg/day) is an effective treatment for hostility symptoms in adolescents with schizophrenia. Clinical trials information: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00102063.

Risperidone dose for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Risperidone is a widely used antipsychotic drug for people with schizophrenia. It is important to get a balance between gaining the most positive effects for the least negative outcomes. The optimal dose of risperidone is the focus of this review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine risperidone dose response relationships for schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Groups Trials Register (July 2008) for all relevant references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All relevant randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and resolved disagreement by discussion with a third member of the team. When insufficient data were provided, we contacted the study authors. For homogenous dichotomous data we calculated fixed-effect relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (MD).

MAIN RESULTS

A consistent finding when risperidone ultra low doses (<2 mg/day) were compared with other doses (short-term data) was that more people left early because of insufficient response (n=456, 1 RCT, RR when compared with standard-low (>==4-<6 mg/day) 12.48 CI 1.43 to 4.30). The insufficient response for this low dose is reflected in measures of mental state. When low doses (>==2-<4 mg/day) are used and compared with standard-higher doses (>==6-<10 mg/day) and the high dose range (>==10 mg/day), more people left early because of insufficient response (>==4-<6 mg/day: n=173, 2 RCTs, RR 4.05 CI 1.09 to 15.07; >==10 mg/day: n=173, 2 RCTs, RR 1.92 CI 1.36 to 2.70). For the outcome of 'no clinically important improvement' results favour standard-higher doses (n=272, 2 RCTs, RR 2.26 CI 0.81 to 6.34). When low doses are compared with other higher doses, we found no differences in terms of cardiovascular, CNS, endocrine or gastrointestinal adverse effects. Unspecified EPS were more frequent with the higher doses (>==10 mg: n=262, 2 RCTs, RR 0.45 CI 0.24 to 0.84). One trial did find that endpoint scores on PANSS significantly favoured a low dose when compared with >==4-6 mg/day (n=124, 1 RCT, MD -12.40 CI -17.01 to -7.79). When >==4-<6 mg/day is compared with high doses, less people left early (n=677, 1 RCT, RR leaving any reason 0.74 CI 0.54 to 1.00; n=677, 1 RCT, RR due to adverse effects 0.56 CI 0.32 to 0.97). >==4-<6 mg/day was no worse than >==6-<10 mg/day for 'no clinically important improvement' (n=39, 1 RCT, RR on CGI-I 0.79 CI 0.29 to 2.17). People allocated >==4-<6 mg/day had more movement disorders than those on a low dose (n=124 1 RCT, RR 2.28 CI 1.67 to 3.11). When >==6-<10 mg/day is compared with standard-lower doses and a high dose range, there is no significant difference in terms of proportions leaving early. >==6-<10 mg/day is better than a low dose for 'no clinical important improvement' (n=172, 2 RCTs, RR 0.76 CI 0.61 to 0.94). Overall >==6-<10 mg/day caused less problems especially in EPS when compared with >==10mg/day (n=261, 2 RCTs, RR unspecified EPS 0.56 CI 0.31 to 0.99). When a high dose was compared with a low dose less people left early (n=70, 1 RCT, RR 0.43 CI 0.26 to 0.71) but not when compared with a standard-lower dose (n=677, 1 RCT, RR leaving due to adverse event 1.78 CI 1.03 to 3.09). >==10 mg/day was better than a low dose in terms of 'no clinical important improvement' (n=257, 2 RCTs, RR 0.64 CI 0.50 to 0.82), but worse than a standard-higher dose (>==6-<10 mg/day: n=255, 2 RCTs, RR 1.22 CI 1.00 to 1.51). >==10 mg/day caused more unspecified EPS adverse effects and any drug for adverse events when compared with a standard-higher dose and with a low dose.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is still lack of strong evidence for an optimal dose for clinical practice. The quality of trials suggests that an over estimate of effect is likely and we think this is most probably for the mid-range doses. One such dose (standard-lower dose range, 4-<6 mg/day) does seem optimal for clinical response and adverse effects. Weak evidence suggests that low doses (>==2-<4 mg/day) may be of value for people in their first episode of illness. High doses (>==10 mg/day) did not confer any advantage over any other dose ranges and caused more adverse effects, especially for movement disorders. Ultra low dose (<2 mg/day) seemed useless. We advise the use of dosages from low dose to standard-lower dose for different kinds of individual patients. Future trials should focus on specific populations, e.g. those in their first episode, with acute exacerbation, in relapse or refractory to treatment, and should also test the optimal dose of risperidone over a longer period of time and in the community.

The effectiveness of technology-based patient education on self-reported deprivation of liberty among people with severe mental illness: a randomized controlled trial

Deprivation of liberty (DL) in psychiatric inpatient care is common worldwide. As liberty is a central element of patients' rights, there is a need to develop most effective methods supporting patients' personal liberty. The article presents initial results from a study to determine the effectiveness of an information technology (IT)-based patient education programme on patients' experiences of being deprived of their liberty during their in-hospital stay. An overall sample of 311 patients with schizophrenia spectrum psychosis was randomized into three groups: an intervention group with needs-based computerized patient education, a patient education group with conventional education and a control group with standard care. Data on the general experience of DL were collected at baseline and during the patient discharge process. In general, all patients experienced less DL at the time of their discharge. The change in patients' experiences of their DL did not differ statistically between the three groups. Male patients in the standard care group were significantly more likely to drop out of the study than female patients. Although technology-based patient education was not found to be superior to other approaches, we did not find any reason to inhibit its utilization in patient care among persons with severe mental health problems. From the healthcare organizations' perspective, a cost-effectiveness analysis is needed, as the IT education was slightly more time-consuming.

Heterogeneity of violence in schizophrenia and implications for long-term treatment

AIMS

Most patients with schizophrenia are not violent. However, persistent violent behaviour in a minority of patients presents a therapeutic challenge. Published treatment guidelines and most pharmacological and epidemiological literature on violence in schizophrenia treat overt physical aggression as a homogeneous phenomenon. The aim of this review is to address the subtyping of violent behaviour in schizophrenia, and to relate the subtypes to treatment.

METHOD

Literature describing subtypes of violence in schizophrenia and the treatment of this problem was reviewed. 'Schizophrenia', 'violence', 'aggression', 'hostility' and 'personality disorders' were the principal search terms describing behaviours. Generic names of individual atypical antipsychotics and mood stabilisers were used in treatment searches.

RESULTS

There are at least three aetiological subtypes of violence in schizophrenia (i) that related directly to positive psychotic symptoms, (ii) impulsive violence and (iii) violence stemming from comorbidity with personality disorders, particularly psychopathy. Current treatment of violence in schizophrenia relies on antipsychotics and mood stabilisers. The evidence of effectiveness is relatively strong for clozapine, but inconsistent for other treatments. No systematic recommendations relating the treatment to aetiological subtypes of violence were found.

DISCUSSION

The inconsistent effectiveness of the current treatments of violent behaviour in schizophrenia is due, at least in part, to the aetiological heterogeneity of that behaviour. We should not expect that any given pharmacological treatment will be equally effective in reducing violent behaviour caused by psychosis, impaired impulse control or personality disorder.

CONCLUSION

Violence in schizophrenia is aetiologically heterogeneous. This heterogeneity has therapeutic implications that impact clinical practice today and should be further explored in future studies.

Risperidone alone versus risperidone plus valproate in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia and hostility

The objective of the study was to compare the antiaggressive efficacy of risperidone monotherapy versus risperidone plus valproate in patients with schizophrenia. This was an 8-week open-label randomized parallel group clinical trial in hospitalized adults diagnosed with schizophrenia and with hostile behavior. Patients were randomly assigned to receive risperidone alone (n=16) or risperidone plus valproate (n=17). To minimize bias, raters were blinded to the assigned treatment arm. Outcome measures included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI), Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS), Nurses Observation Scale for Inpatient Evaluation (NOSIE), and the Overt Aggression Scale (OAS). Although significantly fewer patients randomized to monotherapy completed the study (chi(2)=8.62, d.f.=1, P=0.003), no significant differences between monotherapy or combination treatment were observed in change of the BDHI, BIS, NOSIE, PANSS total scores, OAS measures of aggressive behavior or the hostility item of the PANSS. In conclusion, although patients receiving combination treatment were more likely to complete the study, we were unable to detect a meaningful advantage for combination therapy as measured by rating scales.

Supportive therapy for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Supportive therapy is often used in everyday clinical care and in evaluative studies of other treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the effects of supportive therapy for people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register of trials (January 2004), supplemented by manual reference searching and contact with authors of relevant reviews or studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials involving people with schizophrenia and comparing supportive therapy with any other treatment or standard care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reliably selected studies, quality rated these and extracted data. For dichotomous data, we estimated the relative risk (RR) fixed effect with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where possible, we undertook intention-to-treat analyses. For statistically significant results, we calculated the number needed to treat/harm (NNT/H). We estimated heterogeneity (I-square technique) and publication bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 relevant studies. We found no significant differences in the primary outcomes between supportive therapy and standard care. There were, however, significant differences favouring other psychological or psychosocial treatments over supportive therapy. These included hospitalisation rates (3 RCTs, n=241, RR 2.12 CI 1.2 to 3.6, NNT 8) but not relapse rates (5 RCTs, n=270, RR 1.18 CI 0.9 to 1.5). We found that the results for general functioning significantly favoured cognitive behavioural therapy compared with supportive therapy in the short (1 RCT, n=70, WMD -9.50 CI -16.1 to -2.9), medium (1 RCT, n=67, WMD -12.6 CI -19.4 to -5.8) and long term (2 RCTs, n=78, SMD -0.50 CI -1.0 to -0.04), but the clinical significance of these findings based on few data is unclear. Participants were less likely to be satisfied with care if receiving supportive therapy compared with cognitive behavioural treatment (1 RCT, n=45, RR 3.19 CI 1.0 to 10.1, NNT 4 CI 2 to 736). The results for mental state and symptoms were unclear in the comparisons with other therapies. No data were available to assess the impact of supportive therapy on engagement with structured activities.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient data to identify a difference in outcome between supportive therapy and standard care. There are several outcomes, including hospitalisation and general mental state, indicating advantages for other psychological therapies over supportive therapy but these findings are based on a few small studies. Future research would benefit from larger trials that use supportive therapy as the main treatment arm rather than the comparator.

Supportive therapy for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Supportive therapy is often used in everyday clinical care and in evaluative studies of other treatments.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the effects of supportive therapy for people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's register of trials (January 2004), supplemented by manual reference searching and contact with authors of relevant reviews or studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised trials involving people with schizophrenia and comparing supportive therapy with any other treatment or standard care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We reliably selected studies, quality rated these and extracted data. For dichotomous data, we estimated the relative risk (RR) fixed effect with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Where possible, we undertook intention-to-treat analyses. For statistically significant results, we calculated the number needed to treat/harm (NNT/H). We estimated heterogeneity (I-square technique) and publication bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 relevant studies. We found no significant differences in the primary outcomes between supportive therapy and standard care. There were, however, significant differences favouring other psychological or psychosocial treatments over supportive therapy. These included hospitalisation rates (3 RCTs, n=241, RR 2.12 CI 1.2 to 3.6, NNT 8) but not relapse rates (5 RCTs, n=270, RR 1.18 CI 0.9 to 1.5). We found that the results for general functioning significantly favoured cognitive behavioural therapy compared with supportive therapy in the short (1 RCT, n=70, WMD -9.50 CI -16.1 to -2.9), medium (1 RCT, n=67, WMD -12.6 CI -19.4 to -5.8) and long term (2 RCTs, n=78, SMD -0.50 CI -1.0 to -0.04), but the clinical significance of these findings based on few data is unclear. Participants were less likely to be satisfied with care if receiving supportive therapy compared with cognitive behavioural treatment (1 RCT, n=45, RR 3.19 CI 1.0 to 10.1, NNT 4 CI 2 to 736). The results for mental state and symptoms were unclear in the comparisons with other therapies. No data were available to assess the impact of supportive therapy on engagement with structured activities.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient data to identify a difference in outcome between supportive therapy and standard care. There are several outcomes, including hospitalisation and general mental state, indicating advantages for other psychological therapies over supportive therapy but these findings are based on a few small studies. Future research would benefit from larger trials that use supportive therapy as the main treatment arm rather than the comparator.

Risperidone in the management of disruptive behavior disorders

Disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs) represent a spectrum of disorders, including conduct disorder and oppositional-defiant disorder. The atypical antipsychotic risperidone may be useful for the management of patients with DBDs. Clinical data on risperidone have demonstrated efficacy and satisfactory tolerability in improving angry, aggressive, self-injurious, and disruptive symptoms and behavior in children with pervasive developmental disorders and mood disorders. This paper reviews the results of recent studies that have evaluated the efficacy and safety of risperidone in the treatment of pediatric patients with DBDs. Because concerns have been raised regarding the safety of atypical antipsychotic treatment in pediatric patients, this paper further evaluates safety risks by presenting newly completed analyses of movement disorders, prolactin concentrations, body weight, and cognitive function data from short- and long-term studies in this patient population. A comprehensive review of all of the findings suggests that risperidone is an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for children and adolescents with DBDs. As with all antipsychotics, practitioners should monitor young patients' growth, weight, sexual maturation, and metabolic parameters.

Effectiveness of clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and haloperidol monotherapy in reducing hostile and aggressive behavior in outpatients treated for schizophrenia: a prospective naturalistic study (IC-SOHO)

OBJECTIVE

Antipsychotic medications may reduce hostile and aggressive behavior in schizophrenia. This study compared the effectiveness of antipsychotics in the treatment of aggression.

METHOD

The Intercontinental Schizophrenia Outpatient Health Outcomes (IC-SOHO) study compares the effectiveness of antipsychotic treatments in practice setting. Schizophrenia outpatients who initiated or changed to a new antipsychotic are followed in this non-interventional, prospective observational study for up to 3 years, with 6-months data now available on the entire cohort (N=7655). The presence or absence of verbal or physical hostility/aggression was assessed retrospectively for the period of 6 months before enrollment, and prospectively in the period of 6 months after enrollment (the study treatment period). At baseline, patients in five monotherapy treatment groups (combined N=3135) were prescribed one of the treatments: clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, or haloperidol, and had complete data.

RESULTS

Hostile/aggressive behavior was reduced during the treatment period. Olanzapine and risperidone were significantly superior to haloperidol and to clozapine in this respect. These results remained essentially unchanged when adjusting for baseline imbalances in age, gender, age of onset, and substance abuse.

CONCLUSIONS

As monotherapy, both olanzapine and risperidone were superior to haloperidol and clozapine in reducing aggression. The relative lack of effectiveness of clozapine may be specific to this study population.

Antipsychotic medication for elderly people with schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

A large and growing number of older people across the world suffer from schizophrenia. Recommendations for their treatment are largely based on data extrapolated from studies of the use of antipsychotic medications in younger populations. In addition most manufacturers of such medications recommend prescription of reduced doses to the elderly. The evidence base for these assumptions is unclear and raises obvious questions regarding the appropriateness of such prescribing practice.

OBJECTIVES

To find and assimilate good evidence of the effects of antipsychotic medication for treatment of schizophrenia in people over 65 years of age.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Register (May 2003). We inspected references of all included studies for further trials and contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All clinical randomised trials evaluating antipsychotic drugs for schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses in older people.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data independently. For homogenous dichotomous data, the random effects, relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence interval (CI) and, where appropriate, the numbers needed to treat (NNT) were calculated on an intention-to-treat basis. For continuous data, we calculated weighted mean differences (WMD).

MAIN RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty two elderly people with schizophrenia participated in three relevant randomised controlled studies. We were unable to extract usable data on quality of life, satisfaction, service use, or economic outcomes. One small study (n=18) compared thioridazine with remoxipride (RR leaving the study early 1.0 CI 0.07 to 13.6). A second study (n=175) compared risperidone with olanzapine. Global state 'not improved/worse' was not significantly different between treatments (n= 171, RR 1.26 CI 0.8 to 1.9); mental state PANSS total endpoint scores were also equivocal (n=171, RR 0.98 CI 0.76 to 1.26) as were all cognitive function tests. The third study (subset n=59) compared olanzapine with haloperidol and mental state change scores (BPRS WMD -3.60 CI -10.8 to 3.6; PANSS WMD -6.00 CI -18.3 to 6.3) were equivocal.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antipsychotics may be widely used in the treatment of elderly people with schizophrenia, however, based on this systematic review, there are little robust data available to guide the clinician with respect to the most appropriate drug to prescribe. Clearly reported large short, medium and long-term randomised controlled trials with participants, interventions and primary outcomes that are familiar to those wishing to help elderly people with schizophrenia are long overdue.

The Psychopharmacologic Treatment of Violent Youth

Aggressive violence has been described as the greatest problem and the most frequent reason for referrals in child and adolescent psychiatry. In this country we have only partially emerged from an epidemic of violence that was really an epidemic of youth violence. Thus it is hardly surprising that psychiatrists are being asked more and more frequently whether psychiatric medications might help to diminish the toll from this behavioral plague. Medications are useful and appropriate for only a small minority of the people who commit serious violence. Even when they are indicated, they can never be the sole treatment modality, but should be supplemented by psychological and social therapies. When the violence is a byproduct or symptom of an underlying mental illness, treating that illness is generally the most effective method of preventing future violence on a long-term basis. However, most violence is not committed by those who are mentally ill, and most of the mentally ill never commit a serious act of violence. That is why many attempts have been made to discover whether there are drugs that diminish the symptom, violence, even when there is no underlying mental illness for which drugs would normally be prescribed. In fact there are several, and their indications and use are reviewed here. Different principles govern the acute short-term emergency treatment of a violent crisis and the long-term treatment of those who are chronically and repetitively violent, and these differences are also summarized here.

Escalated Aggressive Behavior: New Pharmacotherapeutic Approaches and Opportunities

Psychopharmacologic studies of aggressive behavior in animals under controlled laboratory conditions have been instrumental in developing and evaluating specific and effective novel drug treatments that reduce aggressive behavior. An initial contribution of this research is to create experimental conditions that enable the display of aggressive and defensive acts and postures in species that engage in either dominance or territorial or maternal aggression. Quantitative ethological analyses allow the precise delineation of the sequential organization of aggressive bursts, providing a benchmark for assessing excessive or pathological forms of aggressive behavior. A second contribution of preclinical research is the development of experimental models of escalated forms of aggressive behavior, such as focusing on genetic predispositions or social provocations and frustrative experiences. A critical role of preclinical research is in the pharmacological and neurochemical analysis of aggressive behavior; for example, a host of undesirable side effects prompted a shift from classic dopaminergic neuroleptic compounds to the more recently developed atypical neuroleptics with effective and more specific anti-aggressive effects. The long-established role of brain serotonin in impulsive and escalated forms of aggressive behavior continues to be a focus of preclinical studies. New evidence differentiates dynamic state changes in corticolimbic serotonergic neurons during the termination of aggressive behavior from the deficient-serotonin trait in violence-prone individuals. It can be anticipated that currently developed tools for targeting the genes that code for specific subtypes of serotonin receptors will offer new therapeutic options for reducing aggressive behavior, and the 5-HT(1B) receptor appears to be a promising target. The modulation of GABA and GABA(A) receptors by 5-HT in corticolimbic neurons promises to be particularly relevant for specific forms of escalated aggressive behavior such as alcohol-heightened aggression.

Aggression and quantitative MRI measures of caudate in patients with chronic schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder

Caudate dysfunction is implicated in schizophrenia. However, little is known about the relationship between aggression and caudate volumes. Forty-nine patients received magnetic resonance imaging scanning in a double-blind treatment study in which aggression was measured. Caudate volumes were computed using a semiautomated method. The authors measured aggression with the Overt Aggression Scale and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. Larger caudate volumes were associated with greater levels of aggression. The relationship between aggression and caudate volumes may be related to the iatrogenic effects of long-term treatment with typical antipsychotic agents or to a direct effect of schizophrenic processes on the caudate.

Quantitative MRI measures of orbitofrontal cortex in patients with chronic schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder

The relationship between orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) volumes and functional domains in treatment-resistant patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder is poorly understood. OFC dysfunction is implicated in several of the behaviors that are abnormal in schizophrenia. However, little is known about the relationship between these behaviors and OFC volumes. Forty-nine patients received magnetic resonance imaging scanning as part of a double-blind treatment study in which psychiatric symptomatology, neuropsychological function, and aggression were measured. OFC volumes were manually traced on anatomical images. Psychiatric symptomatology was measured with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Aggression was measured with the Overt Aggression Scale (OAS) and with the PANSS. Neuropsychological function was assessed using a comprehensive test battery. Larger right OFC volumes were associated with poorer neuropsychological function. Larger left OFC gray matter volumes and larger OFC white matter volumes bilaterally were associated with greater levels of aggression. These findings are discussed in the context of potential iatrogenic effects.

Risperidone: an open-label, observational study of the efficacy, tolerability, and prescribing behavior in acutely exacerbated patients with schizophrenia

OBJECTIVE

Efficacy of atypical antipsychotic in acute schizophrenic episodes is still in debate. This study evaluated treatment practices over 7 years of initial treatment with oral risperidone in acutely exacerbated patients with schizophrenia and in a subgroup of highly agitated, tense, and aggressive patients. Additionally, the study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of risperidone in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

In a prospective, multicenter, observational trial from 1996 to 2002, patients with schizophrenia experiencing acute symptom exacerbations were treated with risperidone within 24 hours of inpatient admission. Patients with a total score of > or =15 points on the agitation subscale of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) were defined as highly agitated. Efficacy measures were carried out with a modified PANSS, the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS).

RESULTS

A total of 1625 patients were evaluated. Despite prescription of decreasing risperidone dosages over 7 years, efficacy was maintained and tolerability improved significantly. Significant symptom relief occurred in all patients and was more pronounced in the subgroup of highly agitated patients (n = 256; P < 0.001 for PANSS, BPRS, and CGI). At Week 6, the mean daily dosage of risperidone was 4.8 mg in the highly agitated patients and 4.7 mg in the remaining patients, and more than 55% of all patients were receiving risperidone as monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Prescribing patterns with risperidone in patients with acutely exacerbated schizophrenia, including highly agitated patients, changed with the experience gained with this compound. In routine clinical practice in this indication, risperidone was found to be effective and well tolerated.

The effect of quetiapine on aggression and hostility in patients with schizophrenia

A post hoc analysis of data from three placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trials was carried out to determine the efficacy of quetiapine in aggression and hostility in patients with schizophrenia. Quetiapine treatment induced statistically significantly greater improvements in BPRS positive symptom cluster scores and three measures of hostility derived from the BPRS, compared with placebo, in patients symptomatic at baseline. A path analysis showed that the improvements in hostility were highly correlated with improvements in positive symptoms and there was no consistent relationship between sedation and hostility. Aggressive behaviour appears to be related to positive symptoms of schizophrenia. Quetiapine may be a suitable option for patients with schizophrenia and aggressive behaviour.

Oral risperidone with lorazepam versus oral zuclopenthixol with lorazepam in the treatment of acute psychosis in emergency psychiatry: a prospective, comparative, open-label study

Acutely psychotic patients presenting as psychiatric emergencies with aggression or agitation are often administered conventional antipsychotics intramuscularly. However, patients view intramuscular administration as coercive, and conventional antipsychotics are often associated with adverse events. In this open study, consecutive adult patients presenting with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or other psychotic disorder were assigned to oral risperidone 2-6 mg/day (n = 48) or oral zuclopenthixol 20-50 mg/day (n = 27) for 7-14 days. Lorazepam (either oral or intramuscular) was administered to both groups as needed. Patients were assessed regularly until day 14 or discharge. Mean Positive And Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) aggression scores (sum of item scores on excitement, poor impulse control, hostility and uncooperativeness) decreased steadily and similarly in both groups; the mean changes from baseline were statistically significant at days 10 and 14 and at study end-point. The mean decrease at study end-point in the PANSS component score for hostility was statistically significant in the risperidone group, but not in the zuclopenthixol group. Social Dysfunction and Aggression Scale aggression scores and Clinical Global Impression scores decreased significantly and similarly in both groups. Overall, 18.7% of patients showed minor extrapyramidal symptoms during the study, but only 16.7% of risperidone-treated patients, compared to 59.3% of zuclopenthixol-treated patients, received anti-parkinsonian medication (p < 0.001). Lorazepam was administered to all of the patients assigned to risperidone and to 89% of those assigned to zuclopenthixol. Oral risperidone plus lorazepam is a convenient, effective and well-tolerated alternative to conventional antipsychotics for the treatment of acute psychosis in emergency psychiatry.

Neuroimaging studies of violence and antisocial behavior

The neurobiological basis of violence and antisocial behavior is poorly understood. Lesion studies have implicated the frontal and temporal lobes in such phenomena. Recent neuroimaging studies have provided more detailed information on the neurobiological correlates of violence and antisocial behavior. Moreover, the results of such imaging studies extend findings from prior lesion studies. These results suggest that violent and antisocial behavior is associated with disruptions in frontotemporal neural systems. This article reviews the neuroimaging literature on violence and antisocial behavior and discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the different methods that have been used in such studies. The author reviews findings from cerebral psychophysiology studies (electroencephalographic studies and evoked potentials), as well as from studies using positron emission tomography (PET), single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The article concludes with a discussion of useful directions for future research. It is clear that the use of neuroimaging methods in combination offers the greatest promise for progress in the understanding of the neural basis of violence and antisocial behavior.

The new and evolving pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia

Based on the evidence presented here, the following tentative conclusions can be drawn. Atypical antipsychotics (except amisulpride) have shown superiority over placebo in acute schizophrenia. Compared with conventional antipsychotics, they are at least as effective. Generally, analyses employing conservative criteria (e.g., Cochrane reviews) report few efficacy differences between atypical and conventional agents. There are now many well-controlled studies indicating modest advantages for the atypical antipsychotics, however, particularly in specific symptom domains. For the treatment of negative symptoms, olanzapine and to a lesser extent amisulpride seem most promising. Risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine display advantages in improving cognitive and depressive symptoms. There are indications that the atypical antipsychotics are associated with decreased likelihood of rehospitalization and improved quality of life. In head-to-head comparisons of atypical antipsychotics, none have shown consistent efficacy advantages. In severely refractory samples, no atypical antipsychotics have consistently been shown to be as effective as clozapine or superior to conventional agents. There are indications, however, that risperidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine have advantages over conventional agents in less severely refractory patients. Few maintenance RCTs have been published, and efficacy advantages for atypical antipsychotics in prospective RCTs in first-episode schizophrenia have not been reported.

Treatment of the psychotic patient who is violent

Aggression among patients with serious mental illness occurs relatively infrequently, but it is a significant concern for patients, relatives, mental health professionals, and the public. Recognition of this risk and providing access and continuity of appropriate psychiatric care should be major clinical and administrative objectives in the management of violence in psychotic patients. To date, pharmacologic approaches have been unclear and inconsistent. At present, typical antipsychotics continue to have a primary role in acute management and in long-term management, in which noncompliance necessitates the use of long-acting depot neuroleptic preparations. Atypical antipsychotics in acute and long-acting intramuscular forms doubtless will influence and expand the choice for acute management of hostile psychotic patients and the long-term management of poorly compliant patients who are at risk to become violent on relapse. Persistent aggression should be managed by atypical antipsychotics with a preferential indication for clozapine, for which the most data on efficacy are available. The role of adjunctive medications is presently unclear. A major focus of care should be to refine legal processes and to conduct intervention studies aimed at enhancing treatment compliance. Violence risk reduction is not only crucial from a societal perspective, but also it is a humanitarian necessity to alleviate the burden and stigma for patients with serious mental illness.

The controversy over "chemical restraint" in acute care psychiatry

In many healthcare settings, medications are considered a less invasive alternative to the use of physical restraint for agitated patients experiencing a behavioral crisis, a practice that is often referred to as "chemical restraint." However, recent federal regulations appear to equate chemical and physical restraint and to characterize both as extraordinary practices that should not be undertaken lightly. Although many clinicians consider the term "chemical restraint" pejorative, since it does not reflect the possibility that forced medication may be clinically necessary and have a beneficial effect, the term is embedded in recent regulatory language. The author first reviews the controversy over the concept of chemical restraint as it has developed in the mental health literature and regulatory policy. As yet there is no consensus among clinicians or policy makers whether such use of medications is a form of coercion or a form of patient-focused intensive care. The author then discusses precipitants of emergency care and clinical factors and situations that may lead to the use of medications in a way that might be considered chemical restraint. Such factors include clinical and demographic characteristics of patients, institutional characteristics, and staff perception and attitudes. In the final section of the article, the author reviews the recommendations concerning the emergency use of medications given in the Expert Consensus Guidelines on the Treatment of Behavioral Emergencies and discusses treatment developments that have occurred since the time of the survey on which those guidelines were based.