Antipsychotic withdrawal-induced relapse predicts future relapses in institutionalized adults with severe intellectual disability

Deprescribing psychotropic medicines for behaviours that challenge in people with intellectual disabilities: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Clear evidence of overprescribing of psychotropic medicines to manage behaviours that challenges in people with intellectual disabilities has led to national programmes within the U.K. such as NHS England's STOMP to address this. The focus of the intervention in our review was deprescribing of psychotropic medicines in children and adults with intellectual disabilities. Mental health symptomatology and quality of life were main outcomes.

METHODS

We reviewed the evidence using databases Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL and Open Grey with an initial cut-off date of 22nd August 2020 and an update on 14th March 2022. The first reviewer (DA) extracted data using a bespoke form and appraised study quality using CASP and Murad tools. The second reviewer (CS) independently assessed a random 20% of papers.

RESULTS

Database searching identified 8675 records with 54 studies included in the final analysis. The narrative synthesis suggests that psychotropic medicines can sometimes be deprescribed. Positive and negative consequences were reported. Positive effects on behaviour, mental and physical health were associated with an interdisciplinary model.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first systematic review of the effects of deprescribing psychotropic medicines in people with intellectual disabilities which is not limited to antipsychotics. Main risks of bias were underpowered studies, poor recruitment processes, not accounting for other concurrent interventions and short follow up periods. Further research is needed to understand how to address the negative effects of deprescribing interventions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (registration number CRD42019158079).

Management of psychotropic medications in adults with intellectual disability: a scoping review

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE(S)

Psychotropic medications are commonly prescribed among adults with intellectual disability, often in the absence of a psychiatric diagnosis. The aim of this scoping review is to provide an overview of the extent, range, and nature of the available research on medication use and practices and medication management in people with intellectual disability taking psychotropic medications for behaviours that challenge.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A scoping review of research studies (qualitative, quantitative, and mixed design) and Grey Literature (English) was carried out. Databases included: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, JBI Evidence Synthesis, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO, and Scopus. A three-step search strategy was followed, with results screened by two independent reviewers. Data was extracted independently by two reviewers using a data extraction tool with results mapped and presented using a narrative form supported by tables and diagrams to the research questions.

RESULTS

Following the removal of duplicates, records were screened, full texts assessed, and 49 studies were included. Medication outcomes included reduced repetitive, stereotypic, and/or aggressive behaviours. High dosing/prescribing in the setting of an absent/unclear clinical indication was associated with worsening of symptoms for which psychotropics were prescribed. While psychotropics had a role in managing behaviours that challenge, reducing or discontinuing psychotropics is sometimes warranted. Study designs were frequently pragmatic resulting in small sample sizes and heterogeneous cohorts receiving different doses and combinations of medications. Access to multidisciplinary teams, guidelines, medication reviews, staff training, and enhanced roles for carers in decision-making were warranted to optimize psychotropic use.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings can inform prescribing interventions and highlight the need for timely and comprehensive patient outcome data, especially on long-term use of high doses of psychotropics and what happens when reduce or stop prescribing these doses.KEY MESSAGESPsychotropic medications are frequently prescribed for people with intellectual disabilities, often at high doses and these medications are associated with both positive and negative patient outcomes.Work to rationalize psychotropic use has been reported with interventions aiming to reduce polypharmacy or deprescribe a single psychotropic medicine. These interventions had mixed success and risk of relapse was documented in some studies.Limitations in sample size and heterogenous patient cohorts make it challenging to understand the risks and benefits associated with reducing or stopping psychotropic medicines.Patient, carer, and clinician partnerships are critical to advance medication management.

A structured programme to withdraw antipsychotics among adults with intellectual disabilities: The Cornwall experience

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic medications are used among 19%-58% of adults with intellectual disabilities to manage challenging behaviour against the NICE guideline recommendations. Studies show that it is possible to completely withdraw antipsychotics in about one third of adults with intellectual disabilities and a dose reduction of 50% or more in another third.

METHOD

In Cornwall, over three years the present authors developed a structured pathway to withdraw antipsychotics among adults with intellectual disabilities which involved people with intellectual disabilities and their carers, GPs, community learning disability team members and pharmacists.

RESULTS

The present authors managed to withdraw antipsychotics totally among 46.5% (33/71) and reduced over 50% of dosage in another 11.3% (8/71) of adults with intellectual disabilities. At three months follow-up no one required hospital admission or change in placement.

CONCLUSION

It is possible to withdraw/reduce antipsychotics in a high proportion of adults with intellectual disabilities if a concerted effort is made involving all stakeholders from the outset.

Reduction or discontinuation of antipsychotics for challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disability: a systematic review

The use of antipsychotics to manage challenging behaviour in adults with intellectual disability is widespread but controversial, and evidence is scarce. There is a perception that antipsychotics used in this context can be reduced or discontinued, and this has been a major focus of recent national policy. However, such an intervention risks harm as well as having potential benefits. We reviewed the available evidence and found that antipsychotics can be reduced or discontinued in a substantial proportion of adults who use them for challenging behaviour, although not always without adverse effects. There is a group which displays behavioural deterioration on antipsychotic reduction that prevents discontinuation; predictors of poor response could not be reliably identified. In view of the relatively scarce data and methodological limitations of the available studies, we cannot draw firm conclusions to inform a population level approach to this issue. Antipsychotic medication used for behaviour should be reviewed regularly and an individualised approach taken to treatment.

Nature and quality of antipsychotic prescribing practice in UK psychiatry of intellectual disability services

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotics are perceived to be over-used in the management of behavioural problems in people with an intellectual disability (ID). Published guidelines have set good practice standards for the use of these drugs for behavioural indications. We sought to identify the range of indications for which antipsychotic drugs are prescribed in people with ID and to audit clinical practice against the standards.

METHOD

Data were collected from the clinical records of individuals with ID who were under the care of mental health services in the UK, and prescribed an antipsychotic drug.

RESULTS

The sample comprised 2319 patients from 39 clinical services. Twenty-seven per cent of the patients had a diagnosis of a psychotic illness (ICD-10 F20-29) and 27% an affective illness (ICD-10 F30-39). The proportion who did not have a psychiatric diagnosis ranged from 6% of those with borderline/mild ID to 21% of those with severe/profound ID. Overall, the most common indications for prescribing an antipsychotic drug were comorbid psychotic illness, anxiety and agitation, and a range of behavioural disturbances. The prevalence of use of antipsychotic drugs to manage challenging behaviour in the absence of concomitant mental illness increased with the severity of ID and accounted for almost half of prescriptions in those with severe/profound ID. Adherence to the audit standards related to documentation of clinical indications and review of efficacy was high. Side effect monitoring was less assiduous.

CONCLUSIONS

In clinical practice, most prescriptions for antipsychotic drugs in people with ID are consistent with the evidence base and the overall quality of prescribing practice, as measured against recognised standards, is good, although in some patients potentially remedial side effects may not be detected and treated.