Antipsychotic Use and Metabolic Monitoring in Individuals with Developmental Disabilities Served in a Medicaid Medical Home

This study describes antipsychotic use and metabolic monitoring rates among individuals with developmental disabilities enrolled in a subspecialty medical home (N = 826). Four hundred ninety-nine participants (60.4 %) were taking antipsychotics, which was associated with male gender (p = 0.01), intellectual disability with and without autism spectrum disorder (p = 0.001 and p = 0.04, respectively), and inversely associated with the youngest and oldest age categories (p = 0.001 and p = 0.04, respectively). Among those taking antipsychotics, annual metabolic monitoring rates ranged from 89 % (lipids) to 99 % (weight). Age was positively associated with glucose (p < 0.001) and lipid monitoring (p < 0.001). Adult participants with dyslipidemia (p < 0.01), prediabetes/diabetes (p = 0.04), and hypertension (p = 0.02) were significantly more likely to obtain lipid monitoring. These values exceeded previously reported rates suggesting the importance of an integrated care model.

Monitoring metabolic side effects of atypical antipsychotics in people with an intellectual disability

This audit was undertaken prospectively to examine the compliance of a group of psychiatrists against guidelines they developed for monitoring the onset of metabolic syndrome, a potential side effect of antipsychotic medication, especially second generation or atypical ones. Phase 1 of the audit was to set standards by a questionnaire survey of participating psychiatrists against Consensus Guidelines on monitoring (American Diabetic Association, 2004), which they favoured. The results led to modifying these guidelines to develop minimum acceptable standards against which their practice was audited in Phase 2. Although in Phase 1, 77% of the psychiatrists felt that they did some baseline recording, Phase 2 finding did not corroborate this--only 53.8% of the notes recorded the assessment of risk factors in personal history; 37.5% risk factors in family history; 31.7% baseline weight and 26.4% baseline blood sugar/lipid levels. In Phase 1, 85% of the psychiatrists thought that they carried out some of the recommended monitoring; our audit found the records of weight monitoring in 69.7% of the notes and blood sugar and lipids monitoring in 44.2%. People with intellectual disability have a shorter life expectancy and increased risk of early death when compared with the general population. Obesity is already a health issue for people with intellectual disability. We discuss the challenges faced by psychiatrists in implementing their own minimum acceptable standards and suggest measures to reduce the metabolic risk associated with antipsychotic medication through increasing awareness--use of information leaflets in accessible format, health promotion and use of side effect checklists and improving access--by working collaboratively with general practitioners utilising the forum of annual health checks.

Safety of antipsychotics in people with intellectual disability

BACKGROUND

Despite frequent use, little is known about the metabolic and endocrine side-effects of antipsychotics in individuals with intellectual disability.

AIMS

To compare indices of obesity, glucose, lipids and prolactin between antipsychotic-treated and antipsychotic-naive individuals with intellectual disability and also between participants with intellectual disability and controls from the general population.

METHOD

Observational study comparing 138 antipsychotic-treated and 64 antipsychotic-naive participants with intellectual disability in one National Health Service trust with general population controls.

RESULTS

Antipsychotic treatment comprised: risperidone 48%,olanzapine 18%, thioxanthenes 10%, other 24%; monotherapy 95% of participants; mean treatment duration 8 years;median daily chlorpromazine equivalent dose 108 mg(range 16–667). Metabolic indices were the same or more favourable in the intellectual disability group than the general population control group but overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes were more prevalent in the women in the intellectual disability group than the control group. Metabolic indices were similar, statistically or clinically, between the antipsychotic-treated and the antipsychotic-naive groups but there was a non-significant trend towards a higher rate of type 2 diabetes in the antipsychotic group. A total of 100%and 70% of participants on amisulpride/sulpiride and risperidone respectively had hyperprolactinaemia, with secondary hypogonadism in 77% and 4% of affected women and men.

CONCLUSIONS

Antipsychotics, on average, did not increase metabolic risk,although the existence of a susceptible subgroup at risk of diabetes cannot be excluded. Some antipsychotics induced hyperprolactinaemic hypogonadism, requiring active management. However, our findings suggest that antipsychotics at the low doses routinely prescribed for people with intellectual disability are generally safe in relation to metabolic adverse effects, even if efficacy remains poorly defined.

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.