Guideline-Concordant Antipsychotic Use and Mortality in Schizophrenia

Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine , Baltimore, MD
Schizophrenia Bulletin (Impact Factor: 8.61). 10/2012; 39(5). DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbs097
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Objective:To determine if care concordant with 2009 Schizophrenia Patient Outcomes Research Team (PORT) pharmacological recommendations for schizophrenia is associated with decreased mortality.Methods:We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult Maryland Medicaid beneficiaries with schizophrenia and any antipsychotic use from 1994 to 2004 (N = 2132). We used Medicaid pharmacy data to measure annual and average antipsychotic continuity, to calculate chlorpromazine (CPZ) dosing equivalents, and to examine anti-Parkinson medication use. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to examine the relationship between antipsychotic continuity, antipsychotic dosing, and anti-Parkinson medication use and mortality.Results:Annual antipsychotic continuity was associated with decreased mortality. Among patients with annual continuity greater than or equal to 90%, the hazard ratio [HR] for mortality was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57-0.99) compared with patients with annual medication possession ratios (MPRs) of less than 10%. The HRs for mortality associated with continuous annual and average antipsychotic continuity were 0.75 (95% CI 0.58-0.98) and 0.84 (95% CI 0.58-1.21), respectively. Among users of first-generation antipsychotics, doses greater than or equal to 1500 CPZ dosing equivalents were associated with increased risk of mortality (HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.10-3.21), and use of anti-Parkinson medication was associated with decreased risk of mortality (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.95). Mental health visits were also associated with decreased mortality (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.93-0.98).Conclusions:Adherence to PORT pharmacological guidelines is associated with reduced mortality among patients with schizophrenia. Adoption of outcomes monitoring systems and innovative service delivery programs to improve adherence to the PORT guidelines should be considered.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The fact that individuals with schizophrenia have high cardiovascular morbidity and mortality is well established. However, risk status and moderators or mediators in the earliest stages of illness are less clear.
    JAMA Psychiatry 10/2014; 71(12). DOI:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2014.1314 · 12.01 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Our aim was to assess the impact of the most commonly used typical and atypical antipsychotics on mortality of patients with first-onset schizophrenia. We conducted a nationwide, register-based, five-year follow-up study of all patients presenting with first-onset of schizophrenia between 1998 and 2003. Details of reimbursed medicines were obtained from the register of Social Insurance Institution. After adjusting for age, gender, comorbid physical diseases and patient group, the use of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs), especially clozapine, olanzapine and quetiapine, was associated with reduced risk of all-cause mortality in patients with schizophrenia, while clozapine associated with lower suicide risk. First generation antipsychotics (FGAs), specifically levomepromazine, thioridazine or clorprothixene, were associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality. The FGAs, particularly clorprothixene, were associated with decreased suicide mortality. An increased likelihood for cardiovascular deaths was found among users of levomepromazine. In antidepressants, the use of mirtazapine associated with increased risk of suicide. Differences exist between FGAs' and SGAs' use in relation to mortality. These differences remain even when the patient's physical illness are taken into account when prescribing antipsychotic medication.
    Schizophrenia Research 08/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.schres.2013.07.043 · 4.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Most available quality indicators for hospitals are represented by simple ratios or proportions, and are limited to specific events. A generalized method that can be applied to diverse clinical events has not been developed. The aim of this study was to develop a simple method of evaluating physicians' prescription patterns for diverse events and their level of awareness of clinical practice guidelines. We developed a quantitative method called Prescription pattern Around Clinical Event (PACE), which is applicable to electronic health records (EHRs). Three discrete prescription patterns (intervention, maintenance, and discontinuation) were determined based on the prescription change index (PCI), which was calculated by means of the increase or decrease in the prescription rate after a clinical event. Hyperkalemia and Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) were used as example cases. We calculated the PCIs of 10 drugs related to hyperkalemia, categorized them into prescription patterns, and then compared the resulting prescription patterns with the known standards for hyperkalemia treatment. The hyperkalemia knowledge of physicians was estimated using a questionnaire and compared to the prescription pattern. Prescriptions for CDAD were also determined and compared to clinical knowledge. Clinical data of 1698, 348, and 1288 patients were collected from EHR data. The physicians prescribing behaviors for hyperkalemia and CDAD were concordant with the standard knowledge. Prescription patterns were well correlated with individual physicians' knowledge of hyperkalemia (κ = 0.714). Prescribing behaviors according to event severity or clinical condition were plotted as a simple summary graph. The algorithm successfully assessed the prescribing patterns from the EHR data. The prescription patterns were well correlated with physicians' knowledge. We expect that this algorithm will enable quantification of prescribers' adherence to clinical guidelines and be used to facilitate improved prescribing practices.
    PLoS ONE 10/2013; 8(10):e75214. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0075214 · 3.53 Impact Factor