Across-sectional study of prescribing patterns in chronic psychiatric patients living in sheltered housing facilities

Department of Pharmacy, Division of Pharmacotherapy and Pharmaceutical Care, GUIDE, University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
International journal of clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (Impact Factor: 1.22). 04/2008; 46(3):146-50. DOI: 10.5414/CPP46146
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To analyze prescribing patterns of chronic psychiatric patients living in sheltered housing facilities, to identify the extent of polypharmacy and to estimate associated risks in this patient group.
In a retrospective cross-sectional study the prescription data of 323 chronic psychiatric patients (average age 48.5 years) living in sheltered housing facilities in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, were analyzed. Prescription data were obtained from pharmacy-dispensing records.
Patients received on average 4.6 drugs (95% CI, 4.3-4.9). The most frequently prescribed drugs were as expected antipsychotics, benzodiazepines and antimuscarinic drugs. Overall 25% (n=81) of patients received two or more antipsychotic drugs. A high proportion of patients (38%, n=124) received one benzodiazepine, and 15% (n=50) received two or more benzodiazepines.
Patients in our study received a worryingly high number of drugs, and a quarter of the population was subject to antipsychotic polypharmacy. This increases the risk that drug-drug interactions, adverse drug reactions and noncompliance occur. Our study indicates potentially low quality of prescribing and shows the need for reviewing and special monitoring of pharmacotherapy in this patient group.

Download full-text


Available from: Katja Taxis, Sep 16, 2015
5 Reads
  • Source
    03/2012; DOI:10.5350/DAJPN2012250105
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess the prevalence and correlates of antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) across decades and regions. Electronic PubMed/Google Scholar search for studies reporting on APP, published from 1970 to 05/2009. Median rates and interquartile ranges (IQR) were calculated and compared using non-parametric tests. Demographic and clinical variables were tested as correlates of APP in bivariate and meta-regression analyses. Across 147 studies (1,418,163 participants, 82.9% diagnosed with schizophrenia [IQR=42-100%]), the median APP rate was 19.6% (IQR=12.9-35.0%). Most common combinations included first-generation antipsychotics (FGAs)+second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) (42.4%, IQR=0.0-71.4%) followed by FGAs+FGAs (19.6%, IQR=0.0-100%) and SGAs+SGAs (1.8%, IQR=0.0-28%). APP rates were not different between decades (1970-1979:28.8%, IQR=7.5-44%; 1980-1989:17.6%, IQR=10.8-38.2; 1990-1999:22.0%, IQR=11-40; 2000-2009:19.2% IQR=14.4-29.9, p=0.78), but between regions, being higher in Asia and Europe than North America, and in Asia than Oceania (p<0.001). APP increased numerically by 34% in North America from the 1980s 12.7%) to 2000s (17.0%) (p=0.94) and decreased significantly by 65% from 1980 (55.5%) to 2000 (19.2%) in Asia (p=0.03), with non-significant changes in Europe. APP was associated with inpatient status (p<0.001), use of FGAs (p<0.0001) and anticholinergics (<0.001), schizophrenia (p=0.01), less antidepressant use (p=0.02), greater LAIs use (p=0.04), shorter follow-up (p=0.001) and cross-sectional vs. longitudinal study design (p=0.03). In a meta-regression, inpatient status (p<0.0001), FGA use (0.046), and schizophrenia diagnosis (p=0.004) independently predicted APP (N=66, R(2)=0.44, p<0.0001). APP is common with different rates and time trends by region over the last four decades. APP is associated with greater anticholinergic requirement, shorter observation time, greater illness severity and lower antidepressant use.
    Schizophrenia Research 04/2012; 138(1):18-28. DOI:10.1016/j.schres.2012.03.018 · 3.92 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Maltreatment, family violence, and disruption in primary caregiver attachment in childhood may constitute a developmental form of trauma that places children at risk for multiple psychiatric and medical diagnoses that often are refractory to well-established evidence-based mental health treatments. No integrative diagnosis exists to guide assessment and treatment for these children and adolescents. This study therefore assessed clinicians' ratings of the clinical utility of a proposed developmental trauma disorder diagnostic framework. An Internet survey was conducted with an international convenience sample of 472 self-selected medical, mental health, counseling, child welfare, and education professionals. Respondents made quantitative ratings of the clinical significance of developmental trauma disorder, developmental trauma exposure, and symptom items and also posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other Axis I internalizing and externalizing disorder symptom items for 4 clinical vignettes. Ratings of the discriminability of each developmental trauma disorder item from PTSD, other anxiety disorders, affective disorders, and externalizing behavior disorders, and of each developmental trauma disorder item's amenability to existing evidence-based treatments for those disorders, also were obtained. Respondents viewed developmental trauma disorder criteria as (1) comparable in clinical utility to criteria for PTSD and other psychiatric disorders; (2) discriminable from and not fully accounted for by other disorders; and (3) refractory to existing evidence-based psychotherapeutic treatments. The exposure and symptom criteria proposed for a developmental trauma disorder diagnosis warrant clinical dissemination and scientific field testing to determine their actual clinical utility in treating traumatized children with complex psychiatric presentations.
    The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 08/2013; 74(8):841-9. DOI:10.4088/JCP.12m08030 · 5.50 Impact Factor