National Trends in the Outpatient Treatment of Children and Adolescents With Antipsychotic Drugs

New York State Psychiatric Institute and Department of Psychiatry, College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
Archives of General Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 14.48). 07/2006; 63(6):679-85. DOI: 10.1001/archpsyc.63.6.679
Source: PubMed


Although there are indications that antipsychotic drugs are increasingly used to treat children and adolescents, little is known about the characteristics of those who receive them.
To examine national trends and patterns in antipsychotic treatment of youth seen by physicians in office-based medical practice.
Analysis of national trends of visits (1993-2002) that included prescription of antipsychotics, and comparison of the clinical and demographic characteristics of visits (2000-2002) that included or did not include antipsychotic treatment.
Outpatient visits to physicians in office-based practice.
Patient visits by persons 20 years and younger from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys from 1993 to 2002.
Visits that included prescription of antipsychotics.
In the United States, the estimated number of office-based visits by youth that included antipsychotic treatment increased from approximately 201,000 in 1993 to 1,224,000 in 2002. From 2000 to 2002, the number of visits that included antipsychotic treatment was significantly higher for male youth (1913 visits per 100,000 population) than for female youth (739 visits per 100,000 population), and for white non-Hispanic youth (1515 visits per 100,000 population) than for youth of other racial or ethnic groups (426 visits per 100,000 population). Overall, 9.2% of mental health visits and 18.3% of visits to psychiatrists included antipsychotic treatment. From 2000 to 2002, 92.3% of visits with prescription of an antipsychotic included a second-generation medication. Mental health visits with prescription of an antipsychotic included patients with diagnoses of disruptive behavior disorders (37.8%), mood disorders (31.8%), pervasive developmental disorders or mental retardation (17.3%), and psychotic disorders (14.2%).
There has been a sharp national increase in antipsychotic treatment among children and adolescents in office-based medical practice. Second-generation antipsychotics are being widely prescribed, and emerging empirical evidence provides a base of support that is limited to short-term safety and efficacy.

15 Reads
  • Source
    • "Most psychotropic medications have been increasingly prescribed for children and adolescents in recent years, with as much as a 500 % increase documented for atypical antipsychotics (Olfson et al. 2006, 2010; Vitiello et al. 2006). Pediatric polypharmacy (prescribing two or more psychotropic drugs for the same disorder or symptom) increased from 22 to 32 % during the same period, although ''little is known about the safety and efficacy of these drugs'' (Comer et al. 2010, p. 1001). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To alert professionals and consumers about safety risks associated with approved drugs, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) periodically issues Drug Safety Communications, or DSCs (previously known as advisories, warnings, and health care professional letters). This review consolidates balanced information from 22 DSCs issued over the last 15 years by the FDA for drugs with pediatric indications (for any disorder) that are used to treat pediatric emotional and behavioral disorders (ADHD drugs, antipsychotics, antidepressants, and antiepileptics/anticonvulsants). A single-source document of pediatric DSCs for these drugs was needed because none existed previously; finding DSC information on the FDA website can be challenging; and other information sources (e.g., manufacturer or advocacy websites, blogs, other media reports) may lack the objectivity or accuracy that the FDA is charged to maintain. This consolidation is intended to enable better informed risk-benefit analysis around treatment selection and drug safety monitoring. For the 22 DSCs, we summarize the safety concerns, the populations affected, and when available from the FDA, the incidence of the adverse events, precursors, and factors that may increase or mitigate the risk of these very serious (e.g., sudden death, life-threatening rash, liver failure), but typically low incidence (<1 %) adverse events (cardiometabolic complications with atypical antipsychotics and suicidality with antidepressants are more common). This review does not address the far more common, but usually less serious, side effects that also accompany these drugs. Implications of this review for research and practice are discussed.
    Journal of Child and Family Studies 05/2014; 23(4). DOI:10.1007/s10826-012-9706-x · 1.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "This can leave clinicians puzzled whether to treat such young children with drugs developed for adults, with the fear of uncharted effectiveness and safety, or to risk not treating some children who are still symptomatic despite attempting all other avenues. Current usage, licensing and guidelines: the challenge for clinicians Recent reviews of pharmaco-epidemiological studies have shown an international increase in antipsychotic prescribing trends in both child and adult populations (Comer et al., 2010; Olfson et al., 2006; Pathak et al., 2010; Verdoux et al., 2010; Zito et al., 2000). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent reports have illustrated a dramatic rise in the use of antipsychotics in preschool children, medications originally designed and licensed for the treatment of adult psychotic disorders. Within this context, the current usage and the associated diagnoses are reviewed and compared with official guidelines and licensing for such use, highlighting a controversial challenge for clinicians. A review of the evidence base of the relative efficacy of such medications for a range of disorders is given. Associated safety and side effects are discussed, with compelling evidence for increased adverse events associated with use of antipsychotics in preschoolers, and neurodevelopmental hypotheses are used to guide predictions of long-term risk. An apparent gap in the literature and evidence base supporting such use and elucidating the risks and benefits leaves a challenge for clinicians and researchers and hinders the development of appropriate guidelines. Pragmatism in clinical practice, mindful of the limited evidence base that does exist and the propensity for harm, is necessary; far more research is required in this important area.
    Journal of Psychopharmacology 01/2014; 28(4). DOI:10.1177/0269881113519506 · 3.59 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "The present study is the first one to examine how different HAL dosing regimens affect the magnitude of HAL sensitization of its avoidance disruptive effect from adolescence to adulthood. This issue is significant given the highly plastic nature of adolescent brain and the increase use of antipsychotic drugs in adolescent patients in recent decades (Kalverdijk et al., 2008; Olfson et al., 2006; Rani et al., 2008). Our results show that different drug treatment schedules do affect the magnitude of Fig. 3. Number of avoidance responses made by the rats previously treated with HAL-0.25 CONT (0.25 mg kg −1 day −1 via minipump, n = 14), HAL-0.05 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Animal work on the behavioral effects of antipsychotic treatment suggests that different dosing regimens could affect drug sensitivity differently, with an intermittent treatment regimen tending to cause a sensitization effect, while a continuous treatment causing a tolerance. In this study, we explored how haloperidol (HAL) sensitization induced throughout adolescence and tested in adulthood was differentially impacted by these two dosing regimens in the conditioned avoidance response (CAR) test. We also examined how these two dosing regiments affected social interaction and social memory in adulthood. Male adolescent Sprague-Dawley rats were treated with HAL via either osmotic minipump (HAL-0.25 CONT; 0.25 mg kg− 1 day− 1, n = 14) or daily injection (HAL-0.05 INT; 0.05 mg kg− 1 day− 1 injection, sc, n = 14), or sterile water (n = 14) from postnatal days (PND) 44 to 71. HAL sensitization was assessed in a challenge test in which all rats were injected with HAL (0.025 and 0.05 mg/kg, sc) on PND 80 and PND 82. Two days later, half of the rats from each group (n = 7/group) were assayed in two 4-trial social interaction tests in which a subject rat was given four 5-min social encounters with a familiar or novel juvenile rat (PND 35-40) at 10 min intervals. Another half were tested in a quinpirole-induced hyperlocomotion assay to assess the potential HAL-induced change in D2-mediated function. Results show that only the intermittent dosing group under the HAL 0.05 mg/kg challenge showed a robust sensitization effect as rats in this group made significantly fewer avoidance responses than those in the vehicle and HAL-0.25 CONT groups. Adolescent HAL treatment did not affect social behavior and social memory, as rats from all 3 groups exhibited a similar level of social interaction and showed a similar level of sensitivity to the change of social stimuli. Similarly, adolescent HAL treatment also did not produce a long-lasting change in D2 function, as all 3 groups exhibited a similar level of increase in motor activity under quinpirole challenge. These findings suggest that HAL sensitization is a dosing-specific phenomenon. It is more likely to be seen under an intermittent dosing regimen than under a continuous dosing one. The findings that the intermittent HAL treatment did not impair social functioning and did not alter D2 function suggest a dissociation between drug-induced alterations in drug sensitivity and those in social function and neuroreceptors.
    Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry 01/2014; 54:67–75. · 3.69 Impact Factor
Show more


15 Reads
Available from