Patient characteristics and process factors associated with antipsychotic polypharmacy in a nationwide sample of psychiatric inpatients in Italy

Prevalence and Appropriateness of Antipsychotic Prescribing in an Italian Prison: Is Everything Always Really Overprescribed?

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

Although the prevalence of mental disorders in prisoners is known to be higher than in the general population, less is known about the antipsychotic (AP) prescribing rate in jail. The aim of this research was to investigate prevalence and appropriateness of AP prescription in an Italian prison to expand our understanding on this crucial area of clinical-forensic practice.

METHODS/PROCEDURES

A cross-sectional (census day) design was used among male adults in the Parma Penitentiary Institutes (PPI). Sociodemographic, clinical and prescription data were collected from the PPI electronic clinical database management system. The AP prescribing appropriateness was examined in accordance with the therapeutic indications included in the Italian National Formulary. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

A total of 98 (14.1%) of 696 PPI prisoners were taking AP medications. Moreover, 90 (91.8%) of the 98 PPI participants were also taking other psychotropic medications concurrently. Quetiapine and olanzapine were the most common prescribed APs. Antipsychotic medications were most likely to be prescribed for off-label indications (74.4%). Less than one fifth of all AP prescriptions were for psychotic disorders.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

Antipsychotic medications are widely used in prison, often together with other psychotropic drugs. Considering their common adverse effects, it is crucial to longitudinally monitor their potential risk of metabolic, cardiovascular, and extrapyramidal symptoms and signs, as well as their early risk of mortality. Given the high prevalence of AP off-label prescription, the rationale for AP prescribing should be clearly documented and regularly reviewed within the prison by mental health professionals.

Exploring Hidden Issues in the Use of Antipsychotic Polypharmacy in the Treatment of Schizophrenia

The mainstay of schizophrenia treatment is pharmacological therapy using various antipsychotics including first- and second-generation antipsychotics which have different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic property leading to differential presentation of adverse events (AEs) and treatment effects such as negative symptoms, cognitive symptoms and cormorbid symptoms. Major treatment guidelines suggest the use of antipsychotic monotherapy (APM) as a gold standard in the treatment of schizophrenia. However, the effects of APM is inadequate and less potent to achieve symptom remission as well as functional recovery in real practice which has been consistently reported in numerous controlled clinical trials, large practical trials, independent small studies and systematic reviews till today. Therefore anti-psychotic polypharmacy (APP) regardless of the class of antipsychotics has been also commonly utilized for many reasons in real world practice. However, APP has also crucial pitfalls including increase of total psychotics including antipsychotics, high-doses of antipsychotics used, poor compliance, drug-drug interaction and risks for developing AEs, all of which are paradoxically related to poor clinical outcomes, whereas APP has also substantial advantages in reduction of re-hospitalization, severe psychopathology and targeted control of concurrent symptoms. Given currently limited therapeutic options, it is also important to properly utilize APP in order to maximize its clinical utility and minimize its risk for better treatment outcomes for patients with schizophrenia, based on risk/benefit with full understanding of pharmacological and clinical issues on APP. The present paper intends to address intriguing and important issues in the use of APP in real world practice.

Antipsychotic polypharmacy in adult patients diagnosed with schizophrenia: A retrospective study

Antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) is a common practice in the treatment of schizophrenia. In this study, we aimed to identify the prevalence of APP in our department, as well as the trends associated with co-prescribing antipsychotics. We collected data from the medical records of all 193 inpatients diagnosed with schizophrenia who were admitted to Prof. Dr. Alexandru Obregia Clinical Psychiatry Hospital (Bucharest, Romania), Department 9, during January 2019-December 2019. Demographic characteristics of the patients, clinical diagnosis, psychiatric admission type and duration of hospitalization were examined. Data regarding the antipsychotic regimen at discharge and other psychotropic drugs used were collected. A total of 69 (35.75%) patients received more than 2 antipsychotics upon discharge. Patients treated with APP did not differ in regards to sex, age, education level, employment status, marital status, living situation, type of admission from those receiving antipsychotic monotherapy (APM). Prolonged hospitalization was found to be an independent predictor of APP (P=0.014). Most of the combinations used in our unit included clozapine (47.8%), and the most frequently used treatment in the APP group was the combination of paliperidone and clozapine (14.5%). In the APP group, 30 (43.5%) patients included in their regimen was a long-acting intramuscular antipsychotic. There was no significant difference in terms of the use of mood stabilizers, antiparkinsonian drugs or anxiolytics between the APP and the APM group; yet, a higher prevalence of antidepressant use, although not statistically significant (P=0.067), in the APP group compared to the APM group, was observed. The use of APP as a long-term regimen is a common practice in our department, as it is worldwide. There is a great need for randomized-control trials and evidence-based studies in order to define the safest and most effective combinations of antipsychotics and also the characteristics of patients that may benefit from these combinations.

Prescription patterns in psychiatric compulsory care: polypharmacy and high-dose antipsychotics

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotic polypharmacy and prescription of high-dose antipsychotics are often used for the treatment of psychotic symptoms, especially in compulsory psychiatric care although there is lack of evidence to support this practice and related risks for patients.

AIMS

We aimed to investigate prescription patterns in patients with psychosis under compulsory psychiatric treatment in Cyprus and to identify predictors for pharmaceutic treatment patterns.

METHOD

This was a nationwide, descriptive correlational study with cross-sectional comparisons, including 482 patients with compulsory admission to hospital. Sociodemographic and clinical data were collected. Psychotic symptoms were assessed with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Prescribed medication patterns, including use of medication pro re nata (PRN, when required), were recorded.

RESULTS

Antipsychotic polypharmacy with a PRN schema was reported in 33.2% (n = 160) of the participants. Polypharmacy without a PRN schema was reported in 5.6% (n = 27) of the participants. We found that 27.2% (n = 131) of the participants were prescribed high-dose antipsychotics without PRN included; and 39.2% (n = 189) prescribed high-dose antipsychotics with PRN included. In the logistic regression analyses, predictors for prescription of high-dose antipsychotics were male gender, positive psychiatric history, receiving state benefits and a negative history of substance use. Male gender was the only predictor for polypharmacy without a PRN schema whereas male gender, negative family psychiatric history, receiving state benefits and the total score on the positive symptoms PANSS subscale were predictors for polypharmacy with a PRN schema included.

CONCLUSIONS

A high frequency of polypharmacy and use of medication PRN beyond clinical guidelines has been reported for the first time in psychiatric compulsory care in Cyprus; revision in antipsychotic prescription is needed.

Clozapine affects the pharmacokinetics of risperidone and inhibits its metabolism and P-glycoprotein-mediated transport in vivo and in vitro: A safety attention to antipsychotic polypharmacy with clozapine and risperidone

Antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP), as one maintenance treatment strategy in patients with schizophrenia, has gained popularity in real-world clinical settings. Risperidone (RIS) and clozapine (CLZ) are the most commonly prescribed second-generation antipsychotics, and they are often used in combination as APP. In this study, the pharmacokinetics of RIS and CLZ in rats were examined after co-administration to explore the reliability and rationality of co-medication with RIS and CLZ. In addition, the effects of CLZ on RIS metabolism and transport in vitro were investigated. The results illustrated that in the 7-day continuous administration test in rats, when co-administered with CLZ, the area under curve and peak concentrations of RIS were increased by 2.2- and 3.1-fold at the first dose, respectively, increased by 3.4- and 6.2-fold at the last dose, respectively. The metabolite-to-parent ratio of RIS was approximately 22% and 33% lower than those of RIS alone group at the first and last doses, respectively. Moreover, CLZ significantly increased RIS concentrations in the brain (3.0-4.8 folds) and cerebrospinal fluid (2.1-3.5 folds) in rats, which was slightly lower than the impact of verapamil on RIS after co-medication. Experiments in vitro indicated that CLZ competitively inhibited the conversion of RIS to 9-hydroxy-RIS with the inhibition constants of 1.36 and 3.0 μM in rat and human liver microsomes, respectively. Furthermore, the efflux ratio of RIS in Caco-2 monolayers was significantly reduced by CLZ at 1 μM. Hence, CLZ may affect the exposure of RIS by inhibiting its metabolism and P-glycoprotein-mediated transport. These findings highlighted that APP with RIS and CLZ might increase the plasma concentrations of RIS and 9-hydroxy-RIS beyond the safety ranges and cause toxic side effects.

The COVID-19 Outbreak and Subjects With Mental Disorders Who Presented to an Italian Psychiatric Emergency Department

ABSTRACT

We performed a retrospective study from January to May 2020 to establish the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients with mental health problems who arrived at an Italian emergency department during the COVID-19 outbreak. We divided the sample into two groups taking as a watershed March 11, when the World Health Organization announced COVID-19 outbreak as a pandemic. Chi-square/t-tests, adjusted p values (Bonferroni method), and regression analysis were performed. Patients who arrived at the emergency department during the lockdown decreased by 56%; showed greater active suicidal ideation, more tension, and more severe psychopathological state; were living alone more frequently; and were taking home treatment mainly based on second-generation antipsychotics. According to our study, it seems that patients with mental disorders have consulted psychiatric services less frequently during the pandemic, but the economic, health, and social distress may be linked with an increase in suicidal risk and the severity of the psychopathological state.

Antipsychotic Polypharmacy and High-Dose Antipsychotics in Involuntary Patients: a Seven-Year Audit of Discharge Prescriptions in an Acute Care Unit

Antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) is a psychopharmacological practice in which two or more antipsychotics are prescribed simultaneously. Despite the absence of evidence to support it, it is highly prevalent in clinical settings. Another recurrent practice strongly associated with APP is the prescription of high-dose antipsychotics (HDAs). Compulsory treatment is a legal means to impose treatment on an individual suffering from mental illness who refuses therapeutic intervention. Compulsory treatment has been associated with APP and HDAs and rates of both have been proposed to represent indicators of the quality of prescribing. We aimed to perform an antipsychotic prescription audit in a vulnerable psychiatric population, at the psychiatry department of a district hospital in Portugal, across 7 years. We evaluated APP and HDAs in 403 compulsorily admitted patients by reviewing their files at discharge. We used logistic regression to search for factors associated with APP and HDAs. APP was found in 70.5% of individuals, whereas HDAs were found in 51.4%. After adjustment, APP was significantly associated with male gender (Odds Ratio[OR] = 1.85 [1.04; 3.30] 95% Confidence Interval [CI]), involuntary outpatient treatment (OR = .40 [.18; .82] 95% CI), activation of the hospital social services (OR = 1.91 [1.08; 3.38] 95%CI), prescription of antidepressants (OR = .43 [.22; .82] 95%CI) and long-acting injectables (LAI) (OR = 28.29 [13.13; 60.97] 95%CI). HDAs were associated with male gender (OR = 1.76 [1.06; 2.94] 95%CI), the prescription of LAI (OR = 12.92 [6.93; 24.09] 95%CI) and oral first-generation antipsychotics (OR = 2.90 [1.51; 5.60] 95%CI).

Trends in the prescribing of antipsychotic medicines in Pakistan: implications for the future

Introduction and objectives: There is a paucity of antipsychotic prescribing and utilization data in Pakistan that needs addressing, especially with issues of availability, affordability, gender differences, and domestic violence, to develop pertinent strategies. The objective of this study was to address these issues by describing current antipsychotic utilization patterns in Pakistan among adult patients attending tertiary care hospitals and private practitioners.Methods: A three staged approach was used including (1) assessment of total antipsychotic utilization, expenditure, and costs per unit between 2010 and 2015, (2) an in-depth retrospective study of prescribing patterns, including co-morbidities among representative hospital patients in Pakistan, and (3) assessment of the quality of prescribing against WHO targets.Results: Total use of antipsychotics increased 4.3-fold and the cost/unit increased by 13.2% during the study period. Risperidone and olanzapine were the most prescribed antipsychotics with more limited use of other typical and atypical antipsychotics. The number of medicines per encounter was 4.56. Prescription using generic instead of brand names was 21.4%. Seven per cent were prescribed more than one antipsychotic concurrently.Conclusion: There has been an appreciable increase in antipsychotic utilization in recent years in Pakistan, especially atypical antipsychotics, with little polypharmacy. Ongoing utilization of typical antipsychotics may be due to comorbidities such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Issues of international non-proprietary name prescribing need investigating along with the high number of medicines per encounter and gender inequality.

Economic burden of schizophrenia in Italy: a probabilistic cost of illness analysis

OBJECTIVES

Schizophrenia is a chronic, debilitating psychiatric disease with highly variable treatment pathways and consequent economic impacts on resource utilisation. The aim of the study was to estimate the economic burden of schizophrenia in Italy for both the societal and Italian National Healthcare perspective.

METHODS

A probabilistic cost of illness model was applied. A systematic literature review was carried out to identify epidemiological and economic data. Direct costs were calculated in terms of drugs, hospitalisations, specialist services, residential and semiresidential facilities. Indirect costs were calculated on the basis of patients' and caregivers' loss of productivity. In addition, the impact of disability compensation was taken into account using a database from the Italian National Social Security Institute -Italy (INPS).

RESULTS

Overall, 303 913 prevalent patients with schizophrenia were estimated. Of these, 212 739 (70%) were diagnosed and 175 382 (82%) were treated with antipsychotics. The total economic burden was estimated at €2.7 billion (95% CI €1771.93 to €3988.65), 50.5% due to indirect costs and 49.5% to direct costs. Drugs corresponded to 10% of direct costs and hospitalisations (including residential and semiresidential facilities) accounted for 81%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlighted that indirect costs and hospitalisations (including residential and semiresidential facilities) play a major role within the expenses associated with schizophrenia in Italy, and this may be considered as a tool for public decision-makers.

Quality of care indicators for schizophrenia: determinants of observed variations among Italian Departments of Mental Health. Results from the ETAS DSM study

AIMS

The primary aim of this study is to analyse the conformance of usual care patterns for persons with schizophrenia to treatment guidelines in three Italian Departments of Mental Health (DMHs). The secondary aim is to examine possible organisational and structural reasons accounting for variations among DMHs.

METHODS

Within the framework of the Evaluation of Treatment Appropriateness in Schizophrenia (ETAS) project, 20 consensus quality of care indicators were developed. Ten concerned pharmacological treatment and ten encompassed general care and psychosocial rehabilitation interventions. Indicators were calculated using data from a stratified random sample of 458 patients treated at three DMHs located in North-Eastern, North-Western and Southern Italy. Patients' data were collected by combining information from medical charts and from a survey carried out by the health care professionals in charge of the patients. Data on the structural and organisational characteristics of the DMHs were retrieved from administrative databases. For each indicator, the number and percentage of appropriate interventions with and without moderators were calculated. Appropriateness was defined as the percentage of eligible patients receiving an intervention conformant with guidelines. Moderators, i.e., reasons justifying a discrepancy between the interventions actually provided and that recommended by guidelines were recorded. Indicators based on a sufficient number of eligible patients were further explored in a statistical analysis to compare the performance of the DMHs.

RESULTS

In the overall sample, the percentage of inappropriate interventions ranged from 11.1 to 59.3% for non-pharmacological interventions and from 5.9 to 66.8% for pharmacological interventions. Comparisons among DMHs revealed significant variability in appropriateness for the indicators 'prevention and monitoring of metabolic effects', 'psychiatric visits', 'psychosocial rehabilitation', 'family involvement' and 'work'. After adjusting the patient's gender, age and functioning, only the indicators 'Prevention and monitoring of metabolic effects', 'psychiatric visits' and 'work' continued to differ significantly among DMHs. The percentage of patients receiving appropriate integrated care (at least one appropriate non-pharmacological intervention and one pharmacological intervention) was significantly different among the three DMHs and lower than expected.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results underscore discrepancies among Italian DMHs in indicators that explore key aspects of care of patients with schizophrenia. The use of quality indicators and improved guideline adherence can address suboptimal clinical outcomes, and has the potential to reduce practice variations and narrow the gap between optimal and routine care.

Gender differences and psychotropic polypharmacy in psychiatric patients in Brazil: a cross-sectional analysis of the PESSOAS Project

We aimed to estimate the prevalence and correlates of psychotropic polypharmacy in Brazilian psychiatric patients by gender. Sociodemographic, behavioral and clinical data were obtained through face-to-face interviews and medical charts of 2,475 patients. Psychotropic polypharmacy was defined as the use of two or more psychotropic drugs and occurred in 85.7% of men (95%CI: 83.6%-87.6%) and 84.9% of women (95%CI: 82.8%-86.8%; p > 0.05). The mean number of psychotropic drugs/patient was 2.98 ± 1.23 and most common combinations included antipsychotics. Multivariate analysis showed that for both genders, previous hospitalization, severe mental illness, multiple psychiatric diagnoses and an insufficient number of professionals in the health care unit was associated with psychotropic polypharmacy. However, other correlates such as inpatient care, use of non-psychotropic drugs, living in unstable conditions and current smoking vary among them. Psychotropic polypharmacy was a common practice in this national sample. The results highlighted the need for national guidelines to manage patients with mental illness, considering the difference among genders and disease severity, to reduce the burden of polyphamacy in this population.

Antipsychotic prescribing for vulnerable populations: a clinical audit at an acute Australian mental health unit at two-time points

BACKGROUND

Antipsychotics are recognised as a critical intervention for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Guidelines globally endorse the routine practice of antipsychotic monotherapy, at the minimum effective dose. Even in treatment-resistant schizophrenia, clozapine use is endorsed before combining antipsychotics. This aim of this study was to review antipsychotic polytherapy alone, high-dose therapy alone, polytherapy and high-dose prescribing patterns in adults discharged from an inpatient mental health unit at two time-points, and the alignment of this prescribing with clinical guideline recommendations. Additionally, associations with polytherapy and high-dose antipsychotic prescribing, including patient and clinical characteristics, were explored.

METHODS

A retrospective clinical audit of 400 adults (200 patients at two different time-points) discharged with at least one antipsychotic. Preliminary findings and education sessions were provided to physicians between Cohorts. Outcomes (polytherapy alone, high-dose therapy alone, polytherapy and high-dose therapy) were compared between study Cohorts using chi-squared and rank-sum tests. Associations between outcomes and covariates were assessed using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Most patients (62.5%) were discharged on a single antipsychotic within the recommended dose range. There was a clear preference for prescribing second generation antipsychotics, and in this respect, prescribing is aligned with current evidence-based guidelines. However, sub-optimal prescribing practices were identified for both Cohorts in relation to polytherapy and high-dose antipsychotic rates. Involuntary treatment, frequent hospitalisations and previous clozapine use significantly increased the risk of all three prescribing outcomes at discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

In a significant minority, antipsychotic prescribing did not align with clinical guidelines despite increased training, indicating that the education program alone was ineffective at positively influencing antipsychotic prescribing practices. Further consideration should be given when prescribing antipsychotics for involuntary patients, people with frequent hospitalisations, and those who have previously trialled clozapine.

Social and clinical descriptors of antipsychotic prescription

OBJECTIVE

To identify descriptors of Antipsychotic (AP) prescription, focusing on second generation antipsychotics (SGAs), polypharmacy, and long-acting injections (LAIs).

METHODS

Outpatients of the Bologna-Community-Mental-Health-Centres with at least one AP prescription were selected. Patients' characteristics, service utilization, and AP prescriptions were collected from administrative databases. Prescriptions were grouped by class (SGA vs. First Generation Antipsychotics), drug combination (polypharmacy vs. monotherapy), and preparation (LAIs vs. regular administration). Multi-variate analyses were performed to identify prescription descriptors among socio-demographic and clinical variables.

RESULTS

Among 6,074 patients and 41,121 AP prescriptions, SGAs were used in 70.7% of subjects, AP polypharmacy in 25.3%, and LAIs in 17.5%. SGAs were prescribed more often for young, Italian patients, with higher education, voluntary hospitalization, and high number of visits. Descriptors of AP polypharmacy were: high number of visits and hospitalization, length of treatment, non-urban residency, male gender, unemployment. Characteristics associated to LAI prescription were: long duration of treatment, high number of visits, compulsory admissions, non-Italian nationality, male gender, age > 34, low education, unmarried status.

CONCLUSIONS

Besides illness severity, this study identified different socio-demographic descriptors of AP choices, raising concerns on the equity of treatments. Efforts should be directed to investigate appropriateness of AP treatments especially in social disadvantaged populations.

Frontal lobe function and social adjustment in patients with schizophrenia: near-infrared spectroscopy

OBJECTIVE

The study evaluated relationships between frontal lobe function in patients with schizophrenia and both their social adjustment and medication, using 22-channel near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS).

METHODS

One hundred ninety-nine stable patients with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision schizophrenia, whose medication had not been changed within the preceding 3 months and who were able to visit our clinics for NIRS, were the study subjects. As a comparator, 144 healthy volunteers who underwent a physical examination and the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview also received NIRS.

RESULTS

The main outcomes evaluated were frontal lobe oxyhemoglobin concentration (OxHb) measured by NIRS, current medication, social adjustment, and scores on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. The OxHb in schizophrenic patients (0.878 ± 1.1801 mM mm; n = 199) was significantly lower than that in the healthy volunteers (2.085 ± 1.7480 mM mm: n = 100) (p < 0.001). NIRS-measured OxHb values reflected disease severity and degree of social adjustment in schizophrenic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with higher OxHb values were socially better adjusted than those with lower OxHb values. Patients treated with atypical antipsychotic monotherapy showed lower treatment resistance and better social adjustment than those treated with combination therapy.

Antipsychotic patterns of use in patients with schizophrenia: polypharmacy versus monotherapy

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to characterize real-world treatment patterns in the prescription of antipsychotic polypharmacy (≥ 2 concurrent antipsychotics) compared with antipsychotic monotherapy for patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective claims-based analysis of patients (aged 13-64 years) with schizophrenia belonging to an employer-based health plan. Duration of therapy was measured as the number of treatment days over one year following the initial date of antipsychotic therapy. Discontinuation was defined as a 90-day gap in antipsychotic treatment (or in at least one antipsychotic for the polypharmacy group). Logistic regression analyses were used to predict discontinuation within one year. Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regressions were used to predict duration of therapy (by type of therapy) when controlling for gender, region, number of somatic and psychiatric comorbidities, Deyo-Charlson comorbidity score, and number of psychiatric and somatic medications.

RESULTS

Of the 4,156 patients, 3,188 received monotherapy and 968 received polypharmacy. Mean age was 40 years (37.8 years for polypharmacy vs 40.3 years for monotherapy, p < 0.001). Within one year, 77% of the polypharmacy group and 54% of the monotherapy group discontinued treatment. The average duration of therapy was 163 [SD = 143] days in the polypharmacy group vs 253 [SD = 147] days in the monotherapy group. In both cohorts, patients <25 years had a higher frequency of discontinuations than those ≥ 26 years. Age and polypharmacy were independent predictors of treatment duration and discontinuation prior to one year.

CONCLUSIONS

One quarter of patients with schizophrenia received antipsychotic polypharmacy. Discontinuation was higher in the polypharmacy group. Age and polypharmacy were significant predictors of treatment discontinuation.

Prescription patterns for patients with schizophrenia in Korea: a focus on antipsychotic polypharmacy

Objective

This study investigated the prescription patterns for Korean patients with schizophrenia with a particular focus on antipsychotic polypharmacy. All data were gathered from patients presenting at 41 tertiary university hospitals and 8 secondary hospitals.

Methods

Data from three multicenter studies conducted in Korea were retrospectively reviewed and integrated to identify patients with schizophrenia who had their antipsychotic medication switched to paliperidone extended-release between 2008 and 2009. The rates for antipsychotic polypharmacy, combined use of different antipsychotic classes with a special focus on atypical antipsychotics, and psychotropic polypharmacy using benzodiazepines, mood stabilizers, and other relevant drugs were identified.

Results

Of the 851 Korean patients analyzed in this study, 20.4% (n=173) had been prescribed antipsychotic polypharmacy. Of the 678 patients receiving antipsychotic monotherapy, 6.9% (n=47) were prescribed a typical antipsychotic and 93.1% (n=631) were prescribed an atypical antipsychotic. Of the 173 patients receiving a combination of antipsychotic drugs, only 6.4% (n=11) had been prescribed polypharmacy with typical antipsychotics, while 46.82% (n=81) were prescribed atypical+atypical antipsychotics or typical+atypical antipsychotics. The highest co-prescription rates for other psychotropic drugs in conjunction with antipsychotics included benzodiazepines (30.3%), anticholinergic drugs (28.8%), antidepressants (13.3%), β-blockers (10.1%), and mood stabilizers (8.7%).

Conclusion

The present findings demonstrate that the rate of antipsychotic polypharmacy is relatively low in Korea and that Korean clinicians prefer to prescribe atypical, rather than typical, antipsychotic drugs. This suggests that there is a distinct prescription pattern in Korea that is focused on antipsychotic polypharmacy.

Critical review of antipsychotic polypharmacy in the treatment of schizophrenia

Antipsychotic polypharmacy remains prevalent; it has probably increased for the treatment of schizophrenia in real-world clinical settings. The current evidence suggests some clinical benefits of antipsychotic polypharmacy, such as better symptom control with clozapine plus another antipsychotic, and a reversal of metabolic side-effects with a concomitant use of aripiprazole. On the other hand, the interpretation of findings in the literature should be made conservatively in light of the paucity of good studies and potentially serious side-effects. Also, although the available data are still limited, two smaller-scale clinical trials provide preliminary evidence that converting antipsychotic polypharmacy to monotherapy could be a valid and reasonable treatment option. Several studies have explored strategies to change physicians' antipsychotic polypharmacy prescribing behaviours. These have revealed that, while the impact of purely educational interventions may be limited, more aggressive procedures such as directly notifying physicians by letters or phone calls can be more effective in reducing antipsychotic polypharmacy. In conclusion, antipsychotic polypharmacy can work for some clinically difficult conditions; however, it should be the exception rather than the rule and may be avoidable in many patients. More importantly, the paucity of the data clearly emphasizes the need for further investigations on not only advantages and disadvantages of antipsychotic polypharmacy, but also regarding effective interventions in already prescribed polypharmacy regimens.

The prevalence of antipsychotic polypharmacy in schizophrenic patients discharged from psychiatric units in Poland

BACKGROUND

The term antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) refers to the concurrent use of two or more antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia. The aim of this study was to investigate the range of APP in schizophrenic patients discharged from psychiatric units in Poland, and to determine its demographical and clinical correlates.

METHODS

Data on the pharmacological treatment of 207 patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, discharged from six psychiatric hospitals from September-December 2011 were recorded by experienced psychiatrists. Clinical and demographical information was obtained on each patient. The severity of symptoms at admission, and their improvement during hospitalization were assessed using the Clinical Global Impression Scale.

RESULTS

At discharge, 52.7% of the patients were prescribed one, 42.5% two and 4.8% three antipsychotic drugs (AP). When two AP were applied, it was usually a combination of two second generation antipsychotics (SGA) (46%), or of both first generation antipsychotics (FGA) and SGA (48%). The SGA's olanzapine and risperidone were those most commonly prescribed. Patients treated with two or more AP had a higher number of previous hospitalizations than patients receiving antipsychotic monotherapy. Mood stabilizers were prescribed for nearly one third of the patients, while antidepressants and benzodiazepines were prescribed for fewer than 10%.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of polypharmacy in Poland is similar to that reported in other countries. This may suggest that, in a substantial proportion of schizophrenic patients clinical response to the antipsychotic monotherapy is unsatisfactory. Further studies focusing on the efficacy and safety of strategies in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia not responding to antipsychotic monotherapy are necessary.

Efficacy and clinical determinants of antipsychotic polypharmacy in psychotic patients experiencing an acute relapse and admitted to hospital stay: results from a cross-sectional and a subsequent longitudinal pilot study

Background. Antipsychotic polypharmacy is used in several psychiatric disorders, despite poor evidence existing to support this practice. Aim. We evaluated whether psychotic patients in acute relapse exposed to antipsychotic polypharmacy (AP + AP) showed different demographic, clinical, or psychopathological features compared to those exposed to one antipsychotic (AP) and whether AP + AP patients showed significantly higher improvement compared to AP patients after a 4-week treatment. Methods. Inpatients were subdivided into AP + AP and AP ones. In the cross-sectional step, patients were compared according to demographics, clinical variables, and scores on rating scales. In the longitudinal step, patients remained for 4 weeks under admission medications and were compared for clinical improvement. Results. AP + AP patients were more frequently diagnosed with schizophrenia and mental retardation as a comorbid illness. AP + AP patients were more frequently under first-generation antipsychotics and had worse clinical presentation. After 4 weeks of treatment, both AP + AP and AP patients improved compared to the baseline. However, AP patients scored significantly less than AP + AP patients at the Clinical Global Impression Scale at the 4-week time point but not at the baseline, indicating a treatment-specific improvement. Conclusions. Antipsychotic polypharmacy may be offered to specific types of psychotic patients. However, efficacy of this strategy is limited at best.

Antipsychotic polypharmacy and high-dose prescription in schizophrenia: a 5-year comparison

OBJECTIVE

The co-prescription of multiple antipsychotic drugs continues to increase despite a lack of evidence supporting this practice. The purpose of this study was to quantify and describe recent trends of antipsychotic polypharmacy in Korean schizophrenic inpatients by comparing prescribed medications between the years of 2005 and 2010.

METHODS

We reviewed comprehensive medication profiles of schizophrenic patients discharged from a university psychiatric hospital in 2005 (n=194) or 2010 (n=201). Antipsychotic polypharmacy was defined as the concurrent receipt of two or more chemically distinct antipsychotics for at least 14 days. High antipsychotic dose was defined as a prescribed daily dose to defined daily dose ratio of greater than 1.5.

RESULTS

Antipsychotic polypharmacy increased between 2005 (37.1%) and 2010 (48.3%, p=0.025). The most frequently used drug within combinations of antipsychotics was haloperidol in 2005 (51.4%) and quetiapine in 2010 (48.5%). Overall, no changes were observed between 2005 and 2010 in the rate of prescribing high-dose antipsychotics. High-dose antipsychotic monotherapy decreased across years (from 30.4 to 18.4%), but high-dose antipsychotic polypharmacy increased (from 34.0 to 45.3%). Regression analysis revealed that antipsychotic polypharmacy was strongly associated with high doses of prescribed antipsychotics (odds ratio=18.60, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The practice of prescribing multiple antipsychotics to patients with schizophrenia is increasing, and high-dose antipsychotic drugs are more likely to be prescribed in combination than in isolation. The reasons for this pattern of prescription and its impact warrants further study.

Interventions to reduce antipsychotic polypharmacy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

It still remains unclear as to how to counteract antipsychotic polypharmacy that remains controversial but common. The objective of this study was to synthesize the clinical evidence to reduce antipsychotic polypharmacy (i.e. use of multiple antipsychotics) in schizophrenia.

METHODS

A literature search was performed to identify clinical trials that attempted to reduce antipsychotic polypharmacy in patients with schizophrenia by any form of systematic intervention using PubMed as well as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO (last search: June 2012). The search terms included "antipsychotics" and "polypharmacy". Cross-referencing was also performed.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 17 studies. Only 3 studies (1 randomized controlled trial and 2 open-label trials) were found that systematically switched antipsychotic polypharmacy to monotherapy. In two of them, more than two thirds of the subjects successfully completed the switch (40/58, 69.0%; 34/44, and 77.3%, respectively) while less than half the subjects tolerated it in the other study (6/14 and 42.9%) although the sample size was very small. On the other hand, 14 studies that examined impacts of interventions have physicians refrain from antipsychotic polypharmacy. While a modest intervention with educational approach alone was effective in three of the five articles, a more assertive intervention that directly cautioned physicians on the use of polypharmacy was effective in 10 of 12 articles.

CONCLUSION

The literature search revealed the paucity of the data. Careful switching from polypharmacy to monotherapy seems feasible in a majority of patients with schizophrenia. Assertive interventions, rather than passive educational approaches alone, appear more effective in reducing antipsychotic polypharmacy.

Antipsychotic polypharmacy: a comprehensive evaluation of relevant correlates of a long-standing clinical practice

Antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) is common in the treatment of schizophrenia spectrum disorders. The literature indicates that APP is related to patient, illness, and treatment variables that are proxy measures for greater illness acuity, severity, complexity, and chronicity. The largely unknown relative risks and benefits of APP need to be weighed against the known risks and benefits of clozapine for treatment-resistant patients. To inform evidence-based clinical practice, controlled, high-quality antipsychotic combination and discontinuation trials are necessary to determine the effectiveness, safety, and role of APP in the management of severely ill patients with insufficient response to antipsychotic monotherapy.

The evolution of antipsychotic switch and polypharmacy in natural practice--a longitudinal perspective

OBJECTIVE

Most patients with schizophrenia first start with a single antipsychotic, and yet most finally end up 'switching' or using 'polypharmacy'. The objective of this study was to examine the evolution of antipsychotic switch and polypharmacy in the real-world from a longitudinal perspective.

METHODS

A systematic review of longitudinal antipsychotic prescriptions in 300 patients with schizophrenia (ICD-10) for up to 2 years after their first visit to one of the 4 participating psychiatric clinics in Tokyo, Japan between January, 2007 and June, 2008, was conducted. Reasons for prescription change were also examined. The evolution of switching and polypharmacy was studied, and prescribed doses were compared to suggested dose ranges by the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP).

RESULTS

208 patients started their antipsychotic treatment with monotherapy. 34.1% of the patients gave up monotherapy with an initial antipsychotic to move to antipsychotic switch (27.4%) and/or polypharmacy (17.8%) within 2 years. The main reason for antipsychotic switch was 'ineffectiveness'; interestingly, this happened despite the fact that the monotherapy dose was below the recommended range in 47.4% of the antipsychotic switch. In a subgroup of 100 patients who started as antipsychotic-free, 2-year prevalence rates of switching and antipsychotic polypharmacy were 27.0% and 18.0%, respectively, and polypharmacy was resorted to after a median of 1 antipsychotic had been tried for 84 days (median).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings raise a concern that physicians may perform an antipsychotic switch without exploring the entire dose range and resort to antipsychotic polypharmacy without trying an adequate number of antipsychotics.