2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Analysis of the management of antipsychotics in a group of prisons Translated title: Análisis del manejo de antipsicóticos inyectables de larga duración en varios centros penitenciarios

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          To assess the use of prescribed antipsychotic treatments in the Spanish prison population in order to determine whether there are differences in efficacy and cost between the different long-acting antipsychotic injectables (LAIs).

          Material and method

          An observational, retrospective study was carried out in twelve prisons and in two prison psychiatric hospitals. To assess efficacy, all the clinical histories of patients with some kind of LAI were reviewed and only those who were in a situation of therapeutic stability were selected, defined as those treatments that had not undergone any change in the three last months, both in doses and in the association of another antipsychotic.

          Results

          Of the 11,953 inmates included in the study, 1,851 (15.5%) received prescriptions for an antipsychotic, 415 in penitentiary psychiatric hospitals (87%) and 1,436 in prisons (12%), which is a much higher prevalence than that found in the population. Regarding the prescription pattern of LAIs, paliperidone is the most widely prescribed in prison psychiatric hospitals and prisons, followed by aripiprazole, zuclopenthixol and risperidone. Finally flufenazine, olanzapine and paliperidone quarterly, which are scarcely represented. Of the 292 patients with LAI, 41% (121 patients) are with monotherapy and 59% (171 patients) are with polytherapy, which is similar to the data found in the bibliography.

          Discussion

          The use of prescribed LAIs amongst inmates is widespread. Polytherapy is also a common phenomenon, although there is a downward trend due to the use of more recently marketed drugs. Since the use of LAI is long-term, with numerous side effects and a wide range of prices, it is essential to consider the patient’s risk factors and the cost of treatment alongside the therapeutic efficacy.

          Resumen

          Objetivos

          Evaluar el uso de los tratamientos antipsicóticos prescritos en la población reclusa española y determinar si hay diferencias, en cuanto a eficacia y coste, entre los diferentes antipsicóticos inyectables de larga duración (ALD).

          Material y método

          Estudio observacional, retrospectivo, efectuado en doce centros penitenciarios (CCPP) y en dos hospitales psiquiátricos penitenciarios. Para evaluar la eficacia, se revisaron todas las historias clínicas de pacientes con algún ALD y se seleccionaron los que estaban en situación de estabilidad terapéutica, definida como aquellos tratamientos que no habían experimentado ningún cambio en los tres últimos meses, tanto en dosis como en la asociación de otro antipsicótico.

          Resultados

          De 11.953 internos incluidos, 1.851 (el 15,5%) tenían prescrito algún antipsicótico; 415 (el 87%) en los hospitales psiquiátricos penitenciarios y 1.436 (el 12%) en los CCPP. La paliperidona es el ALD más prescrito en hospitales psiquiátricos penitenciarios y en CCPP, seguido del aripiprazol, el zuclopentixol y la risperidona. La flufenazina, la olanzapina y la paliperidona trimestral están poco prescritos. El 41% de los pacientes eran tratados con monoterapia y el 59% con politerapia. Con los ALD de más reciente incorporación, se ha observado una tendencia a la disminución de la politerapia.

          Discusión

          La prevalencia de prescripción de ALD en población reclusa es muy superior a la de la población no presa. La politerapia está muy extendida, aunque muestra una tendencia descendente con el uso de los fármacos más recientemente comercializados. Se recomienda que además de la eficacia terapéutica se valore a la hora de prescribir el riesgo de interacciones farmacológicas y el coste del tratamiento.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Comparative efficacy and tolerability of 15 antipsychotic drugs in schizophrenia: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis.

          The question of which antipsychotic drug should be preferred for the treatment of schizophrenia is controversial, and conventional pairwise meta-analyses cannot provide a hierarchy based on the randomised evidence. We aimed to integrate the available evidence to create hierarchies of the comparative efficacy, risk of all-cause discontinuation, and major side-effects of antipsychotic drugs. We did a Bayesian-framework, multiple-treatments meta-analysis (which uses both direct and indirect comparisons) of randomised controlled trials to compare 15 antipsychotic drugs and placebo in the acute treatment of schizophrenia. We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's specialised register, Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for reports published up to Sept 1, 2012. Search results were supplemented by reports from the US Food and Drug Administration website and by data requested from pharmaceutical companies. Blinded, randomised controlled trials of patients with schizophrenia or related disorders were eligible. We excluded trials done in patients with predominant negative symptoms, concomitant medical illness, or treatment resistance, and those done in stable patients. Data for seven outcomes were independently extracted by two reviewers. The primary outcome was efficacy, as measured by mean overall change in symptoms. We also examined all-cause discontinuation, weight gain, extrapyramidal side-effects, prolactin increase, QTc prolongation, and sedation. We identified 212 suitable trials, with data for 43 049 participants. All drugs were significantly more effective than placebo. The standardised mean differences with 95% credible intervals were: clozapine 0·88, 0·73-1·03; amisulpride 0·66, 0·53-0·78; olanzapine 0·59, 0·53-0·65; risperidone 0·56, 0·50-0·63; paliperidone 0·50, 0·39-0·60; zotepine 0·49, 0·31-0·66; haloperidol 0·45, 0·39-0·51; quetiapine 0·44, 0·35-0·52; aripiprazole 0·43, 0·34-0·52; sertindole 0·39, 0·26-0·52; ziprasidone 0·39, 0·30-0·49; chlorpromazine 0·38, 0·23-0·54; asenapine 0·38, 0·25-0·51; lurasidone 0·33, 0·21-0·45; and iloperidone 0·33, 0·22-0·43. Odds ratios compared with placebo for all-cause discontinuation ranged from 0·43 for the best drug (amisulpride) to 0·80 for the worst drug (haloperidol); for extrapyramidal side-effects 0·30 (clozapine) to 4·76 (haloperidol); and for sedation 1·42 (amisulpride) to 8·82 (clozapine). Standardised mean differences compared with placebo for weight gain varied from -0·09 for the best drug (haloperidol) to -0·74 for the worst drug (olanzapine), for prolactin increase 0·22 (aripiprazole) to -1·30 (paliperidone), and for QTc prolongation 0·10 (lurasidone) to -0·90 (sertindole). Efficacy outcomes did not change substantially after removal of placebo or haloperidol groups, or when dose, percentage of withdrawals, extent of blinding, pharmaceutical industry sponsorship, study duration, chronicity, and year of publication were accounted for in meta-regressions and sensitivity analyses. Antipsychotics differed substantially in side-effects, and small but robust differences were seen in efficacy. Our findings challenge the straightforward classification of antipsychotics into first-generation and second-generation groupings. Rather, hierarchies in the different domains should help clinicians to adapt the choice of antipsychotic drug to the needs of individual patients. These findings should be considered by mental health policy makers and in the revision of clinical practice guidelines. None. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            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.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The prevalence of mental disorders in Spanish prisons.

              The prevalence of mental disorders among prisoners has been researched in a few countries worldwide but never previously in Spain. Our aim was to estimate the lifetime and last month prevalence of mental disorders in a Spanish prison population. This is a descriptive, cross-sectional, epidemiological study of 707 male prisoners. Sociodemographic, clinical and offending data were collected by interviewers. Offending data were confirmed using penitentiary records. Mental disorders were assessed with the clinical version of the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition Axis I Disorders, and personality disorders were assessed through the Spanish version of the International Personality Disorders Examination. The lifetime prevalence of mental disorder was 84.4%. Substance use disorder (abuse and dependence) was the most frequent disorder (76.2%) followed by anxiety disorder (45.3%), mood disorder (41%) and psychotic disorder (10.7%). The period (last month) prevalence of any mental disorder was 41.2%. Anxiety disorder was the most prevalent (23.3%) followed by substance use disorder (abuse and dependence; 17.5%), mood disorder (14.9%) and psychotic disorder (4.2%). Although period prevalence figures, which are those generally provided in research into rates of mental disorder among prisoners, are useful for planning improvements to services within prisons, the fact that almost all of these men had a lifetime prevalence of at least one mental disorder suggests a much wider need for improving services, including community services, for this group. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Rev Esp Sanid Penit
                Rev Esp Sanid Penit
                sanipe
                Revista Española de Sanidad Penitenciaria
                Sociedad Española de Sanidad Penitenciaria
                1575-0620
                2013-6463
                May-Aug 2019
                31 July 2019
                : 21
                : 2
                : 88-94
                Affiliations
                [1 ] originalPharmacy Unit of Albolote Prison. Granada. orgdiv1Pharmacy Unit orgnameAlbolote Prison Granada, Spain
                [2 ] originalSeville Prison Psychiatric Hospital. orgnameSeville Prison Psychiatric Hospital Spain
                [3 ] originalLa Moraleja Prison. Palencia. orgnameLa Moraleja Prison Palencia, Spain
                [4 ] originalMadrid III Prison. orgnameMadrid III Prison Spain
                [5 ] originalAlicante Prison Psychiatric Hospital. orgnameAlicante Prison Psychiatric Hospital Spain
                [6 ] originalZuera Prison. Zaragoza. orgnameZuera Prison Zaragoza, Spain
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Gloria Maria Hervas Leyva. Pharmacy Unit of Albolote Prison (Granada). E-mail: gloria.hervas@ 123456dgip.mir.es
                Article
                00004
                10.4321/S1575-06202019000200004
                6813665
                31642859
                2c07d1f6-5afe-411b-8d16-32f69e4ae8b6

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License

                History
                : 30 August 2018
                : 13 November 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 4, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 16, Pages: 07
                Categories
                Original

                schizophrenia,drug combinations,dosage forms,prisons,esquizofrenia,combinación de medicamentos,formas de dosificación,prisiones

                Comments

                Comment on this article