暂无摘要。

Objectives: Women veterans are more likely than men veterans to receive medications that Department of Veterans Affairs clinical practice guidelines recommend against to treat posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). To understand this difference, we examined potential confounders in incident prescribing of guideline discordant medications (GDMs) in veterans with PTSD.
Methods: Veterans receiving care for PTSD during 2020 were identified using Veterans Health Administration administrative data. PTSD diagnosis was established by the presence of at least 1 ICD-10 coded outpatient encounter or inpatient hospitalization during the calendar year 2020. Incident GDM prescribing was assessed during 2021, including benzodiazepines, antipsychotics, select anticonvulsants, and select antidepressants. Log-binomial regression was used to estimate the difference in risk for GDM initiation between men and women, adjusted for patient, prescriber, and facility-level covariates, and to identify key confounding variables.
Results: Of 704,699 veterans with PTSD, 16.9% of women and 10.1% of men initiated a GDM, an increased risk of 67% for women [relative risk (RR) = 1.67; 95% CI, 1.65-1.70]. After adjustment, the gender difference decreased to 1.22 (95% CI, 1.20-1.24) in a fully specified model. Three key confounding variables were identified: bipolar disorder (RR = 1.60; 95% CI, 1.57-1.63), age (<40 years: RR = 1.20 [1.18-1.22]; 40-54 years: RR = 1.13 [1.11-1.16]; ≥65 years: RR = 0.64 [0.62-0.65]), and count of distinct psychiatric medications prescribed in the prior year (RR = 1.14; 1.13-1.14).
Conclusions: Women veterans with PTSD were 67% more likely to initiate a GDM, where more than half of this effect was explained by bipolar disorder, age, and prior psychiatric medication. After adjustment, women veterans remained at 22% greater risk for an incident GDM, suggesting that other factors remain unidentified and warrant further investigation.

UNASSIGNED: Clozapine is the only antipsychotic approved for treatment-resistant schizophrenia, but without appropriate monitoring, it can be associated with potentially fatal outcomes. An International Adult Clozapine Titration Guideline categorizes patients into normal or slow metabolizers. Categorization provides clozapine titration schedules and recommends regular c-reactive protein (CRP) and clozapine concentration monitoring to reduce the risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The impact of the guideline on clozapine ADRs has not been evaluated.
UNASSIGNED: A retrospective chart review assessed clozapine titrations, laboratory monitoring, ADRs, and discontinuations for clozapine-naive adult inpatients at a single center from January 1, 2013, to June 1, 2022. Each patient\'s cumulative weekly clozapine dosage was compared with their guideline recommended dosage to create a percent accordance. Linear logistic regression evaluated the relationship between titration speed and the presence of an ADR, while descriptive statistics analyzed laboratory monitoring.
UNASSIGNED: Forty-three patients were included, with the majority being White males with schizophrenia. An inverse relationship existed between the last inpatient week clozapine dose percent accordance and the probability of an ADR. Nonobese patients were less likely than obese patients to experience an ADR (odds ratio = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.03-0.99). CRP and clozapine concentration monitoring was suboptimal.
UNASSIGNED: Based on our small retrospective review of primarily White males, more aggressive clozapine titrations did not increase ADRs. Future studies with more diverse samples are needed and should focus on specific ADRs, which may have increased occurrence with rapid titrations. Obese patients were at higher risk of ADRs, correlating with the guideline-recommended slower titrations for these patients.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: There is a relative lack of research evaluating the outcomes when treatment guidelines or algorithms for psychotic disorders are followed. This systematic review and meta-analysis determined the response rates to antipsychotic medications at different stages of these algorithms and whether these response rates differ in first episode cohorts.
METHODS: Data sources: A systematic search strategy was conducted across four databases PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO (Ovid) and CINAHL. Studies that had sequential trials of different antipsychotic medications were included. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed using random effects models and sub-group analysis in first episode psychosis studies.
RESULTS: Of the 4078 unique articles screened, fourteen articles, from nine unique studies, were eligible and included 2522 participants. The proportion who experienced a response to any antipsychotic in the first stage of an algorithm was 0.53 (95 % C.I.:0.38,0.68) and this decreased to 0.26 (95 % C.I.:0.15,0.39) in the second stage. When clozapine was used in the third stage, the proportion that achieved a response was 0.43 (95 % C.I. 0.19, 0.69) compared to 0.26 (95 % C.I.:0.05,0.54) if a different antipsychotic was used. Four studies included 907 participants with a first episode of psychosis and the proportions that achieved a response were: 1st stage: 0.63 (95 % C.I.: 0.45, 0.79); 2nd stage: 0.34 (95 % C.I.:0.16,0.55); clozapine 3rd stage: 0.45 (95 % C.I.:0.0,0.97), different antipsychotic 3rd stage: 0.15 (95 % C.I.,0.01,0.37).
CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the recommendation to have a trial of clozapine after two other antipsychotic medications have been found to be ineffective.

OBJECTIVE: Unidentified benign ethnic neutropenia (BEN) has been recognized as a factor contributing to clozapine underutilization and discontinuation. Guidelines were implemented to accommodate BEN in Canada, and our main objective was to evaluate clozapine\'s safety in a sample of Canadian psychiatric patients with BEN.
METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Canada. Through the clozapine clinic registry, participants were identified who (i) received clozapine using the approved BEN guidelines for hematological monitoring, and (ii) had at least one complete blood count pre- and post-clozapine initiation.
RESULTS: Our sample population was comprised of 41 BEN patients who were African-Caribbean (49 %), African (34 %), African-North American (12 %), Middle Eastern (2 %), and Indian-Caribbean (2 %). There was a significant reduction in hematological alerts for these patients while monitored under BEN guidelines (p < 0.001). The mean within-patient ANC value was not significantly different one year after clozapine initiation compared to the pre-clozapine baseline (p = 0.069). None of the patients discontinued clozapine for hematological reasons.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrated that patients monitored under the modified hematological guidelines for BEN can be safely treated with clozapine. These findings have important clinical ramifications as increased implementation of BEN guidelines may allow for broader use of clozapine.

Despite the evidence that no other antipsychotic is effective as clozapine for the treatment of resistant schizophrenia, it is associated with various metabolic, neuroendocrine, cardiovascular, and gastrointestinal adverse effects. Guidelines aiming to address the monitoring of clozapine\'s (serious) adverse effects can be helpful to prevent and treat these effects. However, many of these guidelines seem to lack one or more important monitoring recommendations. We aimed to systematically review the content and quality of existing monitoring guidelines/recommendations for clozapine-induced adverse effects.
A comprehensive and systematic literature search, using the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases, was conducted for guidelines/recommendations on the monitoring of clozapine-induced adverse events, published between January 2004 and April 2023 (last search 16 April 2023). Only peer-reviewed published guidelines reporting on the comprehensive monitoring of all major clozapine-induced adverse effects and including evidence-based recommendations, developed after the year 2004, were included. Studies reporting on the monitoring of adverse effects of clozapine without being a formal guideline, guidelines reporting on the monitoring of one or a limited number of adverse effects of clozapine, guidelines that were not peer reviewed or published, expert opinion papers without formal consensus guideline development, or guidelines developed before the year 2004, were excluded. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE-II) tool was used to evaluate the guidelines/recommendations\' quality.
Only one guideline met the inclusion criteria. This consensus statement made recommendations for hematological monitoring, and the monitoring of metabolic, cardiac, and three other adverse effects. Highest scores for the qualitative assessment were found for the domains \"scope and purpose\" (66.7%), \"clarity of presentation\" (44.4%), and \"editorial independence\" (66.7%). Lowest scores were found for \"rigor of development\" (14.6%) and \"applicability\" (0%).
Future guidelines should develop more comprehensive recommendations about specific clozapine-induced adverse effects, including constipation, myocarditis, tachycardia, and seizures, as well as include a rechallenge policy. There is an urgent need for well-developed, methodologically stringent, guidelines.
PROSPERO registration number, CRD42023402480.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and to examine the number of oral medicines based on the swallowing function and activities of daily living (ADL) categories in a geriatric medical care ward.
METHODS: A prospective investigation of oral medication use of 124 consecutive patients (male, n=58; female, n=66) admitted to a geriatric medical care ward was conducted from November 2019 to October 2020. Nutritional routes and ADL categories were quantitatively assessed, and the respective medication quantities were subjected to a statistical analysis.
RESULTS: The average number of oral medications was 5.8 at acute care admission, 4.4 upon transfer to the geriatric medical care ward and 4.8 at discharge. Approximately 30% of oral medications were classified as PIMs, including antithrombotic agents, diuretics, antidiabetic drugs, magnesium oxide, sleep and anxiolytic medications, and antipsychotic drugs. Magnesium oxide, antipsychotic drugs, sleep and anxiolytic medications were frequently discontinued during the patient\'s stay at the geriatric medical care ward. The proportion of PIMs significantly decreased from 35.1% at admission, to 28.8% at ward transfer, and 24.3% at discharge (P<0.01). The number of oral medicines at discharge varied based on the nutritional route, with averages of 5.5 for oral intake, 3.6 for enteral nutrition, and 0.7 for venous nutrition. It also varied based on ADL categories, with averages of 6.0 for ADL 1, 5.8 for ADL 2, and 3.8 for ADL 3.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of PIMs decreased in the geriatric medical care ward. A reduced swallowing function and lower ADL were associated with a decrease in the quantity of oral medicines.

Expert consensus-based clinically equivalent dose estimates and dosing recommendations can provide valuable support for the use of drugs for psychosis in clinical practice and research.
This second International Consensus Study of Antipsychotic Dosing provides dosing equivalencies and recommendations for newer drugs for psychosis and previously reported drugs with low consensus.
We used a two-step Delphi survey process to establish and update consensus with a broad, international sample of clinical and research experts regarding 26 drug formulations to obtain dosing recommendations (start, target range, and maximum) and estimates of clinically equivalent doses for the treatment of schizophrenia. Reference agents for equivalent dose estimates were oral olanzapine 20 mg/day for 15 oral and 7 long-acting injectable (LAI) agents and intramuscular haloperidol 5 mg for 4 short-acting injectable (SAI) agents. We also provide a contemporary list of equivalency estimates and dosing recommendations for a total of 44 oral, 16 LAI, and 14 SAI drugs for psychosis.
Survey participants (N = 72) from 24 countries provided equivalency estimates and dosing recommendations for oral, LAI, and SAI formulations. Consensus improved from survey stages I to II. The final consensus was highest for LAI formulations, intermediate for oral agents, and lowest for SAI formulations of drugs for psychosis.
As randomized, controlled, fixed, multiple-dose trials to optimize the dosing of drugs for psychosis remain rare, expert consensus remains a useful alternative for estimating clinical dosing equivalents. The present findings can support clinical practice, guideline development, and research design and interpretation involving drugs for psychosis.