BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend the routine use of a single antipsychotic drug in a standard dose, but prescriptions for high-dose and combined antipsychotics are common in clinical practice. AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of a quality improvement programme in reducing the prevalence of high-dose and combined antipsychotic prescribing in acute adult in-patient wards in the UK. METHOD: Baseline audit was followed by feedback of benchmarked data and delivery of a range of bespoke change interventions, and then by a further audit 1 year later. RESULTS: Thirty-two services participated, submitting data for 3,942 patients at baseline and 3,271 patients at the 1-year audit. There was little change in the prevalence of high-dose (baseline 36%; re-audit 34%) or combined antipsychotic prescribing (baseline 43%; re-audit 39%). As required ('p.r.n.') prescriptions were the principal cause of both high-dose and combined antipsychotic prescribing on both occasions. CONCLUSIONS: The quality improvement programme did not have a demonstrable impact on prescribing practice in the majority of services. Future efforts to align practice with clinical guidelines need to specifically target the culture and practice of p.r.n. prescribing.
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend the routine use of a single antipsychotic drug in a standard dose, but prescriptions for high-dose and combined antipsychotics are common in clinical practice. AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of a quality improvement programme in reducing the prevalence of high-dose and combined antipsychotic prescribing in acute adult in-patient wards in the UK. METHOD: Baseline audit was followed by feedback of benchmarked data and delivery of a range of bespoke change interventions, and then by a further audit 1 year later. RESULTS: Thirty-two services participated, submitting data for 3,942 patients at baseline and 3,271 patients at the 1-year audit. There was little change in the prevalence of high-dose (baseline 36%; re-audit 34%) or combined antipsychotic prescribing (baseline 43%; re-audit 39%). As required ('p.r.n.') prescriptions were the principal cause of both high-dose and combined antipsychotic prescribing on both occasions. CONCLUSIONS: The quality improvement programme did not have a demonstrable impact on prescribing practice in the majority of services. Future efforts to align practice with clinical guidelines need to specifically target the culture and practice of p.r.n. prescribing.
Authors: Alp Üçok; Ugur Çıkrıkçılı; Ceylan Ergül; Öznur Tabak; Ada Salaj; Sercan Karabulut; Christoph U Correll Journal: CNS Drugs Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 5.749
Authors: Jimmi Nielsen; Claus Graff; Jørgen K Kanters; Egon Toft; David Taylor; Jonathan M Meyer Journal: CNS Drugs Date: 2011-06-01 Impact factor: 5.749