OBJECTIVE: Although national guidelines specify appropriate strategies for the treatment of schizophrenia, this disorder presents challenges to clinicians and health-care organizations. To improve care, it is useful to understand how often patients receive appropriate treatment. Most research evaluating treatment was performed when first-generation antipsychotic medications were the modal treatment. Given that most prescriptions are now for second-generation medications, this study describes current clinical problems and the appropriateness of treatment in routine practice. METHOD: Between 2002 and 2004, a random sample of patients (n = 398) were interviewed at baseline and 1 year at 3 Department of Veterans Affairs mental health clinics. Symptoms and side effects were assessed. Analyses examined whether prescribing were consistent with guidelines in patients with significant psychosis, depression, parkinsonism, akathisia, tardive dyskinesia, or elevated weight. RESULTS: Few patients met criteria for depression, parkinsonism, or akathisia. A total of 44% of patients had significant psychosis, 11% had tardive dyskinesia, and 46% were overweight. Medication was appropriate in 27% of patients with psychosis, 25% of patients with tardive dyskinesia, and 2% of patients with elevated weight. Management of elevated weight improved modestly over time. Treatment was more likely to improve for patients whose psychiatrists had more than 12 patients with schizophrenia in their caseload. CONCLUSION: Compared with the 1990s, outpatients are more likely to have significant psychosis. The rate of appropriate treatment of psychosis is unchanged. Weight gain has become a prevalent side effect, yet treatment is rarely changed in response to weight. There is a need for interventions that improve management of psychosis and weight.
OBJECTIVE: Although national guidelines specify appropriate strategies for the treatment of schizophrenia, this disorder presents challenges to clinicians and health-care organizations. To improve care, it is useful to understand how often patients receive appropriate treatment. Most research evaluating treatment was performed when first-generation antipsychotic medications were the modal treatment. Given that most prescriptions are now for second-generation medications, this study describes current clinical problems and the appropriateness of treatment in routine practice. METHOD: Between 2002 and 2004, a random sample of patients (n = 398) were interviewed at baseline and 1 year at 3 Department of Veterans Affairs mental health clinics. Symptoms and side effects were assessed. Analyses examined whether prescribing were consistent with guidelines in patients with significant psychosis, depression, parkinsonism, akathisia, tardive dyskinesia, or elevated weight. RESULTS: Few patients met criteria for depression, parkinsonism, or akathisia. A total of 44% of patients had significant psychosis, 11% had tardive dyskinesia, and 46% were overweight. Medication was appropriate in 27% of patients with psychosis, 25% of patients with tardive dyskinesia, and 2% of patients with elevated weight. Management of elevated weight improved modestly over time. Treatment was more likely to improve for patients whose psychiatrists had more than 12 patients with schizophrenia in their caseload. CONCLUSION: Compared with the 1990s, outpatients are more likely to have significant psychosis. The rate of appropriate treatment of psychosis is unchanged. Weight gain has become a prevalent side effect, yet treatment is rarely changed in response to weight. There is a need for interventions that improve management of psychosis and weight.
Authors: Rajiv Tandon; R H Belmaker; Wagner F Gattaz; Juan J Lopez-Ibor; Ahmed Okasha; Bruce Singh; Dan J Stein; Jean-Pierre Olie; W Wolfang Fleischhacker; Hans-Juergen Moeller Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2008-02-19 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Anthony F Lehman; Julie Kreyenbuhl; Robert W Buchanan; Faith B Dickerson; Lisa B Dixon; Richard Goldberg; Lisa D Green-Paden; Wendy N Tenhula; Daniela Boerescu; Cenk Tek; Neil Sandson; Donald M Steinwachs Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2004 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: John W Newcomer; Joao Alberto Campos; Ronald N Marcus; Christopher Breder; Robert M Berman; Wendy Kerselaers; Gilbert J L'italien; Marleen Nys; William H Carson; Robert D McQuade Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Marcia Valenstein; Laurel A Copeland; Frederic C Blow; John F McCarthy; John E Zeber; Leah Gillon; C Raymond Bingham; Thomas Stavenger Journal: Med Care Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: M H Davidson; J Hauptman; M DiGirolamo; J P Foreyt; C H Halsted; D Heber; D C Heimburger; C P Lucas; D C Robbins; J Chung; S B Heymsfield Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-01-20 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Alison H Brown; Amy N Cohen; Matthew J Chinman; Christopher Kessler; Alexander S Young Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2008-02-15 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Alexander S Young; Amy N Cohen; Alison B Hamilton; Gerhard Hellemann; Christopher Reist; Fiona Whelan Journal: J Behav Health Serv Res Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 1.505
Authors: Richard R Owen; Karen L Drummond; Kristen M Viverito; Kathy Marchant; Sandra K Pope; Jeffrey L Smith; Reid D Landes Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2013-10-08 Impact factor: 7.327