Search

Background Antipsychotic prescribing to Medicaid-enrolled youth has been the target of numerous policy initiatives, including prior authorization and quality monitoring programs, which often target specific populations. Whether these efforts have changed the level or composition of antipsychotic prescribing is unclear. Methods Using 2014–2018 administrative claims data for Medicaid enrollees aged 21 years and under in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, we measured antipsychotic prescription fills overall and for youth without an approved indication (autism, bipolar disorder, or psychosis). We then assessed whether trends differed for populations that have been targeted by policy initiatives, including younger children and foster care-enrolled youth. We also identified the most common approved and unapproved indications and examined whether the treatment duration of antipsychotic prescriptions differed based on whether the youth had an approved or unapproved indication. Results Overall, the number of Medicaid youth with an antipsychotic prescription fill halved between 2014 and 2018. Youth aged 17 years and under and foster care-enrolled youth, who were targeted by prior authorization and quality improvement efforts, experienced larger declines. Roughly half of prescriptions were for unapproved indications in both 2014 and 2018; the most common unapproved indication was ADHD, and the treatment duration was shorter for unapproved indications compared to approved indications. Conclusions Antipsychotic prescribing to Medicaid-enrolled youth is declining, particularly among populations that have been targeted by policy initiatives like prior authorization and quality monitoring programs. Despite the fact that these initiatives often assess diagnostic criteria, half of antipsychotic prescriptions were for unapproved indications in both 2014 and 2018. More research is needed to gauge whether this prescribing is appropriate.

Objectives In Africa, antipsychotic polypharmacy (APP) is increasing due to a high antipsychotic dose prescribing, repeated psychiatric hospitalization, uncontrolled psychotic symptoms, and greater side effect burden. Therefore, the aim of this review and meta-analysis is to assess the prevalence and correlates of APP among patients with schizophrenia in Africa. Methods A systematic search was performed from August 1 to 31, 2020, on PubMed, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Science Direct databases to select articles based on the inclusion criteria. Meta-Analysis of Observational studies in Epidemiology guidelines were employed. Cross-sectional observational studies that reported APP and/or its correlates in schizophrenia patients in English language published in peer-reviewed journals without time limits were included in the review. The quality of included articles was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment tool. Prevalence and correlates of APP were the outcome measures of this review and meta-analysis. Open Meta Analyst and RevMan version 5.3 software were used for meta-analysis. A random effect model was used to synthesize data based on the heterogeneity test. Results Six studies that involved 2154 schizophrenia patients met the inclusion criteria in this review and meta-analysis. The quality of included studies ranges from 6.5 to 10 based on the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment tool. The pooled prevalence of APP among patients with schizophrenia was 40.6% with 95% confidence interval: 27.6% to 53.7%. Depot first-generation antipsychotics and oral first-generation antipsychotics were the most commonly prescribed APP combinations. Socio-demographic, clinical, and antipsychotic treatment characteristics were significantly associated with APP. There was a wide variation in the correlates of APP assessed by studies and the way that association/correlations was determined and reported. Conclusions APP is common and highly prevalent. Advanced age, male gender, longer duration of schizophrenia, hospital admission, and longer antipsychotic treatment were correlates of APP in Africa.

Background Antipsychotic medication use in nursing homes is associated with potential for harms. In Ontario, Canada, an agency of the provincial government offers nursing home physicians quarterly audit and feedback on their antipsychotic prescribing. We compared the characteristics of physicians who did and did not engage with the intervention, and assessed early changes in prescribing. Methods This population-level, retrospective cohort study used linked administrative databases to track prescribing practices in nursing homes pre-intervention (baseline), immediately post-initiative (3 months), and at follow-up (6 months). Exposure variables identified whether a physician signed up to participate (or not) or viewed the feedback following sign up (or not). Differences in the proportion of days that residents received antipsychotic medications at 6 months compared to baseline by exposure(s) were assessed using a linear mixed effects regression analysis to adjust for a range of resident, physician, and nursing home factors. Benzodiazepine and statin prescribing were assessed as a balance and tracer measures, respectively. Results Of 944 eligible physicians, 210 (22.3%) signed up to recieve the feedback report and 132 (13.9%) viewed their feedback. Physicians who signed up for feedback were more likely to have graduated from a Canadian medical school, work in urban nursing homes, and care for a larger number of residents. The clinical and functional characteristics of residents were similar across physician exposure groups. At 6 months, antipsychotic prescribing had decreased in all exposure groups. Those who viewed their feedback report had a signicantly greater reduction in antipsychotic prescribing than those who did not sign up (0.94% patient-days exposed; 95% CI 0.35 to 1.54%, p = 0.002). Trends in prescribing patterns across exposure groups for benzodiazepines and statins were not statistically significant. Interpretation Almost a quarter of eligible physicians engaged early in a voluntary audit and feedback intervention related to antipsychotic prescribing in nursing homes. Those who viewed their feedback achieved a small but statistically significant change in prescribing, equivalent to approximately 14,000 fewer days that nursing home residents received antipsychotic medications over 6 months. This study adds to the literature regarding the role of audit and feedback interventions to improve quality of care.

BackgroundAlthough sometimes appropriate, antipsychotic medications are associated with increased risk of significant adverse events. In 2014, a series of newspaper articles describing high prescribing rates in nursing homes in Ontario, Canada, garnered substantial interest. Subsequently, an online public reporting initiative with home-level data was launched. We examined the impact of these public reporting interventions on antipsychotic prescribing in nursing homes.MethodsTime series analysis of all nursing home residents in Ontario, Canada, between 1 October 2013 and 31 March 2016. The primary outcome was the proportion of residents prescribed antipsychotics each month. Balance measures were prescriptions for common alternative sedating agents (benzodiazepines and/or trazodone). We used segmented regression to assess the effects on prescription trends of the newspaper articles and the online home-level public reporting initiative.ResultsWe included 120 009 nursing home resident admissions across 636 nursing homes. Following the newspaper articles, the proportion of residents prescribed an antipsychotic decreased by 1.28% (95% CI 1.08% to 1.48%) and continued to decrease at a rate of 0.2% per month (95% CI 0.16% to 0.24%). The online public reporting initiative did not alter this trend. Over 3 years, there was a net absolute reduction in antipsychotic prescribing of 6.0% (95% CI 5.1% to 6.9%). Trends for benzodiazepine prescribing did not change as substantially during the period of observation. Trazodone use has been gradually increasing, but its use did not change abruptly at the time of the mass media report or the public reporting initiative.InterpretationThe rapid impact of mass media on prescribing suggests both an opportunity to use this approach to invoke change and a warning to ensure that such reporting occurs responsibly.

Background: As a response to evidence that mental health service users and carers expect greater involvement in decisions about antipsychotic medication choice and prescribing, shared decision-making (SDM) has increasingly come to be viewed as an essential element of person-centred care and practice. However, this aspiration has yet to be realised in practice, as service users and carers continue to feel alienated from healthcare services. Existing understanding of the factors affecting the use of tools to support SDM is limited to inter-individual influences and wider factors affecting potential implementation are underexplored. Aim: To explore the potential use of a tool designed to enhance collaborative antipsychotic prescribing from the perspectives of secondary mental health service users, carers and professionals. Methods: We conducted a qualitative study (semi-structured interviews and focus groups) using a purposive sample of 33 participants (10 mental health service users, 10 carers and 13 professionals) involved in antipsychotic prescribing in one Trust in the North of England. Participants were asked about the potential implementation of a tool to support SDM within secondary mental health services. Framework analysis incorporating the use of constant comparative method was used to analyse the data.Results: The study identified a divergence in the views of service users and professionals, including a previously undocumented tendency to blame each other for implementation failure. This dissonance is shaped by meso and macro level influences relating to paternalism, legislative frameworks, accountability and lack of resources. Participants did not identify macro level (policy or structural) facilitators to the use of the tool highlighting the negative impact of mental health contexts. Our study indicated that inter-individual factors are likely to be most important to implementation, given their potential to transcend meso and macro level barriers by disrupting paternalism.Conclusions: Consideration of the meso and macro level influences identified areas for potential intervention, including challenging professionals and service users' perceptions of each other, rebalancing the notion of accountability within services and introducing new means for service user feedback on the quality of SDM. Multi-level strategies for facilitating the implementation of tools to support SDM are also presented.

Background Shared decision making represents a clinical consultation model where both clinician and service user are conceptualised as experts; information is shared bilaterally and joint treatment decisions are reached. Little previous research has been conducted to assess experience of this model in psychiatric practice. The current project therefore sought to explore the attitudes and experiences of consultant psychiatrists relating to shared decision making in the prescribing of antipsychotic medications. Methods A qualitative research design allowed the experiences and beliefs of participants in relation to shared decision making to be elicited. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants from a range of clinical backgrounds and with varying length of clinical experience. A semi-structured interview schedule was utilised and was adapted in subsequent interviews to reflect emergent themes. Data analysis was completed in parallel with interviews in order to guide interview topics and to inform recruitment. A directed analysis method was utilised for interview analysis with themes identified being fitted to a framework identified from the research literature as applicable to the practice of shared decision making. Examples of themes contradictory to, or not adequately explained by, the framework were sought. Results A total of 26 consultant psychiatrists were interviewed. Participants expressed support for the shared decision making model, but also acknowledged that it was necessary to be flexible as the clinical situation dictated. A number of potential barriers to the process were perceived however: The commonest barrier was the clinician’s beliefs regarding the service users’ insight into their mental disorder, presented in some cases as an absolute barrier to shared decision making. In addition factors external to the clinician - service user relationship were identified as impacting on the decision making process, including; environmental factors, financial constraints as well as societal perceptions of mental disorder in general and antipsychotic medication in particular. Conclusions This project has allowed identification of potential barriers to shared decision making in psychiatric practice. Further work is necessary to observe the decision making process in clinical practice and also to identify means in which the identified barriers, in particular ‘lack of insight’, may be more effectively managed.

BACKGROUND: Antipsychotic drugs are widely used for the treatment of Behavioral and Psychological Symptoms of Dementia (BPSD), despite their limited efficacy and concerns about safety. The aim of this study was to describe antipsychotic drug therapy among people with dementia living in specialized care units in northern Sweden. METHODS: This study was conducted in 40 specialized care units in northern Sweden, with a total study population of 344 people with dementia. The study population was described in regard to antipsychotic drug use, ADL function, cognitive function and BPSD, using the Multi-Dimensional Dementia Assessment Scale (MDDAS). These data were collected at baseline and six months later. Detailed data about antipsychotic prescribing were collected from prescription records. RESULTS: This study showed that 132 persons (38%) in the study population used antipsychotic drugs at the start of the study. Of these, 52/132 (39%) had prescriptions that followed national guidelines with regard to dose and substance.After six months, there were 111 of 132 persons left because of deaths and dropouts. Of these 111 people, 80 (72%) were still being treated with antipsychotics, 63/111 (57%) with the same dose. People who exhibited aggressive behavior (OR: 1.980, CI: 1.515-2.588), or passiveness (OR: 1.548, CI: 1.150-2.083), or had mild cognitive impairment (OR: 2.284 CI: 1.046-4.988), were at increased risk of being prescribed antipsychotics. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of antipsychotic drug use among people with dementia living in specialized care units was high and inappropriate long-term use of antipsychotic drugs was common.