Search

Objective: To assess the impact of a multi-strategic, interdisciplinary intervention on antipsychotic and benzodiazepine prescribing in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). Design, setting: Prospective, longitudinal intervention in Australian RACFs, April 2014 - March 2016.Participants: 150 RACFs (with 12 157 residents) comprised the main participant group; two further groups were consultant pharmacists (staff education) and community pharmacies (prescribing data). Data for all RACF residents, excluding residents receiving respite or end-stage palliative care, were included.Intervention: A multi-strategic program comprising psychotropic medication audit and feedback, staff education, and interdisciplinary case review at baseline and 3 months; final audit at 6 months.Main Outcome Measure: Mean prevalence of regular antipsychotic and benzodiazepine prescribing at baseline, and at 3 and 6 months. Secondary measures: chlorpromazine and diazepam equivalent doses/day/resident; proportions of residents for whom drug was ceased or the dose reduced; prevalence of antidepressant and prn (as required) psychotropic prescribing (to detect any substitution practice).Results: During the 6-month intervention, the proportion of residents prescribed antipsychotics declined by 13% (from 21.6% [95% CI, 20.4-22.9%] to 18.9% [95% CI, 17.7-20.1%]), and that of residents regularly prescribed benzodiazepines by 21% (from 22.2% [95% CI, 21.0-23.5%] to 17.6% [95% CI, 16.5-18.7]; each, P < 0.001). Mean chlorpromazine equivalent dose declined from 22.9 mg/resident/day (95% CI, 19.8-26.0) to 20.2 mg/resident/day (95% CI, 17.5-22.9; P < 0.001); mean diazepam equivalent dose declined from 1.4 mg/resident/day (95% CI, 1.3-1.5) to 1.1 mg/resident/day (95% CI, 0.9-1.2; P < 0.001). For 39% of residents prescribed antipsychotics and benzodiazepines at baseline, these agents had been ceased or their doses reduced by 6 months. There was no substitution by sedating antidepressants or prn prescribing of other psychotropic agents.Conclusions: The RedUSe program achieved significant reductions in the proportions of RACF residents prescribed antipsychotics and benzodiazepines.Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials, ACTRN12617001257358. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Past traumatic events have been associated with poorer clinical outcomes in people with bipolar disorder. However, the impact of these events in the early stages of the illness remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate whether prior traumatic events were related to poorer outcomes 12 months following a first episode of psychotic mania. Methods: Traumatic events were retrospectively evaluated from patient files in a sample of 65 participants who had experienced first episode psychotic mania. Participants were aged between 15 and 28 years and were treated at a specialised early psychosis service. Clinical outcomes were measured by a variety of symptomatic and functioning scales at the 12-month time-point. Results: Direct-personal traumatic experiences prior to the onset of psychotic mania were reported by 48% of the sample. Participants with past direct-personal trauma had significantly higher symptoms of mania (p=0.02), depression (p=0.03) and psychopathology (p=0.01) 12 months following their first episode compared to participants without past direct-personal trauma, with medium to large effects observed. After adjusting for baseline scores, differences in global functioning (as measured by the Global Assessment of Functioning scale) were non-significant (p=0.05); however, participants with past direct-personal trauma had significantly poorer social and occupational functioning (p=0.04) at the 12-month assessment with medium effect. Conclusions: Past direct-personal trauma may predict poorer symptomatic and functional outcomes after first episode psychotic mania. Limitations include that the findings represent individuals treated at a specialist early intervention centre for youth and the retrospective assessment of traumatic events may have been underestimated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare the efficacy of intravenous chlorpromazine versus intravenous prochlorperazine for the treatment of acute migraine in adults presenting to the emergency department (ED)., Background: Migraine is a common, incapacitating neurological condition. Although chlorpromazine and prochlorperazine are known to be safe, efficacious treatments for migraine, they have never been directly compared., Design: We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial at a tertiary hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Adults aged 18-65 years, who presented with migraine, were eligible for recruitment. Sixty-six patients were randomized to either chlorpromazine 12.5 mg or prochlorperazine 12.5 mg, both infused in 500 ml of sodium chloride 0.9% over 30 min. Headache severity score, nausea severity score, and the presence of photophobia and phonophobia were assessed at 0, 30, 60, and 120 min. Adverse effects and the need for rescue therapy were recorded. The primary outcome was a reduction in headache severity score from baseline at 60 min post-commencement of the study medicine infusion., Results: Sixty-five patients were included in the analysis. There was a median reduction in headache severity score at 60 min of 3.0 (interquartile range 1.0-4.0) in the chlorpromazine arm versus 2.0 (1.0-4.0) in the prochlorperazine arm (median difference -0.5 (95% confidence interval, -1.9 to 0.9)). We saw no evidence of a difference in secondary outcomes at 30, 60, or 120 min. Side effects were reported in 16/32 (50%) patients in the chlorpromazine group versus 7/33 (21%) in the prochlorperazine group (p = 0.020). Rescue therapy was required in 7/32 (22%) patients in the chlorpromazine group versus 12/33 (36%) in the prochlorperazine group (p = 0.277)., Conclusions: Both chlorpromazine and prochlorperazine are efficacious treatments for acute migraine in adult patients presenting to the ED. This trial found no evidence of superiority of either agent over the other. Caution should be used when prescribing these medicines in the borderline hypotensive patient; in that circumstance, prochlorperazine should be preferentially used., (© 2021 American Headache Society.)