Does long term use of psychiatric drugs cause more harm than good?

P. C. Gotzsche,A. H. Young,J. Crace

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h2435

2015-05-12

BMJ

Abstract:We could stop almost all psychotropic drug use without deleterious effect, says Peter C Gøtzsche, questioning trial designs that underplay harms and overplay benefits. Allan H Young and John Crace disagree, arguing that evidence supports long term use

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Weighing the evidence for harm from long-term treatment with antipsychotic medications: A systematic review.

Nancy Sohler,Ben G. Adams,David M. Barnes,Gregory H. Cohen,Seth J. Prins,Sharon Schwartz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000106

2016-01-01

American Journal of Orthopsychiatry

Abstract:Research findings supporting the use of antipsychotic medication for acute treatment of schizophrenia are relatively consistent and undisputed. However, the rationale for recommending long-term antipsychotic medication treatment-the current standard of care treatment strategy-is unclear. A controversial hypothesis proposed recently suggests people with schizophrenia who are exposed to long-term treatment with antipsychotic medications have worse outcomes than people with schizophrenia who are not exposed to these medications. We tested whether a systematic appraisal of published literature would produce data consistent with this hypothesis. We reviewed the published literature to identify studies of patients with psychotic disorders who were followed for at least 2 years that compared outcomes in patients who received antipsychotic medication during the follow-up with patients who did not receive antipsychotic medication during the follow-up. We included all English language articles published through 2013 in this review. Our process for selecting studies and documenting study findings included a consensus decision of 2 members of the research team. We found the published data to be inadequate to test this hypothesis. By extension, these data were also inadequate to conclusively evaluate whether long-term antipsychotic medication treatment results in better outcomes on average. We conclude that careful reappraisal of existing data is useful to ensure standard of care treatment strategies are indeed evidence-based. In the case of long-term use of antipsychotic medications, new data may be needed to establish a sufficient evidence base to understand its benefit/risk balance for patients with schizophrenia. (PsycINFO Database Record

social work
Further Evidence That Antipsychotic Medication Does Not Prevent Long-Term Psychosis in Higher-Risk Individuals

Zhang, TianHong,Wang, JunJie,Xu, LiHua,Wei, YanYan,Tang, XiaoChen,Hu, YeGang,Cui, HuiRu,Tang, YingYing,Li, ChunBo,Ling, Zheng,Wang, JiJun

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-021-01331-2

2022-01-01

European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience

Abstract:Although existing guidelines have discouraged use of antipsychotics for general clinical high-risk (CHR) individuals, it is unclear if antipsychotics can prevent psychosis in higher-risk population. We aimed to study the comparative real-world effectiveness of antipsychotic treatments for preventing psychosis in higher-risk CHR individuals. A total of 300 CHR individuals were identified using the structured interview for prodromal syndromes (SIPS) and followed the participants for 3 years. In total, 228(76.0%) individuals completed baseline assessments using the NAPLS-2 risk calculator (NAPLS-2-RC), and 210(92.1%) completed the follow-up. The sample was further stratified according to risk level. “Higher-risk” was defined based on the NAPLS-2-RC risk score (≥ 20%) and SIPS positive symptom total scores (≥ 10). The main outcome was conversion to psychosis and poor functional outcomes, defined as a global assessment of function (GAF) score lower than 60 at follow-up. In higher-risk CHR individuals, we found no significant difference in the rate of conversion to psychosis or poor functional outcomes between the antipsychotic and no-antipsychotic groups. Low-risk individuals treated with antipsychotic drugs were more likely exhibit poor functional outcomes compared with the no-antipsychotics group(NAPLS-2-RC estimated risk: χ2 = 8.330, p = 0.004; Positive symptom severity: χ2 = 12.997, p < 0.001). No significant effective factors were identified for prevention of the conversion to psychosis; conversely, CHR individuals who were treated with high dose antipsychotics (olanzapine, aripiprazole) showed a significantly increased risk of poor functional outcomes. In CHR individuals, antipsychotic treatment should be provided with caution because of the risk of poor functional outcomes. Further, antipsychotic treatment does not appear to prevent onset of psychosis in real‐world settings.
Positive and Negative Effects of Antipsychotic Medication: An International Online Survey of 832 Recipients

John Read,James Williams

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2174/1574886314666190301152734

2019-09-17

Current Drug Safety

Abstract:Background: Antipsychotic medication is currently the treatment of choice for psychosis, but few studies directly survey the first-hand experience of recipients. Objective: To ascertain the experiences and opinions of an international sample of users of antipsychotic drugs, regarding positive and negative effects. Methods: An online direct-to-consumer questionnaire was completed by 832 users of antipsychotics, from 30 countries – predominantly USA, UK and Australia. This is the largest such sample to date. Results: Over half (56%) thought, the drugs reduced the problems they were prescribed for, but 27% thought they made them worse. Slightly less people found the drugs generally ‘helpful’ (41%) than found them ‘unhelpful’ (43%). While 35% reported that their ‘quality of life’ was ‘improved’, 54% reported that it was made ‘worse’. The average number of adverse effects reported was 11, with an average of five at the ‘severe’ level. Fourteen effects were reported by 57% or more participants, most commonly: ‘Drowsiness, feeling tired, sedation’ (92%), ‘Loss of motivation’ (86%), ‘Slowed thoughts’ (86%), and ‘Emotional numbing’ (85%). Suicidality was reported to be a side effect by 58%. Older people reported particularly poor outcomes and high levels of adverse effects. Duration of treatment was unrelated to positive outcomes but significantly related to negative outcomes. Most respondents (70%) had tried to stop taking the drugs. The most common reasons people wanted to stop were the side effects (64%) and worries about long-term physical health (52%). Most (70%) did not recall being told anything at all about side effects. Conclusion: Clinical implications are discussed, with a particular focus on the principles of informed consent, and involving patients in decision making about their own lives.
Barriers to stopping neuroleptic (antipsychotic) treatment in people with schizophrenia, psychosis or bipolar disorder

Joanna Moncrieff,Swapnil Gupta,Mark Abie Horowitz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2045125320937910

2020-01-01

Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology

Abstract:Most guidelines recommend long-term, indefinite neuroleptic (or antipsychotic) treatment for people with schizophrenia, recurrent psychosis or bipolar disorder, on the basis that these medications reduce the chance of relapse. However, neuroleptics have significant adverse effects, including sexual dysfunction, emotional blunting, metabolic disturbance and brain shrinkage, and patients often request to stop them. Evidence for the benefits of long-term treatment is also not as robust as generally thought. Short-term randomised trials show higher rates of relapse among those whose neuroleptic treatment is discontinued compared with those on maintenance treatment, but they are confounded by adverse effects associated with the withdrawal of established medication. Some longer-term studies show possible advantages of medication reduction and discontinuation in terms of improved social functioning and recovery. Therefore, there is a good rationale for supporting patients who wish to stop their medication, especially given the patient choice agenda favoured by The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE). The major barrier to stopping antipsychotics is an understandable fear of relapse among patients, their families and clinicians. Institutional structures also prioritise short-term stability over possible long-term improvements. The risk of relapse may be mitigated by more gradual reduction of medication, but further research is needed on this. Psychosocial support for patients during the process of reducing medication may also be useful, particularly to enhance coping skills. Guidelines to summarise evidence on ways to reduce medication would be useful. Many patients want to try and stop neuroleptic medication for good reasons, and psychiatrists can help to make this a realistic option by supporting people to do it as safely as possible, with the best chance of a positive outcome.

pharmacology & pharmacy,psychiatry
Symptomatic versus disease‐modifying effects of psychiatric drugs

S. Nassir Ghaemi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.13459

2022-06-04

Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica

Abstract:Objective Drugs can be divided into two major categories, symptomatic and disease‐modifying. This review explores whether and how psychiatric drugs fall into one or the other of those categories, and the implications of those results for clinical practice and research in psychopharmacology. Method Narrative review. Results Most psychiatric drugs have only short‐term effects of improving active symptoms. They do not show long‐term benefits for the underlying disease, such as improving the course of illness and improving mortality. Evidence is provided for this claim in the treatment literature of antidepressants for depressive illness and antipsychotics for schizophrenia. Developing truly beneficial drugs for disease modification also is limited by the poor validity of DSM diagnoses as well as the use of invalid falsely positive maintenance efficacy randomized discontinuation trial designs. Conclusions Current psychopharmacology is limited mostly to symptomatic effects, not transformative treatments for the diseases underlying those symptoms. A change in approach is needed in psychopharmacology practice and research, focusing on long‐term disease modification rather than short‐term symptom improvement.

psychiatry
Use and discontinuation of antipsychotic medication in 20 years following a first episode of schizophrenia: results from the OPUS trial

Helene Gjervig Hansen,Helene Speyer,Anne Emilie Stürup,Carsten Hjorthøj,Dost Öngür,Merete Nordentoft,Nikolai Albert

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291724002678

IF: 10.592

2024-11-24

Psychological Medicine

Abstract:Introduction Short-term exposure to antipsychotics has proven to be beneficial. However, naturalistic studies are lacking regarding the long-term use of antipsychotics. This study aimed to investigate changes in use of antipsychotics over 20 years after a first-episode schizophrenia. Methods This study is part of the Danish OPUS trial (1998–2000), including 496 participants with first-episode schizophrenia. Participants were reassessed four times over 20 years. The main outcomes were days on medication, redeemed prescriptions of clozapine, psychiatric hospitalizations, and employment. Results At the 20-year follow-up, an attrition of 71% was detected. In total, 143 out of 496 participated, with 36% (n = 51) in remission-of-psychotic-symptoms-off-medication. The lowest number of days on medication (mean [s.d.], 339 [538] days) was observed in this group over 20 years. Register data on redeemed antipsychotics were available for all trial participants (n = 416). Individuals in treatment with antipsychotics (n = 120) at the 20-year follow-up had spent significantly more days in treatment (5405 [1857] v. 1434 [1819] mean days, p = 0.00) and more had ever redeemed a prescription of clozapine (25% v. 7.8%, p = 0.00) than individuals who had discontinued antipsychotics (n = 296). Further, discontinuers had significantly higher employment at the 20-year follow-up (28.4% v. 12.5%, p = 0.00). Conclusion In a cohort of individuals with first-episode schizophrenia, 36% were in remission-of-psychotic-symptoms-off-medication. However, high attrition was detected, potentially affecting study results by inflating results from individuals with favorable outcomes. From register data, free from attrition, approximately 30% were in treatment with antipsychotics, and 70% had discontinued antipsychotics. Individuals in treatment had the least favorable outcomes, implying greater illness severity.

psychiatry,psychology, clinical
[Weighing the benefits and harms of psychotropic and analgesic substances - A perspective of German addiction medicine experts]

Udo Bonnet,Michael Specka,Michael Soyka,Thomas Alberti,Stefan Bender,Jörg Hilger,Thomas Hillemacher,Thomas Kuhlmann,Jens Kuhn,Christel Lüdecke,Jens Reimer,Udo Schneider,Welf Schroeder,Markus Stuppe,Gerhard Wiesbeck,Norbert Wodarz,Norbert Scherbaum

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1363-0223

Abstract:Background: In Europe, there have been several addiction-expert rankings of harms related to the use of psychotropic substances in the last 15 years. Among them, only one expert ranking took into account the potential benefits of these drugs. Non-Opioidergic Analgesics (NOAs), such as gabapentinoids and NSAIDs, which have been increasingly the subject of abuse / misuse reports, have not been considered in such expert rankings. Likewise, there is currently no multi-substance comparison as to whether the valuation rank of the harmfulness of an illegal drug may change along with an imagined change in legal status in Germany. Objectives and methods: Using a questionnaire, 101 experienced addiction physicians (first cohort) evaluated 33 psychoactive substances including analgesics with regard to their health and social harms as well as potential usefulness for the consumer and their environment / society ('others'). In addition, this cohort investigated whether the harmfulness assessment of an illegal substance changes if it would be legalized. In order to obtain the average overall harmfulness (overall risk) of a substance, the percentage contribution of each dimension to the overall harmfulness was determined in a second survey (second cohort, 36 experienced addiction medicine experts). Finally, the average benefit and overall risk ratings of each substance were related to each other. Results: Prescription psychoactive substances such as analgesics, NOAs (including gabapentinoids) and opioidergic maintenance medications to treat opiate dependence were judged to have a favorable benefit-harm profile. Cannabis and ketamine were placed in the midfield of both, the harm and benefit rankings. Together with most illicit narcotic drugs, alcohol and nicotine, have been ranked among the most harmful and least useful substances, whereby alcohol was judged on average to be more harmful but also more useful than nicotine. In the event of potential legalization, the overall harm of the traditional illegal drugs methamphetamine, heroin, cocaine and cannabis was estimated to be reduced. This was mainly due to a more favorable valuation of the harm to others under these virtual conditions. Conclusion: Prescription substances including opioidergic and non-opioidergic analgesics as well as opioid maintenance therapy medications (methadone and buprenorphine) were assigned a favorable benefit-harm profile. Alcohol, nicotine and traditional illicit drugs (with the exception of cannabis and ketamine) were determined to have an unfavorable profile. The overall harm of traditional illicit drugs was assessed to decrease along with legalization, mainly by decreasing the harm to others in this virtual event.
When I use a word . . . Fictional drugs and the benefit to harm balance

Jeffrey K Aronson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q1814

2024-08-18

BMJ

Abstract:Benefits and harmsThe use of any therapeutic intervention should involve a calculation of the benefit to harm balance, which has three aspects:1. The possible benefits Benefits do not necessarily accrue when an intervention is introduced, and there is no way of predicting in advance in an individual whether benefits will occur and, if so, to what extent, even if there is an average expectation from the results of clinical trials. Likewise, there is no single word that describes a condition present in the individual that can predict a benefit with some probability, for example genetic variants of tumour proteins.2. The possible harms Similarly, harms do not necessarily occur after the introduction of an intervention. However, in contrast to benefits, there is a word for a condition that can result in a harm with some probability; it is called a hazard. Use of a pharmacological intervention, for example, itself constitutes a...

medicine, general & internal
Gradually tapering off antipsychotics: lessons for practice from case studies and neurobiological principles

Mark A. Horowitz,Joanna Moncrieff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/yco.0000000000000940

2024-05-31

Current Opinion in Psychiatry

Abstract:For decades, long-term 'maintenance' antipsychotic treatment has been the accepted norm for people diagnosed with schizophrenia and psychotic conditions. There is, however, increasing attention being paid to reducing and/or stopping antipsychotic medication in people with long-term psychotic conditions [1▪,2▪,3▪▪] , with several large-scale randomized controlled trials on this subject taking place around the world and formation of a large international consortium of researchers around this issue (TAPER) [1▪,4] . This focus on reduction and cessation is due to recognition of the substantial adverse effects of this class of medication, that many patients wish to reduce medication because of unpleasant subjective effects, that their functioning may actually be improved in the long-term by dose minimization and that many clinicians are already incorporating this into their practice [2▪,3▪▪,5,6▪▪] .

psychiatry
Research on a ‘drug-centred’ approach to psychiatric drug treatment: assessing the impact of mental and behavioural alterations produced by psychiatric drugs

J. Moncrieff

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/s2045796017000555

2017-10-12

Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences

Abstract:Aims. This article explores an alternative understanding of how psychiatric drugs work that is referred to as the drug-centred model of drug action. Unlike the current disease-centred model, which suggests that psychiatric drugs work by correcting an underlying brain abnormality, the drug-centred model emphasises how psychiatric drugs affect mental states and behaviour by modifying normal brain processes. The alterations produced may impact on the emotional and behavioural problems that constitute the symptoms of mental disorders. Methods. Arguments are put forward that justify the consideration of the drug-centred model. The research necessary to support the prescription of drugs according to such a model is explored. Results. Evidence from neurochemistry and comparative drug trials do not confirm the disease-centred model of drug action. Since psychiatric drugs are recognised to have mind- and behaviour-altering properties, the drug-centred model constitutes a plausible alternative. The drug-centred model suggests that research is needed to identify all the alterations produced by various sorts of drugs, both acute and long term, and how these might interact with the symptoms and problems associated with different mental disorders. This requires detailed animal and volunteer studies and data from patients prescribed drug treatment long term, along with placebo-controlled and comparative trials that look at the overall impact of drug-induced alterations on well-being and functioning as well as symptoms. Research is also needed on alternative ways of fulfilling the function of drug treatment. The moral aspect of using drugs to modify behaviour rather than treat disease needs honest and transparent consideration. Conclusions. It is hoped this discussion will encourage the psychiatric and pharmaceutical research community to provide more of the information that is required to use psychiatric drugs safely and effectively.

psychiatry
Withdrawal versus continuation of long-term antipsychotic drug use for behavioural and psychological symptoms in older people with dementia.

Ellen Van Leeuwen,Mirko Petrovic,Mieke L van Driel,An IM De Sutter,Robert Vander Stichele,Tom Declercq,Thierry Christiaens,An Im De Sutter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007726.pub3

IF: 8.4

2019-10-03

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract:Antipsychotic agents are often used to treat neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in people with dementia although there is uncertainty about the effectiveness of their long-term use for this indication and concern that they may cause harm, including higher mortality. When behavioural strategies have failed and treatment with antipsychotic drugs is instituted, regular attempts to withdraw them have been recommended in guidelines. Physicians, nurses and families of older people with dementia may be reluctant to stop antipsychotics, fearing deterioration of NPS.This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2013.

medicine, general & internal
White Paper: Efficacy of Psychiatric Drugs

Jacqueline A. Sparks

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1891/1559-4343.18.1.20

2016-01-01

Ethical Human Psychology and Psychiatry

Abstract:Psychiatric drugs have been a mainstay of treatment for a range of behavioral and emotional problems over the past 6 decades in the United States and around the world. Although their use has skyrocketed, the problems they purport to alleviate have not diminished but, in fact, have increased (Whitaker, 2010a). This article summarizes current evidence for the efficacy of antidepressants, antipsychotics, and stimulants. Findings from meta-analyses, reviews, and major trials do not support widespread use of these drugs.

English Else
Potential deprescribing indications for antidepressants between 2012 and 2019: repeated cross-sectional analysis in two Scottish health boards

Vita Brisnik,Marietta Rottenkolber,Jochen Vukas,Miriam Schechner,Karoline Lukaschek,Caroline Jung-Sievers,Jochen Gensichen,Ulrich Thiem,Michael Drey,Nils Krüger,Alpana Mair,Bruce Guthrie,Sebastian Fischer,Tobias Dreischulte,POKAL Study Group,Peter Falkai,Peter Henningsen,Markus Bühner,Helmut Krcmar,Gabriele Pitschel-Walz,Antonius Schneider,Kirsten Lochbuhler,Barbara Prommegger,Andrea Schmitt,Katharina Biersack,Constantin Brand,Christopher Ebert,Julia Eder,Feyza Gökce,Carolin Haas,Lisa Pfeiffer,Lukas Kaupe,Jonas Raub,Philipp Reindl-Spanner,Hannah Schillok,Petra Schönweger,Clara Teusen,Marie Vogel,Victoria von Schrottenberg,Puya Younesi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-024-03584-9

2024-09-11

Abstract:Background: Antidepressants have a pivotal role in the treatment of many psychiatric disorders, but there are concerns about long-term use and adverse effects. The objectives of this study were (1) to examine time trends in antidepressant use, (2) to estimate the prevalence of long-term and potential high-risk antidepressant use, and (3) to examine patient characteristics associated with potential deprescribing indications (PDIs) (i.e., simultaneous long-term and potential high-risk antidepressant use). Methods: Repeated population-based cross-sectional study for all 609,299 people aged ≥ 18 years resident in the Tayside or Fife regions of Scotland. The prevalence of antidepressant use was examined on June 30th (index date) of each year from 2012 to 2019, while the prevalence of long-term and potential high-risk use as well as PDIs was assessed and compared on the same dates in 2012 and 2019. Binary logistic regression modeling was used to examine patient characteristics associated with PDIs. Results: Antidepressant use increased by 27% from 12.0 to 15.3% among adult residents between 2012 and 2019. While the proportion of antidepressants users dispensed ≥ 1 antidepressant for > 2 years increased from 54.3 to 61.9% between 2012 and 2019, the proportion of antidepressant users triggering ≥ 1 indicator of potential high-risk use decreased slightly from 37.9 to 34.7%. In 2019, potential high-risk use most commonly related to indicators targeting fall risk (16.0%), cardiovascular risks (14.1%), insomnia (10.6%), and risk of orthostatic hypotension (8.6%). More than 1 in 4 (25.8%) antidepressant users had PDIs. The main risk factors associated with PDIs included increasing age (65-79, adjusted OR 14.12; 95% CI, 13.15-15.17), increasing number of drugs taken concomitantly (≥ 15 drugs, adjusted OR 7.37; 95% CI, 6.71-8.10), use of tricyclic antidepressants (≥ 50 mg) (adjusted OR 5.49; 95% CI, 5.02-6.01), and concomitant use of ≥ 2 antidepressants (adjusted OR 5.52; 95% CI, 5.20-5.85). Conclusions: Long-term and potential high-risk use of antidepressants is widespread, and potential deprescribing indications (PDIs) are increasing, suggesting the need for a critical review of their ongoing use by clinicians. If deemed necessary, future deprescribing interventions may use the criteria applied here for identification of patients with PDIs and for evaluating intervention effectiveness.
Detailing the effects of polypharmacy in psychiatry: longitudinal study of 320 patients hospitalized for depression or schizophrenia

H H Stassen,S Bachmann,R Bridler,K Cattapan,D Herzig,A Schneeberger,E Seifritz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-021-01358-5

Abstract:Current treatment standards in psychiatry are oriented towards polypharmacy, that is, patients receive combinations of several antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, anxiolytics, hypnotics, antihistamines, and anticholinergics, along with other somatic treatments. In tandem with the beneficial effects of psychopharmacological drug treatment, patients experience significant adverse reactions which appear to have become more frequent and more severe with the rise of ubiquitous polypharmacy. In this study, we aimed to assess today's acute inpatient treatment of depressive and schizophrenic disorders with focus on therapeutic strategies, medications, adverse side effects, time course of recovery, and efficacy of treatments. Of particular interest was the weighing of the benefits and drawbacks of polypharmacy regimens. We recruited a total of 320 patients hospitalized at three residential mental health treatment centers with a diagnosis of either schizophrenic (ICD-10: "F2x.x"; n = 94; "F2 patients") or depressive disorders (ICD-10: "F3x.x"; n = 226; "F3 patients"). The study protocol included (1) assessment of previous history by means of the SADS Syndrome Check List SSCL-16 (lifetime version); (2) repeated measurements over 5 weeks assessing the time course of improvement by the Hamilton Depression Scale HAM-D and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale PANSS, along with medications and adverse side effects through the Medication and Side Effects Inventory MEDIS; and (3) the collection of blood samples from which DNA and serum were extracted. Polypharmacy was by far the most common treatment regimen (85%) in this study. On average, patients received 4.50 ± 2.68 medications, consisting of 3.30 ± 1.84 psychotropic drugs, plus 0.79 ± 1.13 medications that alleviate adverse side effects, plus 0.41 ± 0.89 other somatic medications. The treating psychiatrists appeared to be the main determining factor in this context, while «previous history» and «severity at baseline» played a minor role, if at all. Adverse drug reactions were found to be an inherent component of polypharmacy and tended to have a 2-3 times higher incidence compared to monotherapy. Severe adverse reactions could not be attributed to a particular drug or drug combination. Rather, the empirical data suggested that severe side effects can be triggered by virtually all combinations of drugs, provided patients have a respective vulnerability. In terms of efficacy, there were no advantages of polypharmacy over monotherapy. The results of this study underlined the fact that polypharmacy regimens are not equally suited for every patient. Specifically, such regimens appeared to have a negative impact on treatment outcome and to obfuscate the "natural" time course of recovery through a multitude of interfering factors. Evidence clearly speaks against starting just every therapeutic intervention in psychiatry with a combination of psychopharmaceuticals. We think that it is time for psychiatry to reconsider its treatment strategies, which are far too one-sidedly fixated on psychopharmacology and pay far too little attention to alternative approaches, especially in mild cases where psychotherapy without concurrent medication should still be an option. Also, regular exercises and sports can definitely be an effective therapeutic means in a considerable number of cases. General practitioners (GPs) are particularly in demand here.
Stakeholders' views on the use of psychotropic medication in older people: a systematic review

Eliza Bednarczyk,Sarah Cook,Ruth Brauer,Sara Garfield

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afac060

2022-03-01

Abstract:Background: psychotropic medication use has been shown to increase with age and has been associated with increased risk of falls, strokes and mortality. Various guidelines, regulations and tools have been developed to reduce inappropriate prescribing, but this remains high. In order to understand the reasons for this, we aimed to systematically review healthcare professionals', patients' and family caregivers' attitudes towards the use of psychotropic medication in older people. Methods: a systematic literature search was carried out from inception to September 2020 using PUBMED, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL and hand-searching of reference lists. Included studies investigated stakeholder views on psychotropic in adults over the age of 65. Findings were thematically synthesised. Results: overall, there was an acceptance of long-term psychotropic medication for older people both living in the community and in residential care. While healthcare professionals were aware of guidelines for the use of benzodiazepines and psychotropic medicines, they identified barriers to following them on individual, team and organisational levels. Alternative non-pharmacological approaches were not always available or accepted by patients. Conclusion: psychotropic medicine use in older adults remains a complex issue, which needs to be addressed on a broad level. Attitudes of older people and healthcare professionals encourage long-term use. Meanwhile, various internal and external factors act as barriers to the use of non-drug alternatives in this population. In order to reduce overprescribing of psychotropics, there is a need to increase the acceptability and accessibility of alternative interventions in both care homes and the community.
Long‐term efficacy of antipsychotic drugs in initially acutely ill adults with schizophrenia: systematic review and network meta‐analysis

Stefan Leucht,Angelika Burschinski,Natalie Peter,Dongfang Wang,Shimeng Dong,Maximilian Huhn,Adriani Nikolakopoulou,Georgia Salanti,Johannes Schneider‐Thoma,John M. Davis

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.21089

2023-05-10

World Psychiatry

Abstract:Most acute phase antipsychotic drug trials in schizophrenia last only a few weeks, but patients must usually take these drugs much longer. We examined the long‐term efficacy of antipsychotic drugs in acutely ill patients using network meta‐analysis. We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group register up to March 6, 2022 for randomized, blinded trials of at least 6‐month duration on all second‐generation and 18 first‐generation antipsychotics. The primary outcome was change in overall symptoms of schizophrenia; secondary outcomes were all‐cause discontinuation; change in positive, negative and depressive symptoms; quality of life, social functioning, weight gain, antiparkinson medication use, akathisia, serum prolactin level, QTc prolongation, and sedation. Confidence in the results was assessed by the CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta‐Analysis) framework. We included 45 studies with 11,238 participants. In terms of overall symptoms, olanzapine was on average more efficacious than ziprasidone (standardized mean difference, SMD=0.37, 95% CI: 0.26‐0.49), asenapine (SMD=0.33, 95% CI: 0.21‐0.45), iloperidone (SMD=0.32, 95% CI: 0.15‐0.49), paliperidone (SMD=0.28, 95% CI: 0.11‐0.44), haloperidol (SMD=0.27, 95% CI: 0.14‐0.39), quetiapine (SMD=0.25, 95% CI: 0.12‐0.38), aripiprazole (SMD=0.16, 95% CI: 0.04‐0.28) and risperidone (SMD=0.12, 95% CI: 0.03‐0.21). The 95% CIs for olanzapine versus aripiprazole and risperidone included the possibility of trivial effects. The differences between olanzapine and lurasidone, amisulpride, perphenazine, clozapine and zotepine were either small or uncertain. These results were robust in sensitivity analyses and in line with other efficacy outcomes and all‐cause discontinuation. Concerning weight gain, the impact of olanzapine was higher than all other antipsychotics, with a mean difference ranging from –4.58 kg (95% CI: –5.33 to –3.83) compared to ziprasidone to –2.30 kg (95% CI: –3.35 to –1.25) compared to amisulpride. Our data suggest that olanzapine is more efficacious than a number of other antipsychotic drugs in the longer term, but its efficacy must be weighed against its side effect profile.

psychiatry
Multivariate associations between psychiatric drug intake and grey matter volume changes in individuals at early stages of psychosis and depression

C. Weyer,D. Popovic,A. Ruef,L. Hahn,E. Sarişik,J. Fanning,J. Kambeitz,R. K. Salokangas,J. Hietala,A. Bertolino,S. Borgwardt,P. Brambilla,R. Upthegrove,S. J. Wood,R. Lencer,E. Meisenzahl,P. Falkai,N. Koutsouleris

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1192/j.eurpsy.2024.573

2024-08-30

European Psychiatry

Abstract:Introduction Psychiatric drugs, including antipsychotics and antidepressants, are widely prescribed, even in young and adolescent populations at early or subthreshold disease stages. However, their impact on brain structure remains elusive. Elucidating the relationship between psychotropic medication and structural brain changes could enhance the understanding of the potential benefits and risks associated with such treatment. Objectives Investigation of the associations between psychiatric drug intake and longitudinal grey matter volume (GMV) changes in a transdiagnostic sample of young individuals at early stages of psychosis or depression using an unbiased data-driven approach. Methods The study sample comprised 247 participants (mean [SD] age = 25.06 [6.13] years, 50.61% male), consisting of young, minimally medicated individuals at clinical high-risk states for psychosis, individuals with recent-onset depression or psychosis, and healthy control individuals. Structural magnetic resonance imaging was used to obtain whole-brain voxel-wise GMV for all participants at two timepoints (mean [SD] time between scans = 11.15 [4.93] months). The multivariate sparse partial least squares (SPLS) algorithm (Monteiro et al. JNMEDT 2016; 271:182-194) was embedded in a nested cross-validation framework to identify parsimonious associations between the cumulative intake of psychiatric drugs, including commonly prescribed antipsychotics and antidepressants, and change in GMV between both timepoints, while additionally factoring in age, sex, and diagnosis. Furthermore, we correlated the retrieved SPLS results to personality domains (NEO-FFI) and childhood trauma (CTQ). Results SPLS analysis revealed significant associations between the antipsychotic classes of benzamides, butyrophenones and thioxanthenes and longitudinal GMV decreases in cortical regions including the insula, posterior superior temporal sulcus as well as cingulate, postcentral, precentral, orbital and frontal gyri (Figure 1A-C). These brain regions corresponded most closely to the dorsal and ventral attention, somatomotor, salience and default network (Figure 1D). Furthermore, the medication signature was negatively associated with the personality domains extraversion, agreeableness and conscientiousness and positively associated with the CTQ domains emotional and physical neglect. Image: Conclusions Psychiatric drug intake over a period of one year was linked to distinct GMV reductions in key cortical hubs. These patterns were already visible in young individuals at early or subthreshold stages of mental illness and were further linked to childhood neglect and personality traits. Hence, a better and more in-depth understanding of the structural brain implications of medicating young and adolescent individuals might lead to more cautious, sustainable and targeted treatment strategies. Disclosure of Interest None Declared

psychiatry
Utilization and related harms of systemic glucocorticosteroids for atopic dermatitis: claims data analysis

Kristina Hagenström,Theresa Klinger,Katharina Müller,Charlotte Willers,Matthias Augustin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/bjd/ljae250

IF: 11.113

2024-06-27

British Journal of Dermatology

Abstract:Abstract Background and objectives Systemic glucocorticosteroids (SGCs) are used in the short-term treatment of atopic dermatitis (AD), but are not recommended for long-term use since associated with severe side effects. This study aimed to characterize the utilization and potentially negative effects of SGC use for AD in German statutory health insurance (SHI) claims data. Patients and methods Cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of a large nationwide SHI dataset. SGC drug prescriptions and incidences of predefined comorbidities after drug initiation known as potentially harmful side effects were analysed. The SGC use was quantified by 1) the number of quarters with at least one SGC prescription and 2) the defined daily doses (DDD). Adjustments in comparisons were made for age, gender and morbidity. Results The AD prevalence was 4.07% in 2020 (4.12% women, 3.71% men). During this period 9.91% of persons with AD were prescribed SGCs compared with 5.54% in persons without AD (p < 0.01). Prescribing of SGCs was significantly higher in women (10.20% vs.9.42% in men, p=<0.01) and the elderly. AD and sGC prevalence varied regionally. In a three-year follow-up period, 51% of persons with AD receiving a SGC were prescribed SGCs in > 1 quarter and 15% in > 6 quarters. The odds of developing osteoporosis (odds ratio 3.95 [approach 1] and 1.80 [approach 2]) and diabetes (odds ratio 1.90 [approach 1] and 1.38 [approach 2]) were significantly higher in people with AD on sGCS, especially in the frequently prescribed group compared with the rarely prescribed group, regardless of quantified use. Conclusion A considerable number of persons with AD in Germany are prescribed longterm SGCs. The onset of medical conditions known to be harmful effects from steroids was significantly more frequent in SGC “frequently prescribers”, indicating the need for optimized health care.

dermatology
‘Never change a winning team’: GPs’ perspectives on discontinuation of long-term antidepressants

Van Leeuwen Ellen,Sibyl Anthierens,Mieke L van Driel,An De Sutter,Evelien van den Branden,Thierry Christiaens,Mieke L. van Driel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02813432.2021.2006487

2021-10-02

Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care

Abstract:BACKGROUND: Long-term antidepressant use, much longer than recommended by guidelines, can harm patients and generate unnecessary costs. Most antidepressants are prescribed by general practitioners (GPs) but it remains unclear why they do not discontinue long-term use.AIM: To explore GPs' views and experiences of discontinuing long-term antidepressants, barriers and facilitators of discontinuation and required support.DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative study in Belgian GPs.METHOD: 20 semi-structured face-to-face interviews with GPs. Interviews were analysed thematically.RESULTS: The first theme, 'Success stories' describes three strong motivators to discontinue antidepressants: patient health issues, patient requests and a new positive life event. Second, not all GPs consider long-term antidepressant use a 'problem' as they perceive antidepressants as effective and safe. GPs' main concern is the risk of relapse. Third, GPs foresee that discontinuation of antidepressants is not an easy and straightforward process. GPs weigh up whether they have the necessary skills and whether it is worth the effort to start this process.CONCLUSION: Discontinuation of long-term antidepressants is a difficult and uncertain process for GPs, especially in the absence of a facilitating life-event or patient demand. The absence of a compelling need for discontinuation and fear of relapse of symptoms in a stable patient are important barriers for GPs when considering discontinuation. In order to increase GPs' motivation to discontinue long-term antidepressants, more emphasis on the futility of the actual effect and on potential harms related to long-term use is needed.KEY POINTSCurrent awareness:Long-term antidepressant use, much longer than recommended by guidelines, can harm patients and generate unnecessary costs.Main statements: • Discontinuation of long-term antidepressants is a difficult and uncertain process for GPs. • More emphasis on the futility of the actual effect of antidepressants and on potential harms related to long-term use is needed.

medicine, general & internal,health care sciences & services,primary health care
Psychedelic use and psychiatric risks

Otto Simonsson,Simon B Goldberg,Richard Chambers,Walter Osika,Charlotta Simonsson,Peter S Hendricks

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-023-06478-5

2023-10-24

Abstract:Rationale: Research on psychedelics has recently shown promising results in the treatment of various psychiatric disorders, but relatively little remains known about the psychiatric risks associated with naturalistic use of psychedelics. Objective: The objective of the current study was to investigate associations between naturalistic psychedelic use and psychiatric risks. Methods: Using a sample representative of the US adult population with regard to sex, age, and ethnicity (N=2822), this study investigated associations between lifetime naturalistic psychedelic use, lifetime unusual visual experiences, and past 2-week psychotic symptoms. Results: Among respondents who reported lifetime psychedelic use (n=613), 1.3% reported having been told by a doctor or other medical professional that they had hallucinogen persisting perception disorder. In covariate-adjusted linear regression models, lifetime psychedelic use was associated with more unusual visual experiences at any point across the lifetime, but no association was observed between lifetime psychedelic use and past 2-week psychotic symptoms. There was an interaction between lifetime psychedelic use and family (but not personal) history of psychotic or bipolar disorders on past 2-week psychotic symptoms such that psychotic symptoms were highest among respondents who reported lifetime psychedelic use and a family history of psychotic or bipolar disorders and lowest among those who reported lifetime psychedelic use and no family history of psychotic or bipolar disorders. Conclusions: Although the results in this study should be interpreted with caution, the findings suggest that lifetime naturalistic use of psychedelics might be associated with more unusual visual experiences across the lifetime, as well as more psychotic symptoms in the past 2 weeks for individuals with a family history of psychotic or bipolar disorders and the reverse for those without such a family history. Future research should distinguish between different psychotic and bipolar disorders and should also utilize other research designs (e.g., longitudinal) and variables (e.g., polygenic risk scores) to better understand potential cause-and-effect relationships.

Does long term use of psychiatric drugs cause more harm than good?

Weighing the evidence for harm from long-term treatment with antipsychotic medications: A systematic review.

Further Evidence That Antipsychotic Medication Does Not Prevent Long-Term Psychosis in Higher-Risk Individuals

Positive and Negative Effects of Antipsychotic Medication: An International Online Survey of 832 Recipients

Barriers to stopping neuroleptic (antipsychotic) treatment in people with schizophrenia, psychosis or bipolar disorder

Symptomatic versus disease‐modifying effects of psychiatric drugs

Use and discontinuation of antipsychotic medication in 20 years following a first episode of schizophrenia: results from the OPUS trial

[Weighing the benefits and harms of psychotropic and analgesic substances - A perspective of German addiction medicine experts]

When I use a word . . . Fictional drugs and the benefit to harm balance

Gradually tapering off antipsychotics: lessons for practice from case studies and neurobiological principles

Research on a ‘drug-centred’ approach to psychiatric drug treatment: assessing the impact of mental and behavioural alterations produced by psychiatric drugs

Withdrawal versus continuation of long-term antipsychotic drug use for behavioural and psychological symptoms in older people with dementia.

White Paper: Efficacy of Psychiatric Drugs

Potential deprescribing indications for antidepressants between 2012 and 2019: repeated cross-sectional analysis in two Scottish health boards

Detailing the effects of polypharmacy in psychiatry: longitudinal study of 320 patients hospitalized for depression or schizophrenia

Stakeholders' views on the use of psychotropic medication in older people: a systematic review

Long‐term efficacy of antipsychotic drugs in initially acutely ill adults with schizophrenia: systematic review and network meta‐analysis

Multivariate associations between psychiatric drug intake and grey matter volume changes in individuals at early stages of psychosis and depression

Utilization and related harms of systemic glucocorticosteroids for atopic dermatitis: claims data analysis

‘Never change a winning team’: GPs’ perspectives on discontinuation of long-term antidepressants

Psychedelic use and psychiatric risks